Medication reviews and deprescribing as a single intervention in falls prevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: our aim was to assess the effectiveness of medication review and deprescribing interventions as a single intervention in falls prevention. METHODS:   DESIGN: systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, PsycINFO until 28 March 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: randomised controlled trials of older participants comparing any medication review or deprescribing intervention with usual care and reporting falls as an outcome. STUDY RECORDS: title/abstract and full-text screening by two reviewers. RISK OF BIAS: Cochrane Collaboration revised tool. DATA SYNTHESIS: results reported separately for different settings and sufficiently comparable studies meta-analysed. RESULTS: forty-nine heterogeneous studies were included. COMMUNITY: meta-analyses of medication reviews resulted in a risk ratio (RR) of 1.05 (95% confidence interval, 0.85–1.29, I(2) = 0%, 3 studies(s)) for number of fallers, in an RR = 0.95 (0.70–1.27, I(2) = 37%, 3 s) for number of injurious fallers and in a rate ratio (RaR) of 0.89 (0.69–1.14, I(2) = 0%, 2 s) for injurious falls. HOSPITAL: meta-analyses assessing medication reviews resulted in an RR = 0.97 (0.74–1.28, I(2) = 15%, 2 s) and in an RR = 0.50 (0.07–3.50, I(2) = 72% %, 2 s) for number of fallers after and during admission, respectively. LONG-TERM CARE: meta-analyses investigating medication reviews or deprescribing plans resulted in an RR = 0.86 (0.72–1.02, I(2) = 0%, 5 s) for number of fallers and in an RaR = 0.93 (0.64–1.35, I(2) = 92%, 7 s) for number of falls. CONCLUSIONS: the heterogeneity of the interventions precluded us to estimate the exact effect of medication review and deprescribing as a single intervention. For future studies, more comparability is warranted. These interventions should not be implemented as a stand-alone strategy in falls prevention but included in multimodal strategies due to the multifactorial nature of falls. PROSPERO registration number: CRD4202021823

Deprescribing tool for STOPPFall (screening tool of older persons prescriptions in older adults with high fall risk) items

Background: Health care professionals are often reluctant to deprescribe fall-risk-increasing drugs (FRIDs). Lack of knowledge and skills form a significant barrier. To support clinicians in the management of FRIDs and to facilitate the deprescribing process, a deprescribing tool was developed by a European expert group for STOPPFall (Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions in older adults with high fall risk) items. Methods: STOPPFall was created using an expert Delphi consensus process in 2019 and in 2020, 24 panellists from EuGMS SIG on Pharmacology and Task and Finish on FRIDs completed deprescribing tool questionnaire. To develop the questionnaire, a Medline literature search was performed. The panellists were asked to indicate for every medication class a possible need for stepwise withdrawal and strategy for withdrawal. They were asked in which situations withdrawal should be performed. Furthermore, panellists were requested to indicate those symptoms patients should be monitored for after deprescribing and a possible need for follow-ups. Results: Practical deprescribing guidance was developed for STOPPFall medication classes. For each medication class, a decision tree algorithm was developed including steps from medication review to symptom monitoring after medication withdrawal. Conclusion: STOPPFall was combined with a practical deprescribing tool designed to optimize medication review. This practical guide can help overcome current reluctance towards deprescribing in clinical practice by providing an up-to-date and straightforward source of expert knowledge

Optimizing pharmacotherapy and deprescribing strategies in older adults living with multimorbidity and polypharmacy: EuGMS SIG on pharmacology position paper

Key summary points: Aim: To summarize the literature on medication review and deprescribing in older adults, and formulate recommendations to improve prescribing medications in older, multimorbid adults with polypharmacy. Findings: Current evidence demonstrates a need for a multifaceted and wide-scale change in education, guidelines, research, advocacy, and policy to improve the management of polypharmacy in older people, and to make deprescribing part of routine care for the ageing generations to come. Message: By implementing the recommendations in this paper, healthcare professionals will be better prepared to address the challenges associated with an ageing population and provide high-quality care to older patients with complex health and social care needs

Genetic basis of falling risk susceptibility in the UK Biobank Study

Abstract: Both extrinsic and intrinsic factors predispose older people to fall. We performed a genome-wide association analysis to investigate how much of an individual’s fall susceptibility can be attributed to genetics in 89,076 cases and 362,103 controls from the UK Biobank Study. The analysis revealed a small, but significant SNP-based heritability (2.7%) and identified three novel fall-associated loci (Pcombined ≤ 5 × 10−8). Polygenic risk scores in two independent settings showed patterns of polygenic inheritance. Risk of falling had positive genetic correlations with fractures, identifying for the first time a pathway independent of bone mineral density. There were also positive genetic correlations with insomnia, neuroticism, depressive symptoms, and different medications. Negative genetic correlations were identified with muscle strength, intelligence and subjective well-being. Brain, and in particular cerebellum tissue, showed the highest gene expression enrichment for fall-associated variants. Overall, despite the highly heterogenic nature underlying fall risk, a proportion of the susceptibility can be attributed to genetics

STOPPFall (Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions in older adults with high fall risk): a Delphi study by the EuGMS Task and Finish Group on Fall-Risk-Increasing Drugs.

To access publisher's full text version of this article, please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links field or click on the hyperlink at the top of the page marked DownloadBackground: Healthcare professionals are often reluctant to deprescribe fall-risk-increasing drugs (FRIDs). Lack of knowledge and skills form a significant barrier and furthermore, there is no consensus on which medications are considered as FRIDs despite several systematic reviews. To support clinicians in the management of FRIDs and to facilitate the deprescribing process, STOPPFall (Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions in older adults with high fall risk) and a deprescribing tool were developed by a European expert group. Methods: STOPPFall was created by two facilitators based on evidence from recent meta-analyses and national fall prevention guidelines in Europe. Twenty-four panellists chose their level of agreement on a Likert scale with the items in the STOPPFall in three Delphi panel rounds. A threshold of 70% was selected for consensus a priori. The panellists were asked whether some agents are more fall-risk-increasing than others within the same pharmacological class. In an additional questionnaire, panellists were asked in which cases deprescribing of FRIDs should be considered and how it should be performed. Results: The panellists agreed on 14 medication classes to be included in the STOPPFall. They were mostly psychotropic medications. The panellists indicated 18 differences between pharmacological subclasses with regard to fall-risk-increasing properties. Practical deprescribing guidance was developed for STOPPFall medication classes. Conclusion: STOPPFall was created using an expert Delphi consensus process and combined with a practical deprescribing tool designed to optimise medication review. The effectiveness of these tools in falls prevention should be further evaluated in intervention studies. Keywords: accidental falls; adverse effects; aged; deprescribing; fall-risk-increasing drugs; older people.Amsterdam Public Health Aging and Later Life Innovation Price and Clementine Brigitta Maria Dalderup fund Amsterdam University fun

Fall-risk-increasing drugs: Background, current evidence on deprescribing, and future perspectives

This chapter provides a summary of current evidence on fall-risk increasing drugs from the literature (recent systematic reviews) and expert opinion on this topic (statement paper of EuGMS Task & Finish group on FRIDs and results of Delphi study of the group). Furthermore, deprescribing of FRIDs is being discussed

Sustainable fall prevention across Europe : challenges and opportunities

Falls and related injuries form a growing health-care problem in aging societies. Between 40 and 60% of older fallers in the last year report being injured. Around 15–20% of falls result in serious (non-fracture) injuries including fractures. Non-injurious falls have also been associated with adverse health effects, including accelerated functional decline, anxiety and depression, fear of falling, and social withdrawal. Consequently, fall incidents have an impact on societal health-care expenditure, equaling 0.85–1.5% of the total health-care expenditure in Western countries. To tackle this health-care issue, many countries with developed health-care services have established fall prevention services. Given its multifactorial nature, it is assumed that comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) leading to individually targeted interventions would be effective. Previous literature has shown that several good quality trials have resulted in a reduction in falls. Despite local differences, these services generally address risk stratification and multifactorial assessment (MA) of risk factors and accompanying interventions. Accordingly, several medical societies and organizations have published clinical practice guidelines for fall prevention and management and a recent systematic review found a high degree of agreement in several areas. Successful implementation of health-care intervention such as fall prevention depends on many factors at different health-care levels including the innovation, individual professional, patient, social context, organizational context, and the economic and political context. For successful and durable implementation of fall services, collaboration between relevant medical disciplines, health-care insurers and governmental bodies is essential. To facilitate this, the Special Interest Group on Falls and Fracture prevention of the European Geriatric Medicine Society is currently preparing an international survey on current practices in fall prevention services throughout Europe to determine gaps and opportunities, identify best practices, and relevant stakeholders for sustainable fall prevention for older persons. Also, to achieve global consensus on the optimal content of fall preventive interventions and to facilitate knowledge distribution, the above-mentioned task force of worldwide experts was installed in 2019 at the first World Falls and Postural Stability Conference in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, to produce the first World Falls Prevention and Management Guidelines. The guidelines will include overall recommendations and more specific ones with regard to assessment, risk stratification, and interventions in different settings and risk groups

Fall-Risk-Increasing Drugs: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: I. Cardiovascular Drugs

Use of certain medications is recognized as a major and modifiable risk factor for falls. Although the literature on psychotropic drugs is compelling, the literature on cardiovascular drugs as potential fall-risk-increasing drugs is conflicting. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to provide a comprehensive overview of the associations between cardiovascular medications and fall risk in older adults. Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO. Key search concepts were "fall," "aged," "causality," and "medication." Studies that investigated cardiovascular medications as risk factors for falls in participants ≥60 years old or participants with a mean age of 70 or older were included. A meta-analysis was performed using the generic inverse variance method, pooling unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) separately. In total, 131 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. Meta-analysis using adjusted ORs showed significant results (pooled OR [95% confidence interval]) for loop diuretics, OR 1.36 (1.17, 1.57), and beta-blocking agents, OR 0.88 (0.80, 0.97). Meta-analysis using unadjusted ORs showed significant results for digitalis, OR 1.60 (1.08, 2.36); digoxin, OR 2.06 (1.56, 2.74); and statins, OR 0.80 (0.65, 0.98). Most of the meta-analyses resulted in substantial heterogeneity that mostly did not disappear after stratification for population and setting. In a descriptive synthesis, consistent associations were not observed. Loop diuretics were significantly associated with increased fall risk, whereas beta-blockers were significantly associated with decreased fall risk. Digitalis and digoxin may increase the risk of falling, and statins may reduce it. For the majority of cardiovascular medication groups, outcomes were inconsistent. Furthermore, recent studies indicate that specific drug properties, such as selectivity of beta-blockers, may affect fall risk, and drug-disease interaction also may play a role. Thus, studies addressing these issues are warranted to obtain a better understanding of drug-related fall

Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the effectiveness of deprescribing in falls prevention in older people

Introduction One of the known risk factors for fall incidents is the use of specific medications, fall-risk-increasing drugs (FRIDs). However, to date, there is uncertainty related to the effectiveness of deprescribing as a single intervention in falls prevention. Thus, a comprehensive update of the literature focusing on all settings in which older people receive healthcare and all deprescribing interventions is warranted to enhance the current knowledge. Methods and analysis This systematic review protocol follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A systematic search was performed in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO (2 November 2020). We will also search in trial registers. We will include randomised controlled trials, in which any deprescribing intervention is compared with usual care and reports falls as an outcome. Both title and abstract screening and full-text screening will be done by two reviewers. The Cochrane Collaboration revised tool of Risk of Bias will be applied to perform risk of bias assessment. We will categorise the results separately for every setting. If a group of sufficiently comparable studies will be identified, we will perform a meta-analysis applying random effects model. We will investigate heterogeneity using a combination of visual inspection of the forest plot along with consideration of the chi(2) test and the I-2 statistic results. We have prespecified several subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval is not applicable for this study since no original data will be collected. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations. Furthermore, this systematic review will inform the recommendations of working group of polypharmacy and FRIDs of the anticipated World's Falls Guidelines. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020218231