Journal of Bioethical Inquiry

, Volume 13, Issue 4, pp 581–590 | Cite as

The Ethics of Deprescribing in Older Adults

  • Emily Reeve
  • Petra Denig
  • Sarah N. Hilmer
  • Ruud ter Meulen
Critical Perspectives

Abstract

Deprescribing is the term used to describe the process of withdrawal of an inappropriate medication supervised by a clinician. This article presents a discussion of how the Four Principles of biomedical ethics (beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice) that may guide medical practitioners’ prescribing practices apply to deprescribing medications in older adults. The view of deprescribing as an act creates stronger moral duties than if viewed as an omission. This may explain the fear of negative outcomes which has been reported by prescribers as a barrier to deprescribing. Respecting the autonomy of older adults is complex as they may not wish to be active in the decision-making process; they may also have reduced cognitive function and family members may therefore have to step in as surrogate decision-makers. Informed consent is intended as a process of information giving and reflection, where consent can be withdrawn at any time. However, people are rarely updated on the altered risks and benefits of their long-term medications as they age. Cessation of inappropriate medication use has a large financial benefit to the individual and the community. However, the principle of justice also dictates equal rights to treatment regardless of age.

Keywords

Principlism Deprescribing Bioethics Medication withdrawal Inappropriate medication use Elderly 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by a Brocher Foundation residency (ER and RtM) and an early career researcher’s scholarship from the Brocher foundation (ER). The Brocher Foundation mission is to encourage research on the ethical, legal and social implications of new medical technologies. Its main activities are to host visiting researchers and to organize symposia, workshops, and summer academies. More information on the Brocher Foundation program is available at www.brocher.ch. The funder of this work had no involvement in the design or conduct of the study, collection, management, analysis or interpretation of the data, or preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript.

Author Contributions

All authors significantly contributed to the production of this manuscript and qualify for authorship. All authors substantially contributed to the conception and design of the article, were involved in drafting (ER) or revising the draft critically for important intellectual content (PD, SH and RtM), and all authors have approved the final version for publication. All authors take public responsibility for the article.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Nil conflicts of interest to declare.

References

  1. Anderson, K., C. Freeman, D. Stowasser, and I. Scott. 2014. Prescriber barriers and enablers to minimising potentially inappropriate medications in adults: A systematic review and thematic synthesis. BMJ Open 4(12): e006544.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Arora, N.K., and C.A. McHorney. 2000. Patient preferences for medical decision making: Who really wants to participate? Medical Care 38(3): 335–341.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Astin, F., S.J. Closs, J. McLenachan, S. Hunter, and C. Priestley. 2008. The information needs of patients treated with primary angioplasty for heart attack: An exploratory study. Patient Education and Counseling 73(2): 325–332.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. 2012. Dementia in Australia. Cat. no. AGE 70. Canberra, AIHW.Google Scholar
  5. Beauchamp, T., and J. Childress. 2012. Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Blass, D.M. 2007. The physician–patient relationship in dementia care. Neurotherapeutics 4(3): 545–548.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyd, C.M., J. Darer, C. Boult, L.P. Fried, L. Boult, and A.W. Wu. 2005. Clinical practice guidelines and quality of care for older patients with multiple comorbid diseases: Implications for pay for performance. JAMA 294(6): 716–724.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Brewer, T., and G.A. Colditz. 1999. Postmarketing surveillance and adverse drug reactions: Current perspectives and future needs. JAMA 281(9): 824–829.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Campbell, A.J., M.C. Robertson, M.M. Gardner, R.N. Norton, and D.M. Buchner. 1999. Psychotropic medication withdrawal and a home‐based exercise program to prevent falls: A randomized, controlled trial. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 47(7): 850–853.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Chin, M.H., M.L. Drum, L. Jin, M.E. Shook, E.S. Huang, and D.O. Meltzer. 2008. Variation in treatment preferences and care goals among older patients with diabetes and their physicians. Medical Care 46(3): 275–286.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Davies, E.C., C.F. Green, S. Taylor, P.R. Williamson, D.R. Mottram, and M. Pirmohamed. 2009. Adverse drug reactions in hospital in-patients: a prospective analysis of 3695 patient-episodes. PLoS one 4(2): e4439.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. de Vries, S.T., F.M. de Vries, T. Dekker, et al. 2015. The role of patients’ age on their preferences for choosing additional blood pressure-lowering drugs: A discrete choice experiment in patients with diabetes. PLoS One 10(10): e0139755.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. DeMarco, J.P. 2005. Principlism and moral dilemmas: A new principle. Journal of Medical Ethics 31(2): 101–105.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Dibonaventura, M.D., J.S. Wagner, C.J. Girman, et al. 2010. Multinational Internet-based survey of patient preference for newer oral or injectable Type 2 diabetes medication. Patient Preferences and Adherence 4: 397–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dickenson, D.L. 2000. Are medical ethicists out of touch? Practitioner attitudes in the US and UK towards decisions at the end of life. Journal of Medical Ethics 26(4): 254–260.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Entwistle, V.A., S.M. Carter, A. Cribb, and K. McCaffery. 2010. Supporting patient autonomy: The importance of clinician-patient relationships. Journal of General Internal Medicine 25(7): 741–745.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Fleck, L.M. 2012. Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine: Wicked problems, ragged edges and ethical precipices. New Biotechnology 29(6): 757–768.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Fowler Jr., F.J., B.S. Gerstein, and M.J. Barry. 2013. How patient centered are medical decisions?: Results of a national survey. JAMA Internal Medicine 173(13): 1215–1221.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Fried, T.R., S. McGraw, J.V. Agostini, and M.E. Tinetti. 2008. Views of older persons with multiple morbidities on competing outcomes and clinical decision-making. Journal of the American Geriatric Society 56(10): 1839–1844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fu, A.Z., J.Z. Jiang, J.H. Reeves, J.E. Fincham, G.G. Liu, and M. Perri III. 2007. Potentially inappropriate medication use and healthcare expenditures in the US community-dwelling elderly. Medical Care 45(5): 472–476.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Gallagher, P., P. Barry, and D. O’Mahony. 2007. Inappropriate prescribing in the elderly. Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics 32(2): 113–121.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Garbutt, G., and P. Davies. 2011. Should the practice of medicine be a deontological or utilitarian enterprise? Journal of Medical Ethics 37: 267–270.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Gnjidic, D., S.N. Hilmer, F.M. Blyth, et al. 2012. Polypharmacy cutoff and outcomes: Five or more medicines were used to identify community-dwelling older men at risk of different adverse outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 65(9): 989–995.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Gopal, A.A., L. Cosgrove, I. Shuv-Ami, E.E. Wheeler, M.J. Yerganian, and H.J. Bursztajn. 2012. Dynamic informed consent processes vital for treatment with antidepressants. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 35(5): 392–397.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Harris, J. 1987. QALYfying the value of life. Journal of Medical Ethics 13(3): 117–123.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Hill‐Taylor, B., I. Sketris, J. Hayden, S. Byrne, D. O’Sullivan, and R. Christie. 2013. Application of the STOPP/START criteria: A systematic review of the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing in older adults, and evidence of clinical, humanistic and economic impact. Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics 38(5): 360–372.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Hilmer, S.N., D. Gnjidic, and D.G. Le Couteur. 2012. Thinking through the medication list—Appropriate prescribing and deprescribing in robust and frail older patients. Australian Family Physician 41(12): 924.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Hoffmann, T.C., F. Légaré, M.B. Simmons, et al. 2014. Shared decision making: What do clinicians need to know and why should they bother? The Medical Journal of Australia 201(1): 35–39.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Hope, T. 2000. Acts and omissions revisited. Journal of Medical Ethics 26(4): 227–228.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Iyer, S., V. Naganathan, A.J. McLachlan, and D.G. Le Couteur. 2008. Medication withdrawal trials in people aged 65 years and older: A systematic review. Drugs and Aging 25(12): 1021–1031.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Jonsen, A.R., and S.E. Toulmin. 1988. The abuse of casuistry: A history of moral reasoning. University of California Press.Google Scholar
  32. Karnieli-Miller, O., and Z. Eisikovits. 2009. Physician as partner or salesman? Shared decision-making in real-time encounters. Social Science & Medicine 69(1): 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kuczewski, M. 1998. Casuistry and principlism: The convergence of method in biomedical ethics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 19(6): 509–524.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Le Couteur, D.G., G.A. Ford, and A.J. McLachlan. 2010. Evidence, ethics and medication management in older people. Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research 40(2): 148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Le Couteur, D.G., and H. Kendig. 2008. Pharmaco‐epistemology for the prescribing geriatrician. Australasian Journal of Ageing 27(1): 3–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Marks, J.R., J.M. Schectman, H. Groninger, and M.L. Plews-Ogan. 2010. The association of health literacy and socio-demographic factors with medication knowledge. Patient Education and Counselling 78(3): 372–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mead, N., and P. Bower. 2000. Patient-centredness: A conceptual framework and review of the empirical literature. Social Science and Medicine 51(7): 1087–1110.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Michie, S., J. Miles, and J. Weinman. 2003. Patient-centredness in chronic illness: What is it and does it matter? Patient Education and Counseling 51(3): 197–206.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Mill, J.S. 1961. Utilitarianism. London: Dent.Google Scholar
  40. Notenboom, K., E. Beers, D.A. van Riet-Nales, et al. 2014. Practical problems with medication use that older people experience: A qualitative study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 62(12): 2339–2344.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. NPS MedicineWise. 2015. National Prescribing Service Limited. http://www.nps.org.au/. Accessed 13 May, 2015.
  42. Payne, R., and M. Duerden. 2015. Polypharmacy—Appropriate, problematic or both? Prescriber 26(4): 31–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Post, S.G., J.C. Stuckey, P.J. Whitehouse, et al. 2001. A focus group on cognition-enhancing medications in Alzheimer disease: Disparities between professionals and consumers. Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders 15(2): 80–88.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Qi, K., E. Reeve, S. Hilmer, S.-A. Pearson, S. Matthews, and D. Gnjidic. 2015. Older peoples’ attitudes regarding polypharmacy, statin use and willingness to have statins deprescribed in Australia. International Journal of Clinal Pharmacy 37(5): 949–957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rachels, J. 1975. Active and passive euthanasia. New England Journal of Medicine 292(2): 78–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Reeve, E., S. Bell, and S. Hilmer. 2014a. Barriers to optimising prescribing and deprescribing in older adults with dementia: A narrative review. Current Clinical Pharmacology 10(3): 168–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Reeve, E., D. Gnjidic, J. Long, and S. Hilmer. 2015a. A systematic review of the emerging definition of “deprescribing” with network analysis: Implications for future research and clinical practice. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 80(6): 1254–1268.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. Reeve, E., S. Shakib, I. Hendrix, M.S. Roberts, and M.D. Wiese. 2014b. The benefits and harms of deprescribing. Medical Journal of Australia 201(7): 386–389.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Reeve, E., S. Shakib, I. Hendrix, M.S. Roberts, and M.D. Wiese. 2014c. Review of deprescribing processes and development of an evidence based, patient-centred deprescribing process. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 78(4): 738–747.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. Reeve, E., J. To, I. Hendrix, S. Shakib, M.S. Roberts, and M.D. Wiese. 2013a. Patient barriers to and enablers of deprescribing: A systematic review. Drugs and Aging 30(10): 793–807.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Reeve, E., M.D. Wiese, I. Hendrix, M. Roberts, and S. Shakib. 2013b. People’s attitudes, beliefs, and experiences regarding polypharmacy and willingness to deprescribe. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 61(9): 1508–1514.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Reeve, E., M.D. Wiese, and A.A. Mangoni. 2015b. Alterations in drug disposition in older adults. Expert Opinion on Drug Metabolism & Toxicology 11(4): 491–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rockwood, K. 2014. For how long should we use symptomatic therapies to treat people with Alzheimer Disease. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry 59(12): 615–617.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  54. Rossello, X., S.J. Pocock, and D.G. Julian. 2015. Long-term use of cardiovascular drugs: Challenges for research and for patient care. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 66(11): 1273–1285.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Sarnes, E., L. Crofford, M. Watson, G. Dennis, H. Kan, and D. Bass. 2011. Incidence and US costs of corticosteroid-associated adverse events: A systematic literature review. Clinical Therapeutics 33(10): 1413–1432.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Say, R., M. Murtagh, and R. Thomson. 2006. Patients’ preference for involvement in medical decision making: A narrative review. Patient Education and Counselling 60(2): 102–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Schneider, A., T. Körner, M. Mehring, M. Wensing, G. Elwyn, and J. Szecsenyi. 2006. Impact of age, health locus of control and psychological co-morbidity on patients’ preferences for shared decision making in general practice. Patient Education and Counseling 61(2): 292–298.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Schuling, J., H. Gebben, L.J.G. Veehof, and F.M. Haaijer-Ruskamp. 2012. Deprescribing medication in very elderly patients with multimorbidity: the view of Dutch GPs. A qualitative study. BMC Family Practice 13(1): 56.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  59. Scott, I.A., S.N. Hilmer, E. Reeve, et al. 2015. Reducing inappropriate polypharmacy: The process of deprescribing. JAMA Internal Medicine 175(5): 827–834.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Shalowitz, D.I., E. Garrett-Mayer, and D. Wendler. 2006. The accuracy of surrogate decision makers: A systematic review. Archives of Internal Medicine 166(5): 493–497.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Silveira, M.J., A.S. Kazanis, and M.P. Shevrin. 2008. Statins in the last six months of life: A recognizable, life-limiting condition does not decrease their use. Journal of Palliative Medicine 11(5): 685–693.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Swinglehurst, D., T. Greenhalgh, J. Russell, and M. Myall. 2011. Receptionist input to quality and safety in repeat prescribing in UK general practice: Ethnographic case study. BMJ 343: d6788.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  63. The American Geriatrics Society Beers Criteria Update Expert Panel. 2012. American Geriatrics Society updated Beers Criteria for potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 60(4): 616–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Tjia, J., and J. Givens. 2012. Ethical framework for medication discontinuation in nursing home residents with limited life expectancy. Clinics in Geriatric Medicine 28(2): 255–272.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Tonelli, M.R. 2006. Integrating evidence into clinical practice: an alternative to evidence-based approaches. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 12(3): 248–256.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Torke, A., G.C. Alexander, and J. Lantos. 2008. Substituted judgment: The limitations of autonomy in surrogate decision making. Journal of General Internal Medicine 23(9): 1514–1517.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  67. Uhlig, K., B. Leff, D. Kent, et al. 2014. A framework for crafting clinical practice guidelines that are relevant to the care and management of people with multimorbidity. Journal of General Internal Medicine 29(4): 670–679.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  68. Van Spall, H.G., A. Toren, A. Kiss, and R.A. Fowler. 2007. Eligibility criteria of randomized controlled trials published in high-impact general medical journals. JAMA 297(11): 1233–1240.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Verduijn, M., A. Leendertse, A. Moeselaar, N. de Wit, and R. van Marum. 2013. Multidisciplinaire richtlijn polyfarmacie bij ouderen [Multidisciplinary guideline for polypharmacy in the elderly]. Huisarts en Wetenschap 56(8): 414–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wittink, M.N., K.H. Morales, L.A. Meoni, et al. 2008. Stability of preferences for end-of-life treatment after 3 years of follow-up: The Johns Hopkins Precursors Study. Archive of Internal Medicine 168(19): 2125–2130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Zermansky, A. 1996. Who controls repeats? British Journal of General Practice 46(412): 643.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Journal of Bioethical Inquiry Pty Ltd. 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ageing and Pharmacology, Cognitive Decline Partnership Centre, Kolling Institute of Medical Research, Sydney Medical SchoolUniversity of SydneySt LeonardsAustralia
  2. 2.Faculty of Medical Sciences, Clinical Pharmacy & PharmacologyUniversity of Groningen, University Medical Center GroningenGroningenNetherlands
  3. 3.Departments of Aged Care and Clinical Pharmacology, Royal North Shore Hospital and Cognitive Decline Partnership Centre, Kolling Institute of Medical Research, Sydney Medical SchoolUniversity of SydneySt LeonardsAustralia
  4. 4.Centre for Ethics in Medicine, School of Social and Community MedicineUniversity of BristolBristolUK

Personalised recommendations