Factors associated with potentially inappropriate prescriptions and barriers to medicines optimisation among older adults in primary care settings: a systematic review.
Zhijie Xu, Xujian Liang, Yue Zhu, Yiting Lu, Yuanqu Ye, Lizheng Fang, Yi Qian
{"title":"Factors associated with potentially inappropriate prescriptions and barriers to medicines optimisation among older adults in primary care settings: a systematic review.","authors":"Zhijie Xu, Xujian Liang, Yue Zhu, Yiting Lu, Yuanqu Ye, Lizheng Fang, Yi Qian","doi":"10.1136/fmch-2021-001325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify factors that likely contribute to potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIPs) among older adults in primary care settings, as well as barriers to medicines optimisation and recommended potential solutions.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Systematic review.</p><p><strong>Eligibility criteria: </strong>Quantitative studies that analysed the factors associated with PIPs among older adults (≥65 years) in primary care settings, and qualitative studies that explored perceived barriers and potential solutions to medicines optimisation for this population.</p><p><strong>Information sources: </strong>PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CNKI and Wanfang.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 13 167 studies identified, 50 were included (14 qualitative, 34 cross-sectional and 2 cohort). Nearly all quantitative studies examined patient-related non-clinical factors (eg, age) and clinical factors (eg, number of medications) and nine studies examined prescriber-related factors (eg, physician age). A greater number of medications were identified as positively associated with PIPs in 25 quantitative studies, and a higher number of comorbidities, physical comorbidities and psychiatric comorbidities were identified as patient-related clinical risk factors for PIPs. However, other factors showed inconsistent associations with the PIPs. Barriers to medicines optimisation emerged within four analytical themes: prescriber related (eg, inadequate knowledge, concerns of adverse consequences, clinical inertia, lack of communication), patient related (eg, limited understanding, patient non-adherence, drug dependency), environment related (eg, lack of integrated care, insufficient investment, time constraints) and technology related (eg, complexity of implementation and inapplicable guidance). Recommended potential solutions were based on each theme of the barriers identified accordingly (eg, prescriber-related factors: incorporating training courses into continuing medical education).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Older adults with more drugs prescribed and comorbidities may have a greater risk of receiving PIPs in the primary care setting, but it remains unclear whether other factors are related. Barriers to medicines optimisation among primary care older adults comprise multiple factors, and evidence-based and targeted interventions are needed to address these difficulties.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration number: </strong>CRD42020216258.</p>","PeriodicalId":44590,"journal":{"name":"Family Medicine and Community Health","volume":"9 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/9e/ce/fmch-2021-001325.PMC8603289.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family Medicine and Community Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/fmch-2021-001325","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To identify factors that likely contribute to potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIPs) among older adults in primary care settings, as well as barriers to medicines optimisation and recommended potential solutions.
Design: Systematic review.
Eligibility criteria: Quantitative studies that analysed the factors associated with PIPs among older adults (≥65 years) in primary care settings, and qualitative studies that explored perceived barriers and potential solutions to medicines optimisation for this population.
Information sources: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CNKI and Wanfang.
Results: Of the 13 167 studies identified, 50 were included (14 qualitative, 34 cross-sectional and 2 cohort). Nearly all quantitative studies examined patient-related non-clinical factors (eg, age) and clinical factors (eg, number of medications) and nine studies examined prescriber-related factors (eg, physician age). A greater number of medications were identified as positively associated with PIPs in 25 quantitative studies, and a higher number of comorbidities, physical comorbidities and psychiatric comorbidities were identified as patient-related clinical risk factors for PIPs. However, other factors showed inconsistent associations with the PIPs. Barriers to medicines optimisation emerged within four analytical themes: prescriber related (eg, inadequate knowledge, concerns of adverse consequences, clinical inertia, lack of communication), patient related (eg, limited understanding, patient non-adherence, drug dependency), environment related (eg, lack of integrated care, insufficient investment, time constraints) and technology related (eg, complexity of implementation and inapplicable guidance). Recommended potential solutions were based on each theme of the barriers identified accordingly (eg, prescriber-related factors: incorporating training courses into continuing medical education).
Conclusions: Older adults with more drugs prescribed and comorbidities may have a greater risk of receiving PIPs in the primary care setting, but it remains unclear whether other factors are related. Barriers to medicines optimisation among primary care older adults comprise multiple factors, and evidence-based and targeted interventions are needed to address these difficulties.
期刊介绍:
Family Medicine and Community Health (FMCH) is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal focusing on the topics of family medicine, general practice and community health. FMCH strives to be a leading international journal that promotes ‘Health Care for All’ through disseminating novel knowledge and best practices in primary care, family medicine, and community health. FMCH publishes original research, review, methodology, commentary, reflection, and case-study from the lens of population health. FMCH’s Asian Focus section features reports of family medicine development in the Asia-pacific region. FMCH aims to be an exemplary forum for the timely communication of medical knowledge and skills with the goal of promoting improved health care through the practice of family and community-based medicine globally. FMCH aims to serve a diverse audience including researchers, educators, policymakers and leaders of family medicine and community health. We also aim to provide content relevant for researchers working on population health, epidemiology, public policy, disease control and management, preventative medicine and disease burden. FMCH does not impose any article processing charges (APC) or submission charges.