Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Development and validation of the patients’ attitudes towards deprescribing (PATD) questionnaire

  • Research Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background There is a large amount of research into and promotion of rational prescribing, but there is a comparative lack of investigation into deprescribing. The success of deprescribing is likely to be dependent on both medical and patient factors. Objective The aim of this study was to develop and validate a tool to capture the views and beliefs of patients regarding cessation of medications. Setting Participants were recruited from a multidisciplinary clinic at the Royal Adelaide Hospital and Hampstead Rehabilitation Centre. Methods The patients’ attitudes towards deprescribing (PATD) questionnaire was developed through expert opinion and piloting. Psychometric testing included face, content and criterion validity, sensitivity and test–retest reliability. Results A final 15 item questionnaire was produced. Through piloting, expert review and gamma rank correlation with the previously validated beliefs about medicines questionnaire, the PATD was determined to be valid. Test-retesting resulted in a total concordance of 71.3 % (95 % confidence interval, 64.1–78.5 %). Conclusion The PATD has acceptable psychometric properties and has potential for future use in research and practice to not only determine patients’ willingness towards deprescribing, but also uncover what beliefs may influence this.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dedhiya SD, Hancock E, Craig BA, Doebbeling CC, Thomas J. Incident use and outcomes associated with potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults. Am J Geriatr Pharmacother. 2010;8:562–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sorensen L, Stokes JA, Purdie DM, Woodward M, Roberts MS. Medication management at home: medication-related risk factors associated with poor health outcomes. Age Ageing. 2005;34:626–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fialova D, Topinkova E, Gambassi G, Finne-Soveri H, Jonsson PV, Carpenter I, et al. Potentially inappropriate medication use among elderly home care patients in Europe. JAMA. 2005;293:1348–58.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Barat I, Andreasen F, Damsgaard EM. Drug therapy in the elderly: what doctors believe and patients actually do. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2001;51:615–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Claxton AJ, Cramer J, Pierce C. A systematic review of the associations between dose regimens and medication compliance. Clin Ther. 2001;23:1296–310.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Nordin OI, Runnamo R, Engfeldt P. Medication quality and quality of life in the elderly, a cohort study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2011;9:95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Beers MH. Explicit criteria for determining potentially inappropriate medication use by the elderly: an update. Arch Intern Med. 1997;157:1531–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Hanlon JT, Schmader KE, Samsa GP, Weinberger M, Uttech KM, Lewis IK, et al. A method for assessing drug therapy appropriateness. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:1045–51.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Fick DM, Cooper JW, Wade WE, Waller JL, Maclean R, Beers MH. Updating the beers criteria for potentially in appropriate medication use in older adults. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163:2716–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. O’Mahony D, Gallagher PF. Inappropriate prescribing in the older population: need for new criteria. Age Ageing. 2008;37:138–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kaur S, Mitchell G, Vitetta L, Roberts MS. Interventions that can reduce inappropriate prescribing in the elderly: a systematic review. Drugs Aging. 2009;26:1013–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Brulhart M, Wermeille J. Multidisciplinary medication review: evaluation of a pharmaceutical care model for nursing homes. Int J Clin Pharm. 2011;33:549–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Woodward M. Deprescribing: achieving better health outcomes for older people through reducing medications. JPPR. 2003;33:323–8.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Alexander GC, Sayla MA, Holmes HM, Sachs GA. Prioritizing and stopping prescription medicines. Can Med Assoc J. 2006;174:1083–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Williams A, Manias E, Walker R. Interventions to improve medication adherence in people with multiple chronic conditions: a systematic review. J Adv Nurs. 2008;63:132–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Carder PC, Vuckovic N, Green CA. Negotiating medications: patient perceptions of long-term medication use. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2003;28:409–17.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Peat JK, Mellis C, Williams K, Xuan W. Validity. Health science research. London, UK: SAGE Publications, Ltd; 2002. p. 105–13. ISBN: 9780761974031.

  18. Dolovich L, Nair K, Sellors C, Lohfeld L, Lee A, Levine M. Do patients’ expectations influence their use of medications? Qualitative study. Can Fam Physician. 2008;54:384–93.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Barter G, Cormack M. The long-term use of benzodiazepines: patients’ views, accounts and experiences. Fam Pract. 1996;13:491–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. King MB, Gabe J, Williams P, Rodrigo EK. Long term use of benzodiazepines: the views of patients. Br J Gen Pract. 1990;40:194–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Boath EH, Blenkinsopp A. The rise and rise of proton pump inhibitor drugs: patients’ perspectives. Soc Sci Med. 1997;45:1571–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Horne R, Weinman J, Hankins M. The beliefs about medicines questionnaire: the development and evaluation of a new method for assessing the cognitive representation of medication. Psychol Health. 1999;14:1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Jyrkkä J, Enlund H, Korhonen MJ, Sulkava R, Hartikainen S. Patterns of drug use and factors associated with polypharmacy and excessive polypharmacy in elderly persons: results of the Kuopio 75+ study: a cross-sectional analysis. Drugs Aging. 2009;26:493–503.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Garfinkel D, Mangin D. Feasibility study of a systematic approach for discontinuation of multiple medications in older adults: addressing polypharmacy. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170:1648–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Williams ME, Pulliam CC, Hunter R, Johnson TM, Owens JE, Kincaid J, et al. The short-term effect of interdisciplinary medication review on function and cost in ambulatory elderly people. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2004;52:93–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the staff of the Multidisciplinary Ambulatory Consulting Service at the Royal Adelaide Hospital and the pharmacists at the Hampstead Rehabilitation Centre for their assistance with this study. We acknowledge the contribution made by the members of the RAH Pharmacology Department Journal Club for their insights in the development of the PATD. And finally we would like to thank all of the participants, especially those in the piloting phase who provided us with invaluable feedback.

Funding

Ms Emily Reeve’s PhD candidacy (of which this research was conducted within) is funded by an Australian Postgraduate Award (APA).

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences and Sansom Institute for Health Research, University of South Australia, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia

    Emily Reeve, Ivanka Hendrix, Michael S. Roberts & Michael D. Wiese

  2. Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, SA, Australia

    Emily Reeve & Sepehr Shakib

  3. Therapeutics Research Centre, School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Michael S. Roberts

Authors
  1. Emily Reeve
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sepehr Shakib
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ivanka Hendrix
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael S. Roberts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michael D. Wiese
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emily Reeve.

Additional information

Full copies of the PATD Questionnaire are available from http://www.unisa.edu.au/Research/Sansom-Institute-for-Health-Research/Research-at-the-Sansom/Research-Concentrations/Therapeutics-and-Pharmaceutical-Science/#projects or from the corresponding author.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Reeve, E., Shakib, S., Hendrix, I. et al. Development and validation of the patients’ attitudes towards deprescribing (PATD) questionnaire. Int J Clin Pharm 35, 51–56 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-012-9704-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-012-9704-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation