Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medicine 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research article

Developing a measure of polypharmacy appropriateness in primary care: systematic review and expert consensus study

Authors: Jenni Burt, Natasha Elmore, Stephen M. Campbell, Sarah Rodgers, Anthony J. Avery, Rupert A. Payne

Published in: BMC Medicine | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Polypharmacy is an increasing challenge for primary care. Although sometimes clinically justified, polypharmacy can be inappropriate, leading to undesirable outcomes. Optimising care for polypharmacy necessitates effective targeting and monitoring of interventions. This requires a valid, reliable measure of polypharmacy, relevant for all patients, that considers clinical appropriateness and generic prescribing issues applicable across all medications. Whilst there are several existing measures of potentially inappropriate prescribing, these are not specifically designed with polypharmacy in mind, can require extensive clinical input to complete, and often cover a limited number of drugs. The aim of this study was to identify what experts consider to be the key elements of a measure of prescribing appropriateness in the context of polypharmacy.

Methods

Firstly, we conducted a systematic review to identify generic (not drug specific) prescribing indicators relevant to polypharmacy appropriateness. Indicators were subject to content analysis to enable categorisation. Secondly, we convened a panel of 10 clinical experts to review the identified indicators and assess their relative clinical importance. For each indicator category, a brief evidence summary was developed, based on relevant clinical and indicator literature, clinical guidance, and opinions obtained from a separate patient discussion panel. A two-stage RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was used to reach consensus amongst the panel on a core set of indicators of polypharmacy appropriateness.

Results

We identified 20,879 papers for title/abstract screening, obtaining 273 full papers. We extracted 189 generic indicators, and presented 160 to the panel grouped into 18 classifications (e.g. adherence, dosage, clinical efficacy). After two stages, during which the panel introduced 18 additional indicators, there was consensus that 134 indicators were of clinical importance. Following the application of decision rules and further panel consultation, 12 indicators were placed into the final selection. Panel members particularly valued indicators concerned with adverse drug reactions, contraindications, drug-drug interactions, and the conduct of medication reviews.

Conclusions

We have identified a set of 12 indicators of clinical importance considered relevant to polypharmacy appropriateness. Use of these indicators in clinical practice and informatics systems is dependent on their operationalisation and their utility (e.g. risk stratification, targeting and monitoring polypharmacy interventions) requires subsequent evaluation.

Trial registration

Registration number: PROSPERO (CRD42016049176).
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Duerden M, Avery T, Payne R, et al. Polypharmacy and Medicines Optimisation: Making it Safe and Sound. London: King’s Fund; 2013. Duerden M, Avery T, Payne R, et al. Polypharmacy and Medicines Optimisation: Making it Safe and Sound. London: King’s Fund; 2013.
2.
go back to reference Barnett K, Mercer SW, Norbury M, et al. Epidemiology of multimorbidity and implications for health care, research, and medical education: a cross-sectional study. Lancet. 2012;380:37–43.CrossRefPubMed Barnett K, Mercer SW, Norbury M, et al. Epidemiology of multimorbidity and implications for health care, research, and medical education: a cross-sectional study. Lancet. 2012;380:37–43.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Spinewine A, Schmader KE, Barber N, et al. Appropriate prescribing in elderly people: how well can it be measured and optimised? Lancet. 2007;370:173–84.CrossRefPubMed Spinewine A, Schmader KE, Barber N, et al. Appropriate prescribing in elderly people: how well can it be measured and optimised? Lancet. 2007;370:173–84.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Hill-Taylor B, Walsh KA, Stewart S, et al. Effectiveness of the STOPP/START (Screening Tool of Older Persons’ potentially inappropriate Prescriptions/Screening Tool to Alert doctors to the Right Treatment) criteria: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2016;41:158–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpt.12372.CrossRefPubMed Hill-Taylor B, Walsh KA, Stewart S, et al. Effectiveness of the STOPP/START (Screening Tool of Older Persons’ potentially inappropriate Prescriptions/Screening Tool to Alert doctors to the Right Treatment) criteria: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2016;41:158–69. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​jcpt.​12372.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Hanlon JT, Schmader KE, Samsa GP, et al. A method for assessing drug therapy appropriateness. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:1045–51.CrossRefPubMed Hanlon JT, Schmader KE, Samsa GP, et al. A method for assessing drug therapy appropriateness. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:1045–51.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Basger BJ, Chen TF, Moles RJ. Inappropriate medication use and prescribing indicators in elderly Australians: development of a prescribing indicators tool. Drugs Aging. 2008;25:777–93.CrossRefPubMed Basger BJ, Chen TF, Moles RJ. Inappropriate medication use and prescribing indicators in elderly Australians: development of a prescribing indicators tool. Drugs Aging. 2008;25:777–93.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Bergman-Evans B. Evidence-based guideline. Improving medication management for older adult clients. J Gerontol Nurs. 2006;32:6–14.CrossRefPubMed Bergman-Evans B. Evidence-based guideline. Improving medication management for older adult clients. J Gerontol Nurs. 2006;32:6–14.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Cantrill JA, Sibbald B, Buetow S. Indicators of the appropriateness of long-term prescribing in general practice in the United Kingdom: consensus development, face and content validity, feasibility, and reliability. Qual Health Care QHC. 1998;7:130–5.CrossRefPubMed Cantrill JA, Sibbald B, Buetow S. Indicators of the appropriateness of long-term prescribing in general practice in the United Kingdom: consensus development, face and content validity, feasibility, and reliability. Qual Health Care QHC. 1998;7:130–5.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Hamdy RC, Moore SW, Whalen K, et al. Reducing polypharmacy in extended care. South Med J. 1995;88:534–8.CrossRefPubMed Hamdy RC, Moore SW, Whalen K, et al. Reducing polypharmacy in extended care. South Med J. 1995;88:534–8.CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Newton PF, Levinson W, Maslen D. The geriatric medication algorithm: a pilot study. J Gen Intern Med. 1994;9:164–7.CrossRefPubMed Newton PF, Levinson W, Maslen D. The geriatric medication algorithm: a pilot study. J Gen Intern Med. 1994;9:164–7.CrossRefPubMed
34.
go back to reference Lam PW, Lum CM, Leung MF. Drug non-adherence and associated risk factors among Chinese geriatric patients in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Med J. 2007;13:284.PubMed Lam PW, Lum CM, Leung MF. Drug non-adherence and associated risk factors among Chinese geriatric patients in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Med J. 2007;13:284.PubMed
36.
go back to reference Dirmaier J, Steinman MA, Krattenmacher T. Non-pharmacological treatment of depressive disorders: a review of evidence-based treatment options. Rev Recent Clin Trials. 2012;7:141–9.CrossRefPubMed Dirmaier J, Steinman MA, Krattenmacher T. Non-pharmacological treatment of depressive disorders: a review of evidence-based treatment options. Rev Recent Clin Trials. 2012;7:141–9.CrossRefPubMed
45.
go back to reference Gazarian M, Kelly M, McPhee JR, et al. Off-label use of medicines: consensus recommendations for evaluating appropriateness. Med J Aust. 2006;185:544–8.PubMed Gazarian M, Kelly M, McPhee JR, et al. Off-label use of medicines: consensus recommendations for evaluating appropriateness. Med J Aust. 2006;185:544–8.PubMed
47.
go back to reference Johnson KA, Nye M, Hill-Besinque K, et al. Measuring the impact of patient counseling in the outpatient pharmacy setting: development and implementation of the counseling models for the Kaiser Permanente/USC Patient Consultation Study. Clin Ther. 1995;17:988–1002.CrossRefPubMed Johnson KA, Nye M, Hill-Besinque K, et al. Measuring the impact of patient counseling in the outpatient pharmacy setting: development and implementation of the counseling models for the Kaiser Permanente/USC Patient Consultation Study. Clin Ther. 1995;17:988–1002.CrossRefPubMed
50.
51.
go back to reference van Dijk KN, Pont LG, de Vries CS, et al. Prescribing indicators for evaluating drug use in nursing homes. Ann Pharmacother. 2003;37:1136–41.CrossRefPubMed van Dijk KN, Pont LG, de Vries CS, et al. Prescribing indicators for evaluating drug use in nursing homes. Ann Pharmacother. 2003;37:1136–41.CrossRefPubMed
52.
go back to reference Winslade NE, Bajcar JM, Bombassaro AM, et al. Pharmacist’s management of drug-related problems: a tool for teaching and providing pharmaceutical care. Pharmacotherapy. 1997;17:801–9.PubMed Winslade NE, Bajcar JM, Bombassaro AM, et al. Pharmacist’s management of drug-related problems: a tool for teaching and providing pharmaceutical care. Pharmacotherapy. 1997;17:801–9.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Developing a measure of polypharmacy appropriateness in primary care: systematic review and expert consensus study
Authors
Jenni Burt
Natasha Elmore
Stephen M. Campbell
Sarah Rodgers
Anthony J. Avery
Rupert A. Payne
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medicine / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1741-7015
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-018-1078-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

BMC Medicine 1/2018 Go to the issue