Abstract
Background
Several tools have revealed an association between potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) and adverse outcomes, but the one most fitted for the rural population has not been determined.
Aims
We investigated the performance of the Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions (STOPP) and Screening Tool to Alert doctors to the Right Treatment (START) in identifying inappropriate prescribing and its association with adverse outcomes among older rural primary health care users.
Methods
A cohort of consenting outpatients aged ≥ 65 years in a rural Greek primary care center was assessed for PIM and potential prescribing omissions (PPO) using the START/STOPP version 2 criteria. Medications, comorbidities, functional status, and laboratory data were recorded along with 6-month incidence of emergency department visits, hospitalization, and death prospectively.
Results
Among 104 participants (median age 78 years, 49.1% women, receiving a median of 6 drugs), PPO was found in 78% and PIMs in 61%. PIM was multivariately correlated with multimorbidity (p = 0.029) and polypharmacy (p < 0,001), while drug-PPO was only associated with multimorbidity (p = 0.039). The number of PIM predicted emergency department visits and hospitalizations at 6-month follow-up (p value 0.011), independent of age, sex, frailty, comorbidities, and total medication number.
Discussion
The START/STOPP tool is useful in identifying inappropriate prescribing patterns leading to increased utilization of acute care services in older adults followed at a rural primary care setting.
Conclusion
Inappropriate prescribing as identified by the START/STOPP criteria is prevalent among older adults with multimorbidity in rural primary care, and independently associated with future acute care visits.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Μultimorbidity in the older adult population has led to increasingly complex drug regimens, potentially harmful polypharmacy [1], and poor treatment adherence [2]. Geriatric research has revealed that most adverse outcomes attributable to polypharmacy are related to potentially inappropriate medications (PIM), which are more common among women rather than men, older rather than younger patients, and those with impaired autonomy in daily activities, a high overall number of comorbidities and drugs [3, 4]. In addition, PIM in older adults have been associated with numerous geriatric syndromes and negative health outcomes [5], increased use of health services, more frequent hospitalizations, and consequently higher health costs [6] as well as higher mortality [7, 8], highlighting the need of using prescribing tools [9, 10]; however, other cohorts have yielded conflicting results and did not confirm increased mortality [11, 12]. In addition, the optimal tool to evaluate inappropriate prescribing has not been determined.
Several validated screening tools have been developed to detect PIM in older adults, such as the Beers criteria [13], and the Screening Tool of Older People’s Prescriptions (STOPP) and criteria for potential prescribing omissions (PPO) called the Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (START) developed in 2008 and updated in 2015 and 2018 [14]. According to a prospective cohort study, when comparing different tools, associations between inappropriate prescribing and outcomes differ: several prescribing tools have been associated with an increased rate of health system visits, while only STOPP was significantly associated with increased emergency attendance [15, 16]. Additionally, the STOPP/START tool includes prescribing omissions, and seems to identify more instances of potential major clinical relevance [17]. Although PIMs as defined by the STOPP/START criteria have been linked to hospitalizations and mortality in urban settings [6, 8, 11, 18], here is a paucity of data on PIMs-associated adverse outcomes in rural community settings.
In this study, we sought to identify risk factors associated with inappropriate prescribing as per the STOPP / START v2 in a rural health center in Greece, and prospectively assess increases in risk for emergency department visits, hospitalizations or death, in this population.
Methods
Study design, setting, and participants
A prospective observational cohort study of 104 consecutive home-dwelling outpatients aged ≥ 65 years was conducted from February to October 2019 in a rural Greek primary care center. The state regional medical center of Marmari, S. Evoia where our study took place serves a reference population of approximately 1000 people, of which about 30% are older adults. The study was approved by “Diocleion” General Hospital of Karystos institutional review board, and all participants signed written informed consent in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki and the European General Data Protection Regulation.
Demographics, regular medications (counted as active ingredients per person)—excluding over the counter medications—vaccination status, comorbidities as mentioned in revised START/STOPP criteria, functional status (using KATZ Index tool), frailty status (using the 9-point Clinical Frailty Scale) [19], multimorbidity (using the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) [20]), laboratory values and renal function measured by glomerular filtration rate (GFR) were recorded by a geriatric expert, during the medical visit or in case of severely frail patients through representation by their caregivers in their encounter with the primary healthcare setting. The data were obtained through self-report, review of patient’s and reference hospital’s medical records, and complemented by the Greek universal electronic prescribing system. Participants were assessed by the investigator (MT) case by case for potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP), including PIM and PPO using the START/STOPP v 2 criteria: the total number of potentially inappropriate medication applying STOPP criteria was regarded as PIM number. Regarding PPOs, we considered inadequate prescription practices applying START criteria in total, termed “PPO” (including drugs and/or vaccinations), and separately, drug prescribing omissions (regardless of vaccination omissions), termed “dPPO”, since vaccination omission is to a greater extent affected by personal attitudes and choices.
Six-month prospective outcomes were collected via telephone or in-person follow-up visits and/or electronic medical record review including deaths, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations.
Statistical analysis
Age, Katz index, CFS, CCI, as well as number of medication and PIM number were regarded continuous variables. Sex, hospitalization/death, hospitalization/emergency department visit, PIM, PPO, and dPPO were treated as categoric variables. Data preparation and analysis were done in R (R Core Team, 2016). To investigate the associations between binary variables, Chi-square independence tests were performed and, wherever deemed necessary due to the sparse distribution of contingencies, Fisher's exact test was applied. To test if the total number of drugs was univariately associated with inappropriate prescribing and worse clinical outcomes, a non-parametric Kruskal–Wallis population difference test was performed. Finally, we further investigated the risk factors for PIM and dPPO (as binary variables) through multiple logistic regression models, including age, sex, CCI, CFS, and number of medications. The potential PIM risk factors identified in the relevant literature [21,22,23] were included a priori into multivariate models. Statistical significance was set at α = 0.05.
Results
Population characteristics
From a reference population of 1000 inhabitants, 140 adults older than 65 years presented to our medical center for an ambulatory primary care visit. Of those, 104 agreed to participate and were enrolled in the study. Median age was 78 years (interquartile range: 71.5–83.5 years), of which 51 (49.1%) were women. Half of the participants were in very good physical condition or coping well with everyday activities (CFS 1–3). Only three of them suffered from documented dementia. Baseline characteristics are shown in Table 1.
In 95% of the sample, at least one criterion of PIP was met, with at least one PIM being observed in 61% of participants, while 78% of the cases concerning PPOs with major representative omission of vaccination in 84% of them.
In more detail, among those with PIM, the most frequent cause of inappropriateness was drug prescription beyond the recommended duration in 51%, followed by drug prescription without an evidence-based clinical indication (48% of PIM), duplicate drug class prescription in 14% of PIMs, and the prescription of drugs to treat side effects of other drugs (3%). Not impressively 100% of prescribed benzodiazepines were administered beyond recommended 4-week duration, while xanthine oxidase inhibitors were prescribed in 99% of cases without an evidence-based clinical indication. Similarly, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs') were prescribed either prolonged or without a documented clinical indication in half of the cases. (More details in Online Resource 1).
Among patients with PPOs, the vast majority regarded vaccination omission (84% of PPO). Drug omissions were noticed in 38% of PPOs with main representatives being lack of statin for secondary prevention in 7%, b-blockers in ischemic heart disease (5%), bone anti-resorptive or anabolic therapy in documented osteoporosis in 5%, followed by bisphosphonates/ vitamin D/ calcium in patients taking long-term systemic corticosteroid therapy in 4% of cases. (More details in Online Resource 2).
Exploratory analysis
As expected, the number of PIMs was univariately associated to a statistically significant degree with patient age, the number of comorbidities (as per the CCI), and the level of frailty (as per the CFS), as well as with the total number of medications (Online Resources 3–4). All of the univariately associated factors were then included in the same multivariate regression models, to derive a fully adjusted analysis of PIM determinants and predictive value.
Determinants of inappropriate prescribing
In multiple logistic regression models, PIM and dPPO were independently associated with the total comorbidity burden (CCI); (OR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.28–0.93 and OR = 1.74, 95% CI = 1.03–2.94 respectively), while adjusting for age, sex, CCI, CFS, and the total medication number (Tables 2 and 3). PIMs, but not dPPOs, were also associated with the total medication number (OR = 1.57, 95% CI: 1.25–1.96). (Tables 2, 3).
Prospective 6-month adverse outcomes
Four patients died during the 6-month follow-up (78, 84, 88, and 89 years old). Overall, 31 (29.8%) visited the hospital for an emergency department visit and/or unscheduled admission (composite outcome acute care visits). In more detail, 22.1% needed emergency medical services, 18.3% have been hospitalized.
PIM was statistically significantly associated with increased emergency department visits (p value 0.027), hospitalizations (p value 0.032), and deaths (p value 0.041) (Fig. 1, more details in Online Resources 5 and 6); these associations were robust to confounding effects in multiple logistic regression models adjusted for number of medications, age, sex, comorbidities, CFS and total number of medication, where also an independent association between acute care visits and older age was shown (Table 4). There was no univariate or multivariable association between dPPO and the 6-month outcomes of interest.
Discussion
In our study at least one PIM recorded in 61% of participants, and at least one PPO in 78% of individuals. The corresponding prevalence of PIM recorded in the literature varies from 21% to 66.8% [12]. Only four studies in eastern Europe have evaluated the prevalence of inappropriate prescribing in primary care, of which three were held in urban hospitals [4, 24,25,26]; PIM prevalence was similar to our study in Croatia (69%, [24]), Albania (63%, [25]), and Italy (54%, [4]). Only one study was held in a rural setting in Romania [26], which found lower prevalence of PIP (26% PIM and 42% PPO); however, this study only applied a limited subset of the START/STOPP criteria. Notably, these estimates are much higher than recorded in Ireland (21% PIM and 23% PPOs) [27].. Heterogeneity of prevalence in various studies seems to be depended on variable primary care models, prescribing systems, and prescribing mentality among different countries, characteristics of the population studied as well as the tool used to capture inappropriate prescribing [12].
Several factors contribute to prescribing inertia in primary care in Greece and other European countries: lack of time, lack of information sharing among primary care practitioners and specialists, lack of structured special geriatric education [28, 29], inadequate numbers of health workforce and inadequate financial motivation [30]. It should also be noted that part of our data was based on self-report of the participants, so it is possible that patients may have failed to mention certain medical conditions, leading to a false identification of STOPP PIMs. However, multiple characteristics of the participants were tested, reducing the likelihood of systematic reference bias between subgroups.
Our study confirms a strong association between PIM and polypharmacy, which has been reported in previous studies [31,32,33,34,35,36], which, however, did not examine rural community-dwelling older adults using the START/STOPP screening tool, as in our work. We found that both PIM and PPO were directly related to the burden of comorbidities, which remains in keeping with previous studies assessing multiple prescribing tools and indices comorbidity [31, 32]; again, none of these studies was held exclusively in rural population. PPOs, in particular, have been associated to multimorbidity in a few studies held in hospitalized patients, but not in a rural community setting [4, 37].
Regarding the risk for future adverse events conferred by PIMs, studies on this topic are fraught by heterogeneous methodology on cardinal aspects such as the origin of patients (hospital, long-term care facilities, community), the classification tool for PIM (Beers criteria, START/STOPP, other screening methods), and the categorization of outcomes (use of health services, hospitalizations, length of hospital stay, death, health costs, heterogeneous quality of life criteria) [6]. The impact of PIM on acute care visits was documented in a systematic review by Hyttinen et al., while in other studies, inappropriate prescribing was associated with mortality [7, 8]. In a meta-analysis including 77,624 primary care participants, a significant association between PIP and increased emergency department visits and hospitalizations was found [11]; however, a very high degree of heterogeneity was noted, and all studies were conducted in urban primary care centers. Our study confirms that the elevated risk of acute care visits deriving from PIM prescribing is also relevant to the primary care of rural populations. We have also highlighted that a high burden of comorbidities, but not polypharmacy per se, is associated with prescribing omissions, which has not been described in such a population.
To our knowledge, this is the first study evaluating inappropriate prescribing in primary care in Greece, and one of the few referring to Southeastern Europe. Its strengths lie in the prospective design, detailed recording and classification of prescription patterns, and case by case evaluation for START/STOPP criteria ascertainment by a geriatric expert. A limitation of the study is the modest sample size, resulting in few cases experiencing adverse outcomes; larger data from additional rural primary care models are needed for more robust conclusion.
Our findings highlight the significance of using dedicated criteria to reinforce appropriate geriatric prescribing across primary care settings, including rural areas. Further research is needed to reveal the most appropriate method of integrating the STOPP / START tool into routine clinical practice and document its effectiveness in preventing suboptimal outcomes.
References
Guthrie B, Makubate B, Hernandez-Santiago V et al (2015) The rising tide of polypharmacy and drug-drug interactions: population database analysis 1995–2010. BMC Med 13:74. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0322-7
Ulley J, Harrop D, Ali A et al (2019) Deprescribing interventions and their impact on medication adherence in community-dwelling older adults with polypharmacy: a systematic review. BMC Geriatr. 19:15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-019-1031-4
Pérez T, Moriarty F, Wallace E et al (2018) Prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people in primary care and its association with hospital admission: longitudinal study. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k4524
Bo M, Gibello M, Brunetti E et al (2019) Prevalence and predictors of inappropriate prescribing according to the screening tool of older people’s prescriptions and screening tool to alert to right treatment version 2 criteria in older patients discharged from geriatric and internal medicine ward: STOPP/STARTv2 in hospital-discharged patients. Geriatr Gerontol Int 19:5–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/ggi.13542
Mangin D, Bahat G, Golomb BA et al (2018) International group for reducing inappropriate medication use & polypharmacy (IGRIMUP): position statement and 10 recommendations for action. Drugs Aging 35:575–587. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40266-018-0554-2
Hyttinen V, Jyrkkä J, Valtonen H (2016) A systematic review of the impact of potentially inappropriate medication on health care utilization and costs among older adults. Med Care 54:950–964. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000000587
Thomas RE, Nguyen LT, Jackson D et al (2020) Potentially inappropriate prescribing and potential prescribing omissions in 82,935 older hospitalised adults: association with hospital readmission and mortality within six months. Geriatrics. https://doi.org/10.3390/geriatrics5020037
Cardwell K, Kerse N, Hughes CM et al (2020) Does potentially inappropriate prescribing predict an increased risk of admission to hospital and mortality? A longitudinal study of the “oldest old.” BMC Geriatr 20:28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-020-1432-4
Gibert P, Cabaret M, Moulis M et al (2018) Optimizing medication use in elderly people in primary care: Impact of STOPP criteria on inappropriate prescriptions. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 75:16–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2017.10.022
Liew TM, Lee CS, Goh SKL et al (2020) The prevalence and impact of potentially inappropriate prescribing among older persons in primary care settings: multilevel meta-analysis. Age Ageing 49:570–579. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afaa057
Liew TM, Lee CS, Goh Shawn KL et al (2019) Potentially inappropriate prescribing among older persons: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Ann Fam Med. 17:257–266. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2373
Hill-Taylor B, Walsh KA, Stewart S et al (2016) 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 41:158–169. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpt.12372
By the 2019 American Geriatrics Society Beers Criteria® Update Expert Panel, American Geriatrics Society 2019 Updated AGS Beers Criteria® for Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use in Older Adults, J Am Geriatr Soc. 67 (2019) 674–694. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.15767
O’Mahony D, O’Sullivan D, Byrne S et al (2015) STOPP/START criteria for potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people: version 2. Age Ageing 44:213–218. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afu145
Brown JD, Hutchison LC, Li C et al (2016) Predictive validity of the beers and screening tool of older persons’ potentially inappropriate prescriptions (STOPP) criteria to detect adverse drug events, hospitalizations, and emergency department visits in the United States. J Am Geriatr Soc 64:22–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.13884
Moriarty F, Bennett K, Kenny RA et al (2020) Comparing potentially inappropriate prescribing tools and their association with patient outcomes. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:526–534. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.16239
Boland B, Guignard B, Dalleur O et al (2016) Application of STOPP/START and Beers criteria: compared analysis on identification and relevance of potentially inappropriate prescriptions. Eur Geriatr Med 7:416–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurger.2016.03.010
Thomas RE, Nguyen LT, Jackson D et al (2020) Potentially inappropriate prescribing and potential prescribing omissions in 82,935 older hospitalised adults: association with hospital readmission and mortality within six months. Geriatrics 5:37. https://doi.org/10.3390/geriatrics5020037
Pulok MH, Theou O, van der Valk AM et al (2020) The role of illness acuity on the association between frailty and mortality in emergency department patients referred to internal medicine. Age Ageing 49:1071–1079. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afaa089
Quan H, Li B, Couris CM et al (2011) Updating and validating the charlson comorbidity index and score for risk adjustment in hospital discharge abstracts using data from 6 countries. Am J Epidemiol 173:676–682. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwq433
Muhlack DC, Hoppe LK, Saum K-U et al (2020) Investigation of a possible association of potentially inappropriate medication for older adults and frailty in a prospective cohort study from Germany. Age Ageing 49:20–25. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afz127
Tian F, Liao S, Chen Z et al (2021) The prevalence and risk factors of potentially inappropriate medication use in older Chinese inpatients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy: a cross-sectional study. Ann Transl Med. 9:1483–1483. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm-21-4238
Poudel A, Peel NM, Nissen L et al (2014) Potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients discharged from acute care hospitals to residential aged care facilities. Ann Pharmacother 48:1425–1433. https://doi.org/10.1177/1060028014548568
Mucalo I, Hadžiabdić MO, Brajković A et al (2017) Potentially inappropriate medicines in elderly hospitalised patients according to the EU(7)-PIM list, STOPP version 2 criteria and comprehensive protocol. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 73:991–999. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-017-2246-y
Hudhra K, Beçi E, Petrela E et al (2016) Prevalence and factors associated with potentially inappropriate prescriptions among older patients at hospital discharge. J Eval Clin Pract 22:707–713. https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12521
Buda V, Prelipcean A, Andor M et al (2020) Potentially inappropriate prescriptions in ambulatory elderly patients living in rural areas of Romania using STOPP/START (Version 2) criteria. CIA 15:407–417. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S233270
Ryan C, O’Mahony D, Kennedy J et al (2009) Potentially inappropriate prescribing in an Irish elderly population in primary care. Br J Clin Pharmacol 68:936–947. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2125.2009.03531.x
Kotsani M, Ellul J, Bahat G et al (2020) Start low, go slow, but look far: the case of geriatric medicine in Balkan countries. Eur Geriatr Med 11:869–878. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41999-020-00350-x
van Poelgeest EP, Seppala LJ, Lee JM et al (2022) On Behalf of the EuGMS SIG Pharmacology Deprescribing practices, habits and attitudes of geriatricians and geriatricians-in-training across Europe: a large web-based survey. Eur Geriatr Med 13:1455–1466. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41999-022-00702-9
McIntosh J, Alonso A, MacLure K et al (2018) A case study of polypharmacy management in nine European countries: implications for change management and implementation. PLoS One. 13:e0195232. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195232
Sayın Z, Sancar M, Özen Y et al (2022) Polypharmacy, potentially inappropriate prescribing and medication complexity in Turkish older patients in the community pharmacy setting. Acta Clin Belg 77:273–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/17843286.2020.1829251
Xu Z, Liang X, Zhu Y et al (2021) Factors associated with potentially inappropriate prescriptions and barriers to medicines optimisation among older adults in primary care settings: a systematic review. Fam Med Com Health. 9:e001325. https://doi.org/10.1136/fmch-2021-001325
Baré M, Lleal M, Ortonobes S et al (2022) on behalf of the MoPIM study group, factors associated to potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients according to STOPP/START criteria: MoPIM multicentre cohort study. BMC Geriatr 22:44. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-021-02715-8
Shade MY, Berger AM, Chaperon C et al (2017) Factors associated with potentially inappropriate medication use in rural, community-dwelling older adults. J Gerontol Nurs 43:21–30. https://doi.org/10.3928/00989134-20170406-01
Nothelle SK, Sharma R, Oakes A et al (2019) Factors associated with potentially inappropriate medication use in community-dwelling older adults in the United States: a systematic review†. Int J Pharm Pract 27:408–423. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijpp.12541
Lin Y-J, Peng L-N, Chen L-K et al (2011) Risk factors of potentially inappropriate medications among older patients visiting the community health center in rural Taiwan. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 53:225–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2010.11.017
Al-Ragawi AM, Zyryanov SK, Ushkalova EA et al (2020) Prevalence and risk factors of potentially prescribing omissions in elderly and senile patients: clinical practice in Russian hospitals. Adv Gerontol 33:282–288
Funding
Open access funding provided by HEAL-Link Greece. No funding was received for conducting this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
Ethical approval
The study was approved by the “Diocleion” General Hospital of Karystos institutional review board, and all participants signed written informed consent in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki and the European General Data Protection Regulation.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Tampaki, M., Livada, A., Fourka, MN. et al. Inappropriate prescribing in geriatric rural primary care: impact on adverse outcomes and relevant risk factors in a prospective observational cohort study. Aging Clin Exp Res 35, 1901–1907 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-023-02475-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-023-02475-y