ArticleExploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy2023
Implementation and evaluation of STOPP/START criteria to address polypharmacy in older adults in an inpatient psychiatric setting.
Article in Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementing physician-led medication reviews for patients with diabetes and severe mental disorder: A randomized controlled trial.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is a scarcity of research in applying the Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions/Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (STOPP/START) criteria to older adults admitted to a psychiatric hospital. Objectives: The primary aim of this study was to determine the extent of polypharmacy in older adults admitted to a psychiatric hospital and to assess the number of STOPP/START triggers detected and recommended by pharmacists. Secondary objectives include evaluating if the STOPP/START criteria is a useful tool to improve prescribing in this setting by assessing the implementation rates of STOPP/START triggers. Methods: This was a prospective, longitudinal study in a psychiatry inpatient setting. Data were collected over a 7-week period. Explicit informed consent was obtained from participants. Medication reconciliation was completed and participants' medications were reviewed using STOPP/START criteria. The number of STOPP/START triggers detected, recommended and implemented was recorded. Results: Sixty-two patients were included in the study. Ninety-four percent were prescribed ≥5 medications and 55% were prescribed ≥10 medications on admission. The mean number of medications prescribed per patient increased from 10 on admission to 12 at follow-up. Of 174 Potential Inappropriate Medications (PIMs) detected, 41% were recommended for review and, of these only 31% were implemented. 27% of the 77 Potential Prescribing Omissions (PPOs) detected were recommended for review and only 23% of those were implemented. Conclusion: STOPP/START did not reduce the prevalence of polypharmacy in this setting. The implementation rates observed in this study were much lower than those observed in non-psychiatric settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.