Cargando…

Ability to detect potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients: comparative analysis between PIM-Check and STOPP/STARTv2

PURPOSE: Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is a source of preventable adverse drug events. The objective of this study was a comparative analysis (quantitative and qualitative) between two tools used to detect PIP, PIM-Check and STOPP/START. METHODS: First, a qualitative analysis (QAC) was...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Farhat, Akram, Panchaud, Alice, Al-Hajje, Amal, Lang, Pierre-Olivier, Csajka, Chantal
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8528795/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34191107
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00228-021-03171-4
_version_ 1784586325348843520
author Farhat, Akram
Panchaud, Alice
Al-Hajje, Amal
Lang, Pierre-Olivier
Csajka, Chantal
author_facet Farhat, Akram
Panchaud, Alice
Al-Hajje, Amal
Lang, Pierre-Olivier
Csajka, Chantal
author_sort Farhat, Akram
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is a source of preventable adverse drug events. The objective of this study was a comparative analysis (quantitative and qualitative) between two tools used to detect PIP, PIM-Check and STOPP/START. METHODS: First, a qualitative analysis (QAC) was conducted to evaluate the concordance between the criteria, which constitute PIM-Check and the gold standard STOPP/START. Second, a retrospective comparative and observational study was performed on the list of treatment at the admission of 50 older patients hospitalized in an acute geriatric ward of a university hospital in Switzerland in 2016 using both tools. RESULTS: The QAC has shown that 50% (57 criteria) of STOPP/START criteria are fully or partially concordant with those of PIM-Check. The retrospective study was performed on 50 patients aged 87 years, suffering from 5 co-morbidities (min–max 1–11) and treated by of 8 drugs (min–max 2–16), as medians. The prevalence of the detected PIP was 80% by PIM-Check and 90% by STOPP/START. Medication review shows that 4.2 PIP per patient were detected by PIM-Check and 3.5 PIP by STOPP/START among which 1.9 PIP was commonly detected by both tools, as means. PIM-Check detected more PIP related to cardiology, angiology, nephrology, and endocrinology in older patients but missed the PIP related to geriatric syndromes (e.g., fall, dementia, Alzheimer) detected by STOPP/START. CONCLUSIONS: By using PIM-Check in geriatric settings, some PIP will not be detected. It is considered as a limitation for this tool in this frail population but brings a certain complementarity in other areas of therapy not covered by STOPP/START.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8528795
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85287952021-11-04 Ability to detect potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients: comparative analysis between PIM-Check and STOPP/STARTv2 Farhat, Akram Panchaud, Alice Al-Hajje, Amal Lang, Pierre-Olivier Csajka, Chantal Eur J Clin Pharmacol Pharmacoepidemiology and Prescription PURPOSE: Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is a source of preventable adverse drug events. The objective of this study was a comparative analysis (quantitative and qualitative) between two tools used to detect PIP, PIM-Check and STOPP/START. METHODS: First, a qualitative analysis (QAC) was conducted to evaluate the concordance between the criteria, which constitute PIM-Check and the gold standard STOPP/START. Second, a retrospective comparative and observational study was performed on the list of treatment at the admission of 50 older patients hospitalized in an acute geriatric ward of a university hospital in Switzerland in 2016 using both tools. RESULTS: The QAC has shown that 50% (57 criteria) of STOPP/START criteria are fully or partially concordant with those of PIM-Check. The retrospective study was performed on 50 patients aged 87 years, suffering from 5 co-morbidities (min–max 1–11) and treated by of 8 drugs (min–max 2–16), as medians. The prevalence of the detected PIP was 80% by PIM-Check and 90% by STOPP/START. Medication review shows that 4.2 PIP per patient were detected by PIM-Check and 3.5 PIP by STOPP/START among which 1.9 PIP was commonly detected by both tools, as means. PIM-Check detected more PIP related to cardiology, angiology, nephrology, and endocrinology in older patients but missed the PIP related to geriatric syndromes (e.g., fall, dementia, Alzheimer) detected by STOPP/START. CONCLUSIONS: By using PIM-Check in geriatric settings, some PIP will not be detected. It is considered as a limitation for this tool in this frail population but brings a certain complementarity in other areas of therapy not covered by STOPP/START. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-06-30 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8528795/ /pubmed/34191107 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00228-021-03171-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis 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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Pharmacoepidemiology and Prescription
Farhat, Akram
Panchaud, Alice
Al-Hajje, Amal
Lang, Pierre-Olivier
Csajka, Chantal
Ability to detect potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients: comparative analysis between PIM-Check and STOPP/STARTv2
title Ability to detect potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients: comparative analysis between PIM-Check and STOPP/STARTv2
title_full Ability to detect potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients: comparative analysis between PIM-Check and STOPP/STARTv2
title_fullStr Ability to detect potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients: comparative analysis between PIM-Check and STOPP/STARTv2
title_full_unstemmed Ability to detect potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients: comparative analysis between PIM-Check and STOPP/STARTv2
title_short Ability to detect potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients: comparative analysis between PIM-Check and STOPP/STARTv2
title_sort ability to detect potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients: comparative analysis between pim-check and stopp/startv2
topic Pharmacoepidemiology and Prescription
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8528795/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34191107
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00228-021-03171-4
work_keys_str_mv AT farhatakram abilitytodetectpotentiallyinappropriateprescribinginolderpatientscomparativeanalysisbetweenpimcheckandstoppstartv2
AT panchaudalice abilitytodetectpotentiallyinappropriateprescribinginolderpatientscomparativeanalysisbetweenpimcheckandstoppstartv2
AT alhajjeamal abilitytodetectpotentiallyinappropriateprescribinginolderpatientscomparativeanalysisbetweenpimcheckandstoppstartv2
AT langpierreolivier abilitytodetectpotentiallyinappropriateprescribinginolderpatientscomparativeanalysisbetweenpimcheckandstoppstartv2
AT csajkachantal abilitytodetectpotentiallyinappropriateprescribinginolderpatientscomparativeanalysisbetweenpimcheckandstoppstartv2