Abstract
Interpreting results from deprescribing interventions to generate actionable evidence is challenging owing to inconsistent and heterogeneous outcome definitions between studies. We sought to characterize deprescribing intervention outcomes and recommend approaches to measure outcomes for future studies. A scoping literature review focused on deprescribing interventions for polypharmacy and informed a series of expert panel discussions and recommendations. Twelve experts in deprescribing research, policy, and clinical practice interventions participating in the Measures Workgroup of the US Deprescribing Research Network sought to characterize deprescribing outcomes and recommend approaches to measure outcomes for future studies. The scoping review identified 125 papers reflecting 107 deprescribing studies. Common outcomes included medication discontinuation, medication appropriateness, and a broad range of clinical outcomes potentially resulting from medication reduction. Panel recommendations included clearly defining clinically meaningful medication outcomes (e.g., number of chronic medications, dose reductions), ensuring adequate sample size and follow-up time to capture clinical outcomes resulting from medication discontinuation (e.g., quality of life [QOL]), and selecting appropriate and feasible data sources. A new conceptual model illustrates how downstream clinical outcomes (e.g., reduction in falls) should be interpreted in the context of initial changes in medication measures (e.g., reduction in mean total medications). Areas needing further development include implementation outcomes specific to deprescribing interventions and measures of adverse drug withdrawal events. Generating evidence to guide deprescribing is essential to address patient, caregiver, and clinician concerns about the benefits and harms of medication discontinuation. This article provides recommendations and an initial conceptual framework for selecting and applying appropriate intervention outcomes to support deprescribing research.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 2487-2497 |
| Number of pages | 11 |
| Journal | Journal of the American Geriatrics Society |
| Volume | 70 |
| Issue number | 9 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Sep 2022 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:The following authors had no potential financial or personal conflicts of interest: EAB, KBA, KEE, KSG, SLG, AML, DM, LM, LEP, MWR, JT, and EEV. CMB has received funding from UpToDate for writing a chapter on multimorbidity and from Dynamed for reviewing a chapter on falls. MAS receives royalties from UpToDate and honoraria from the American Geriatrics Society for work as co‐chair of the Beers criteria. SD has received research funding paid to her institution from Glaxo Smith Kline and Jazz Pharmaceuticals. NLC has received remuneration from Astellas Pharma, US and Merck as a consultant.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The American Geriatrics Society.
Keywords
- deprescription
- outcome assessment
- polypharmacy
- Polypharmacy
- Deprescriptions
- Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
- Humans
- Quality of Life
PubMed: MeSH publication types
- Journal Article
- Review
- Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural