Health Services Research in Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy, University of Wisconsin Madison, Madison WI.
School of Pharmacy, University of Wisconsin Madison, Madison WI.
Int J Pharm Pract. 2023 Jun 30;31(4):349-368. doi: 10.1093/ijpp/riad025.
Mixed findings about deprescribing impact have emerged from varied study designs, interventions, outcome measures and targeting sub-categories of medications or morbidities. This systematic review controls for study design by reviewing randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) of deprescribing interventions using comprehensive medication profiles. The goal is to provide a synthesis of interventions and patient outcomes to inform healthcare providers and policy makers about deprescribing effectiveness.
This systematic review aims to (1) review RCT deprescribing studies focusing on complete medication reviews of older adults with polypharmacy across all health settings, (2) map patients' clinical and economic outcomes against intervention and implementation strategies and (3) inform research agendas based on observed benefits and best practices.
The PRISMA framework for systematic reviews was followed. Databases used were EBSCO Medline, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus and Web of Science. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomised trials.
Fourteen articles were included. Interventions varied in setting, preparation, use of interdisciplinary teams, validated guidelines and tools, patient-centredness and implementation strategy. Thirteen studies (92.9%) found deprescribing interventions reduced the number of drugs and/or doses taken. No studies found threats to patient safety in terms of primary outcomes including morbidity, hospitalisations, emergency room use and falls. Four of five studies identifying health quality of life as a primary outcome found significant effects associated with deprescribing. Both studies with cost as their primary outcome found significant effects as did two with cost as a secondary outcome. Studies did not systematically study how intervention components influenced deprescribing impact. To explore this gap, this review mapped studies' primary outcomes to deprescribing intervention components using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Five studies had significant, positive primary outcomes related to health-related quality of life (HRQOL), cost and/or hospitalisation, with four reporting patient-centred elements in their intervention.
RCT primary outcomes found deprescribing is safe and reduces drug number or dose. Five RCTs found a significant deprescribing impact on HRQOL, cost or hospitalisation. Important future research agendas include analysing (1) understudied outcomes like cost, and (2) intervention and implementation components that enhance effectiveness, such as patient-centred elements.
由于研究设计、干预措施、结果测量和针对药物或疾病亚类的目标不同,有关减少用药的影响的研究结果存在差异。本系统评价通过审查使用全面药物概况的减少用药干预措施的随机对照试验(RCT),控制研究设计。目的是综合干预措施和患者结局,为医疗保健提供者和决策者提供有关减少用药效果的信息。
本系统评价旨在:(1)综述针对所有健康环境中患有多种药物的老年人进行全面药物审查的 RCT 减少用药研究,(2)根据干预和实施策略映射患者的临床和经济结局,(3)根据观察到的益处和最佳实践制定研究议程。
遵循 PRISMA 系统评价框架。使用的数据库包括 EBSCO Medline、PubMed、Cochrane Library、Scopus 和 Web of Science。使用 Cochrane 随机试验偏倚风险工具评估风险偏倚。
纳入了 14 篇文章。干预措施在设置、准备、使用跨学科团队、验证指南和工具、以患者为中心和实施策略方面存在差异。13 项研究(92.9%)发现减少用药干预措施减少了药物的数量和/或剂量。没有研究发现初级结果(包括发病率、住院、急诊室使用和跌倒)方面的患者安全受到威胁。五项确定健康生活质量为主要结局的研究中有四项发现与减少用药相关的显著影响。两项以成本为主要结局的研究和两项以成本为次要结局的研究均发现了显著的效果。研究没有系统地研究干预措施如何影响减少用药的影响。为了探讨这一差距,本研究使用实施研究综合框架将研究的主要结局映射到减少用药干预措施。五项研究的主要结局与健康相关生活质量(HRQOL)、成本和/或住院治疗有关,四项研究报告了干预措施中的以患者为中心的元素。
RCT 主要结局发现减少用药是安全的,可以减少药物数量或剂量。五项 RCT 发现对 HRQOL、成本或住院治疗有显著的减少用药影响。未来的重要研究议程包括分析(1)成本等研究不足的结果,以及(2)增强效果的干预和实施措施,例如以患者为中心的元素。