Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36721150›Full record

ArticleBMC nursing2023

Perspectives on Deprescribing in long-term care: qualitative findings from nurses, aides, residents, and proxies.

Milta O Little, Emily J Hecker, Cathleen S Colon-Emeric, Laurie Herndon, Eleanor S McConnell, Tingzhong Michelle Xue, Sarah D Berry

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nursing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04242186 (Nursing Home Prevention of Injury in Dementia), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
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.

NCT04242186 nacompletednot on this map

Nursing Home Prevention of Injury in Dementia (NH PRIDE)

TypeinterventionalSponsorHebrew SeniorLifeRan2019 to 2022Enrolled140ConditionsAccidental Falls/Prevention and ControlArmsInjury Liaison Service
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Milta O LittleDuke University School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine, NC, Durham, USA. milta.little@duke.edu.
Emily J HeckerDuke University School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine, NC, Durham, USA.
Cathleen S Colon-EmericDuke University School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine, NC, Durham, USA.
Laurie HerndonHinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew SeniorLife, Boston, MA, USA.
Eleanor S McConnellDurham VA Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center, NC, Durham, USA.
Tingzhong Michelle XueDurham VA Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center, NC, Durham, USA.
Sarah D BerryHinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew SeniorLife, Boston, MA, USA.
Duke University · USBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USGeriatric Research Education and Clinical Center · USHebrew SeniorLife · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDeprescribing initiatives in the long-term care (LTC) setting are often unsuccessful or not sustained. Prior research has considered how physicians and pharmacists feel about deprescribing, yet little is known about the perspectives of frontline nursing staff and residents. Our aim was to elicit perspectives from LTC nursing staff, patients, and proxies regarding their experiences and preferences for deprescribing in order to inform future deprescribing efforts in LTC.

methodsThis study was a qualitative analysis of interviews with nurses, nurse aides, a nurse practitioner, residents, and proxies (family member and/or responsible party) from three LTC facilities. The research team used semi-structured interviews. Guides were designed to inform an injury prevention intervention. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. A qualitative framework analysis was used to summarize themes related to deprescribing. The full study team reviewed the summary to identify actionable, clinical implications.

resultsTwenty-six interviews with 28 participants were completed, including 11 nurse aides, three residents, seven proxies, one nurse practitioner, and six nurses. Three themes emerged that were consistent across facilities: 1) build trust with team members, including residents and proxies; 2) identify motivating factors that lead to resident, proxy, nurse practitioner, and staff acceptance of deprescribing; 3) standardize supportive processes to encourage deprescribing. These themes suggest several actionable steps to improve deprescribing initiatives including: 1) tell stories about successful deprescribing, 2) provide deprescribing education to frontline staff, 3) align medication risk/benefit discussions with what matters most to the resident, 4) standardize deprescribing monitoring protocols, 5) standardize interprofessional team huddles and care plan meetings to include deprescribing conversations, and 6) strengthen non-pharmacologic treatment programs.

conclusionsBy interviewing LTC stakeholders, we identified three important themes regarding successful deprescribing: Trust, Motivating Factors, and Supportive Processes. These themes may translate into actionable steps for clinicians and researchers to improve and sustain person-centered deprescribing initiatives.

trial registrationNCT04242186.

Indexed as

DeprescribingFallsNursing homeQualitative

Identifiers

PMID36721150
PMCPMC9890706
OpenAlexW4318701973

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.