Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26249851›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2015

Majority of drug-related problems identified during medication review are not associated with STOPP/START criteria.

Sanne Verdoorn, Henk-Frans Kwint, Adrianne Faber, Jacobijn Gussekloo, Marcel L Bouvy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Sanne VerdoornDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology & Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), 3584 CG, Utrecht, The Netherlands. s.verdoorn@stevenshof.nl.
Henk-Frans KwintDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology & Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), 3584 CG, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Adrianne FaberSIR Institute for Pharmacy Practice and Policy, 2331 JE, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Jacobijn GusseklooDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZD, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Marcel L BouvyDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology & Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), 3584 CG, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSTOPP and START criteria identify potential inappropriate prescribing and potential prescribing omissions. It is unknown whether STOPP/START criteria identify all drug-related problems. This study aims to determine to what extent STOPP/START correspond to drug-related problems (DRPs) identified during a full clinical medication review.

methodsIn 13 Dutch community pharmacies, 457 community-dwelling patients aged ≥65 years and using ≥5 drugs, received a full clinical medication review. Community pharmacists identified potential DRPs and recommendations by implicit criteria. After completion, all identified DRPs and recommendations were compared with STOPP and START criteria by investigators.

resultsThe total number of potential DRPs identified by community pharmacists was 1656 in 457 patients (mean 3.6 per patient). Eighty-one percent of DRPs were not associated with STOPP/START criteria. The percentage of START criteria present in identified DRPs was higher than the percentage of STOPP criteria (13 vs. 5.7%, p < 0.01). The implementation rate for recommendations associated with STOPP criteria was higher compared to recommendations associated with START criteria (56 vs. 39%, p < 0.01). Both implementation rates of STOPP and START recommendations were lower compared to recommendations not associated with STOPP/START criteria (66%, p = 0.047 and p < 0.001, respectively).

conclusionsThis study shows that the majority of drug-related problems of community-dwelling older patients was not associated with STOPP/START criteria. These findings suggest that application of STOPP/START criteria in full clinical medication review should preferably be combined with implicit criteria.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overCommunity Pharmacy ServicesFemaleHumansInappropriate PrescribingMaleNetherlandsPolypharmacyPotentially Inappropriate Medication ListDrug-related problemsElderlyInappropriate prescribingMedication reviewPrimary careSTOPP/START criteria

Identifiers

PMID26249851
PMCPMC4564444

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.