Clinical Pharmacy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
Geriatrics, Department of Geriatric Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
BMJ Open. 2020 Feb 18;10(2):e033721. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033721.
Appropriate prescribing in older people continues to be challenging. Studies still report a high prevalence of inappropriate prescribing in older people. To reduce the problem of underprescribing and overprescribing in this population, explicit drug optimisation tools like Screening Tool of Older Persons' potentially inappropriate Prescriptions/Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (STOPP/START) have been developed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical applicability of STOPP/START criteria in daily patient care by assessing the clarity of singular criteria.
Quality appraisal study.
For each of the 114 STOPP/START criteria V.2, elements describing the action ( to do), condition ( to do) and explanation ( to do) were identified. Next, the clarity of these three elements was quantified on a 7-point Likert scale using tools provided by the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) Consortium.
The primary outcome measure was the clarity rating per element, categorised into high (>67.7%), moderate (33.3%-67.7%) or low (<33.3%). Secondary, factors that positively or negatively affected clarity most were identified. Additionally, the nature of the conditions was further classified into five descriptive components: disease, sign, symptom, laboratory finding and medication.
STOPP recommendations had an average clarity rating of 64%, 60% and 69% for actions, conditions and explanations, respectively. The average clarity rating in START recommendations was 60% and 57% for actions and conditions, respectively. There were no statements present to substantiate the prescription of potential omissions for the 34 START criteria.
Our results show that the clarity of the STOPP/START criteria can be improved. For future development of explicit drug optimisation tools, such as STOPP/START, our findings identified facilitators (high clarity) and barriers (low clarity) that can be used to improve the clarity of clinical practice guidelines on a language level and therefore enhance clinical applicability.
老年人的合理用药仍然具有挑战性。研究仍报告老年人中存在较高比例的不适当用药。为了减少这一人群中用药不足和用药过度的问题,已经开发了明确的药物优化工具,如老年人潜在不适当处方筛选工具/正确治疗警报筛选工具(STOPP/START)。本研究的目的是通过评估单一标准的清晰度来评估 STOPP/START 标准在日常患者护理中的临床适用性。
质量评估研究。
对于 STOPP/START 标准 V.2 的 114 条标准中的每一条,确定了描述行动(要做)、条件(要做)和解释(要做)的要素。接下来,使用评估研究和评估指南(AGREE)联盟提供的工具,使用 7 分李克特量表对这三个要素的清晰度进行量化。
主要结局指标是每个要素的清晰度评分,分为高(>67.7%)、中(33.3%-67.7%)或低(<33.3%)。其次,确定了对清晰度影响最大的积极和消极因素。此外,还进一步将条件的性质分为五个描述性成分:疾病、体征、症状、实验室发现和药物。
STOPP 建议的行动、条件和解释的平均清晰度评分为 64%、60%和 69%。START 建议的行动和条件的平均清晰度评分为 60%和 57%。对于 34 个 START 标准,没有陈述可以证明潜在遗漏处方的合理性。
我们的结果表明,STOPP/START 标准的清晰度可以提高。对于明确的药物优化工具(如 STOPP/START)的未来发展,我们的研究结果确定了可以在语言层面上提高临床实践指南清晰度的促进因素(高清晰度)和障碍(低清晰度),从而提高临床适用性。