Factors associated to potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients according to STOPP/START criteria: MoPIM multicentre cohort study

Baré, Marisa; Lleal, Marina; Ortonobes, Sara; Queralt Gorgas, Maria; Sevilla-Sánchez, Daniel; Carballo Martínez, Núria; de Jaime Gil, Elisabet; Herranz, Susana; MoPIM study group

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12877-021-02715-8

Factors associated to potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients according to STOPP/START criteria: MoPIM multicentre cohort study

License

Citation

Baré M, Lleal M, Ortonobes S, Gorgas MQ, Sevilla-Sánchez D, Carballo N, De Jaime E, Herranz S; MoPIM study group. Factors associated to potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients according to STOPP/START criteria: MoPIM multicentre cohort study. BMC Geriatr. 2022 Jan 11;22(1):44. DOI: 10.1186/s12877-021-02715-8

Abstract

Objectives: The objectives of the present analyses are to estimate the frequency of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) at admission according to STOPP/START criteria version 2 in older patients hospitalised due to chronic disease exacerbation as well as to identify risk factors associated to the most frequent active principles as potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). Methods: A multicentre, prospective cohort study including older patients (≥65) hospitalized due to chronic disease exacerbation at the internal medicine or geriatric services of 5 hospitals in Spain between September 2016 and December 2018 was conducted. Demographic and clinical data was collected, and a medication review process using STOPP/START criteria version 2 was performed, considering both PIMs and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs). Primary outcome was defined as the presence of any most frequent principles as PIMs, and secondary outcomes were the frequency of any PIM and PPO. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were conducted on all outcomes and multilevel logistic regression analysis, stratified by participating centre, was performed on the primary outcome. Results: A total of 740 patients were included (mean age 84.1, 53.2% females), 93.8% of them presenting polypharmacy, with a median of 10 chronic prescriptions. Among all, 603 (81.5%) patients presented at least one PIP, 542 (73.2%) any PIM and 263 (35.5%) any PPO. Drugs prescribed without an evidence-based clinical indication were the most frequent PIM (33.8% of patients); vitamin D supplement in older people who are housebound or experiencing falls or with osteopenia was the most frequent PPO (10.3%). The most frequent active principles as PIMs were proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and benzodiazepines (BZDs), present in 345 (46.6%) patients. This outcome was found significantly associated with age, polypharmacy and essential tremor in an explanatory model with 71% AUC. Conclusions: PIMs at admission are highly prevalent in these patients, especially those involving PPIs or BZDs, which affected almost half of the patients. Therefore, these drugs may be considered as the starting point for medication review and deprescription.