scholarly journals STOPP/START Criteria and Their Role as a Clinical Tool in Routine Practice

Author(s):  
Denis O'Mahony

Screening Tool of Older Persons’ Prescriptions (STOPP)/Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment (START) criteria was first published in 2008, primarily as an alternative set of explicit criteria for potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) to Beers criteria.

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 204062231987960 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chirn-Bin Chang ◽  
Hsiu-Yun Lai ◽  
Shinn-Jang Hwang ◽  
Shu-Yu Yang ◽  
Ru-Shu Wu ◽  
...  

Background: Explicit criteria for potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) developed for other countries are difficult to apply to a specific territory. This study aimed to update the PIM-Taiwan criteria from a qualitative review of several published PIM criteria, followed by consensus among regional experts in Taiwan. Methods: After a review of the literature, we selected four sets of published PIM criteria to construct preliminary core PIMs. The Beers criteria, Fit fOR The Aged (FORTA), and Japan criteria were used for PIMs, without consideration of chronic diseases. The Beers criteria, Screening Tool of Older Persons’ Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria, and Japan criteria were used for PIMs with respect to chronic diseases. We asked experts ( n = 24) to rate their agreement with each statement, including in the final PIM criteria, after two rounds of modified Delphi methods. The intraclass coefficient (ICC) was used to examine the reliability of the modified Delphi method. Results: Overall, two categories of PIMs were established: 131 individual drugs and 9 drugs with combinations that should generally be avoided; and 9 chronic diseases with their corresponding PIMs that have drug–disease interactions. The ICC estimates for PIMs to be avoided generally were 0.634 and 0.557 (round 1 and 2) and those for PIMs with respect to chronic diseases were 0.866 and 0.775 (round 1 and 2) of the Delphi method, respectively. Conclusions: The 2018 version of PIM-Taiwan criteria was established and several modifications were made to keep the criteria updated and relevant. Clinicians can use them to reduce polypharmacy and PIMs among older patients.


2014 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. S222-S223
Author(s):  
I. Lozano-Montoya ◽  
M. Vélez-Díaz-Pallarés ◽  
E. Delgado-Silveira ◽  
B. Montero Errasquín ◽  
A.J. Cruz-Jentoft

Geriatrics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger E. Thomas ◽  
Leonard T. Nguyen ◽  
Dave Jackson ◽  
Christopher Naugler

Polypharmacy with “potentially inappropriate medications” (PIMs) and “potential prescribing omissions” (PPOs) are frequent among those 65 and older. We assessed PIMs and PPOs in a retrospective study of 82,935 patients ≥ 65 during their first admission in the period March 2013 through February 2018 to the four acute-care Calgary hospitals. We used the American Geriatric Society (AGS) and STOPP/START criteria to assess PIMs and PPOs. We computed odds ratios (ORs) for key outcomes of concern to patients, their families, and physicians, namely readmission and/or mortality within six months of discharge, and controlled for age, sex, numbers of medications, PIMs, and PPOs. For readmission, the adjusted OR for number of medications was 1.09 (1.09–1.09), for AGS PIMs 1.14 (1.13–1.14), for STOPP PIMs 1.15 (1.14–1.15), for START PPOs 1.04 (1.02–1.06), and for START PPOs correctly prescribed 1.16 (1.14–1.17). For mortality within 6 months of discharge, the adjusted OR for the number of medications was 1.02 (1.01–1.02), for STOPP PIMs 1.07 (1.06–1.08), for AGS PIMs 1.11 (1.10–1.12), for START PPOs 1.31 (1.27–1.34), and for START PPOs correctly prescribed 0.97 (0.94–0.99). Algorithm rule mining identified an 8.772 higher likelihood of mortality with the combination of STOPP medications of duplicate drugs from the same class, neuroleptics, and strong opioids compared to a random relationship, and a 2.358 higher likelihood of readmission for this same set of medications. Detailed discussions between patients, physicians, and pharmacists are needed to improve these outcomes.


Drug Safety ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 35 (S1) ◽  
pp. 21-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Corsonello ◽  
Graziano Onder ◽  
Angela Marie Abbatecola ◽  
Enrico Eugenio Guffanti ◽  
Piero Gareri ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 166-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole J. Brandt ◽  
Traci Turner

In 2012, the American Geriatrics Society (AGS), along with a panel of 11 experts, updated the Beers Criteria which has evolved significantly since its inception in 1991. The Beers Criteria, in general, classifies medications/medication classes as: (1) potentially inappropriate for use in all older adults, (2) potentially inappropriate for older adults with certain diseases or symptoms and (3) requiring extra caution when used in older adults. Although each patient must be evaluated individually, the Beers Criteria is a useful clinical tool that can be used when initiating pharmacologic agents in both ambulatory and institutionalized patients. The concept behind use of the Beers Criteria is that it allows prescribers to readily identify, and avoid, medications associated with negative outcomes in older adults therefore decreasing the risk of adverse drug events (ADEs). Within this review article, there will be a highlight of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) commonly seen in clinical practice settings such as antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, non-benzodiazepine sedative-hypnotics, anticholinergics and sliding scale insulin. The focus will be to outline the risk-benefits of these drug classes within the context of persons with dementia. Furthermore, the use of PIMs has both clinical and financial implications in Medicare Star ratings and Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS) measures.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document