Next Article in Journal
Comparison of Three Diagnostic Definitions of Metabolic Syndrome and Estimation of Its Prevalence in Mongolia
Previous Article in Journal
Potentially Inappropriate Medication at Admission and at Discharge: A Geriatric Study in an Internal Medicine Service in Portugal
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 20
Issue 6
10.3390/ijerph20064957
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Differences in Factors Influencing Deprescribing between Primary Care Providers: Cross-Sectional Study

by
Iva Bužančić
1,2,* and
Maja Ortner Hadžiabdić
1
1
Faculty of Pharmacy and Biochemistry, University of Zagreb, A. Kovačića 1, 10 000 Zagreb, Croatia
2
City Pharmacies Zagreb, Kralja Držislava 6, 10 000 Zagreb, Croatia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20(6), 4957; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20064957
Submission received: 20 February 2023 / Revised: 7 March 2023 / Accepted: 9 March 2023 / Published: 11 March 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Health Care Sciences & Services)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Deprescribing is a notable approach to improve medication management, but few healthcare systems recognize it. To introduce a new practice, it is important to examine the factors influencing the provision of a new or elaborate cognitive service within the desired setting. This study explores the perceived barriers and facilitators of deprescribing by primary healthcare providers, and identifies the factors associated with a willingness to suggest deprescribing. A cross-sectional survey was conducted (in Croatia, between October 2021 and January 2022) using a validated comprehensive healthcare providers’ opinions, preferences, and attitudes towards deprescribing (CHOPPED) questionnaire. A total of 419 pharmacists and 124 physicians participated. Participants showed a high willingness to deprescribe, with significantly higher scores in physicians than in pharmacists (5.00 (interquartile range—IQR 5–5) vs. 4.00 (IQR 4–5), p < 0.001). Pharmacists had significantly higher scores in seven out of ten factors (knowledge, awareness, collaboration facilitators, competencies facilitators, healthcare system facilitators, collaboration barriers, competencies barriers) while in the remaining three factors (patient facilitators, patient and healthcare system barriers) there was no difference in scores. The strongest positive correlation with willingness to suggest deprescribing was found with the collaboration and healthcare system facilitators factors for pharmacists (G = 0.331, p < 0.001, and G = 0.309, p < 0.001, respectively), and with knowledge, awareness, and patient facilitators factors for physicians (G = 0.446, p = 0.001; G = 0.771, p < 0.001; and G = 0.259, p = 0.043, respectively). Primary healthcare providers are willing to suggest deprescribing but face different barriers and facilitators. For pharmacists, the most important facilitators were extrinsic, while for physicians they were more intrinsic and patient related. The stated results provide target areas which one could focus upon to help to engage healthcare providers in deprescribing.

1. Introduction

Inappropriate polypharmacy (the use of five or more medicines concurrently), is a well-known risk factor for negative health outcomes, including increased healthcare costs, adverse drug events, drug interactions, decline in functional status, medication non-adherence, or cognitive impairment [1]. This problem is especially worrisome in regard to the elderly. As the global population is aging, it is expected that increasing rates of unnecessary polypharmacy will lead to inadequate care for a large number of sensitive elderly patients. Many countries are recognizing this problem and reforming policy paths in order to keep a sustainable healthcare system [2,3,4].
In recent years, deprescribing, the planned and supervised process of medication withdrawal or dose reduction with the intent to manage polypharmacy and improve outcomes [5], is becoming a noticeable approach to help healthcare providers resolve both existing and potential medication-related problems [6].
Different healthcare providers can uniquely contribute to deprescribing [7]. It has been shown that pharmacist-led or -initiated deprescribing interventions are successful and useful [8,9,10,11]. Pharmacists can identify candidates, initiate conversations on deprescribing, or suggest deprescribing interventions to physicians, as well as monitor and follow up on patients. Physicians’ knowledge and relationship with patients can contribute to the easier adoption of suggested deprescribing [12]. Even though deprescribing is considered a part of good prescribing practice, and good clinical or pharmaceutical care, in many healthcare settings and systems it is still a novel approach. For instance, at the time of the study there were no official workflows, guidelines, or recommendations regarding providing deprescribing at the primary healthcare level in Croatia, nor was deprescribing defined as a part of any diagnostic–therapeutic approach. There were no official data on the topic of deprescribing at any healthcare level, and healthcare providers were not reimbursed for deprescribing. Suggesting deprescribing and providing adequate follow-up to patients were still matters of healthcare professionals’ discretion. Both pharmacists and physicians suggest deprescribing to their patients as a part of their routine work, but this often depends on a collaborative approach. Due to a lack of access to the entirety of patients’ medical records and the inability to make significant inputs into electronic records, pharmacists contact the primary care physician to discuss comprehensive interventions. Primary care physicians often discuss deprescribing with fellow specialist doctors when it comes to specialist-prescribed medications. Similarly to Croatia, in the majority of European countries, proactive deprescribing policies, frameworks, and workflows are still being formed [13]. Evidence is being gathered on how to successfully identify the challenges of implementation of deprescribing across healthcare systems and settings [14,15], as well as how to enhance deprescribing interventions both in research and in everyday practice [16,17].
In order to introduce a new practice, it is important to examine potential barriers and facilitators within the desired setting. Exploring opinions and attitudes towards new or elaborate cognitive services often requires time, experienced researchers, financial support, and readily available participants. To help reduce the costs of research and reach a larger number of important stakeholders who will provide the service and whose opinions, perceptions, experiences, and attitudes effect the provision of a service, a validated tool can be used for the identification of barriers and facilitators for deprescribing.
The aim of this study was to explore the perceived barriers and facilitators of deprescribing by primary care physicians and pharmacists inexperienced in every day deprescribing, and to identify whether any factors were associated with a willingness to suggest deprescribing.

2. Materials and Methods

A cross-sectional online survey was used to collect data, with LimeSurvey® software being used in the design and the distribution of the survey (LimeSurvey Version 2.67.1 + 170626; LimeSurvey GmbH, Hamburg, Germany. URL: http://www.limesurvey.org, accessed on 15 September 2021). The software used is part of the services, data, and collaboration system tools available from the University of Zagreb Computing Centre (SRCE). The survey consisted of three parts: sociodemographic questions, a comprehensive healthcare provider’s opinions, preferences, and attitudes towards deprescribing questionnaire (CHOPPED), and a case vignette (analysis not included herein). The development and validation of the CHOPPED questionnaire have been described elsewhere [18]. Two versions of the questionnaire are available, one for pharmacists (with 38 items) and one for physicians (with 36 items). Each questionnaire consists of ten factors, knowledge, awareness, patient barriers/facilitators, competencies barriers/facilitators, collaboration barriers/facilitators, and healthcare system barriers/facilitators, and one question regarding the willingness to suggest deprescribing. Items within the knowledge factor, awareness factor, and willingness to suggest deprescribing are equal in both versions. For each facilitators factor, there was a difference in one item between the versions. For the barriers factor, the difference between the two versions was in one item for all factors except for the collaboration barrier factor, which had three profession-specific items that were unique in each version. All of the questions within the CHOPPED questionnaire were scored on a 5-point Likert scale (“strongly disagree”, “disagree”, “neither agree nor disagree”, “agree”, and “strongly agree”). Details on items and the differences between the two versions are available in Supplementary File S1.
The link to the survey was sent to community pharmacists and primary care physicians (general practitioners or family physicians) as their professional email addresses were publicly available on the national chambers of pharmacists and physicians. Participants were asked to forward the link to the survey to potential participants (snowballing method). At the beginning of the survey, the participants had to read and digitally authorize the informed consent, without which they could not access the survey. All data were collected anonymously. Participants could save the answers of the unfinished survey and complete it at a later time. Two reminders to complete the survey were sent four and eight weeks after the initial email. The study was conducted in Croatia, between October 2021 and January 2022. To ensure there were no duplicate inputs, each unique IP address was marked in the responses. If a single IP address had multiple inputs, they were cross-checked for the uniqueness of the socio-demographic information. Duplicate unfinished or answerless questionnaire entries from duplicate IP addresses were discarded, as were other invalid or incomplete inputs.
Since there were no data or studies in Croatia on the topic of healthcare providers’ attitudes towards deprescribing, a single population proportion formula was used, with a 95% confidence level and relative precision of 5%, and the proportion of primary care providers willing to suggest deprescribing was 50%. Sample size was determined based on the number of registered primary care physicians and community pharmacists. Data were available from the Croatian health statistics yearbook and the Croatian chamber of pharmacists states than in 2021 there were 2180 registered primary care physicians and 2870 registered community pharmacists [19,20]. Therefore, the calculated sample size was 339 for pharmacists and 327 for physicians.
Sociodemographic data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. The factor score was calculated by summing the score of each item and dividing it by the number of items within the factor. A chi-squared test was used to analyze differences in frequencies between groups. The Mann–Whitney U test was used to determine differences in CHOPPED factor scores between professions. Gamma rank correlation was used to analyze potential associations between factor scores and the willingness to deprescribe (using ordinal data for both factors’ scores and willingness to suggest deprescribing). For all analyses, a value of p < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. All analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0. (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).

3. Results

In total, 419 pharmacists’ and 124 physicians’ inputs were available for analysis. No statistically significant differences, in any characteristics, were found for both the pharmacists’ and physicians’ samples when comparing those who completed the survey and those who completed just a part of it.

3.1. Participants Characteristics

Healthcare providers who participated in the study were mostly female at 82.32% (86.62% among pharmacists and 74.30% among physicians). They had a median of 36 years of age (interquartile range (IQR) 29–48), and a median of 11 years of professional experience (IQR 4–22). More than half of them worked in an urban area (55.99%), 32.04% worked in suburban areas, and 11.97% provided healthcare services in rural areas across Croatia. Detailed characteristics of participants and differences between professions can be found in Table 1. Practices were almost equally placed either near other healthcare facilities (34.26%) or defined as a displaced/standalone practice (35.54%), while 25.78% of practices were within another larger healthcare facility, and 4.42% were within a shopping center.

3.2. Knowledge and Awareness of Deprescribing

When it came to knowledge about deprescribing, pharmacists were more likely to agree with statements that deprescribing involves tapering and reducing the dose of a medication or that it represents changing medication to a safer alternative than physicians (71.59% vs. 52.42%, χ2(4) = 25.64, p < 0.001, and 61.09% vs. 43.49%, χ2(4) = 15.16, p = 0.004, respectively).
Even though the majority of all healthcare providers agreed with all of the statements in the awareness factor, pharmacists were more likely to find deprescribing as being as important as prescribing medication compared to physicians (94.98% vs. 83.87% χ2(4) = 17.64, p = 0.001). Physicians were less likely to be aware of the deprescribing benefits, including a reduction in healthcare expenditures, an improvement in outcomes, or adherence, than pharmacists (91.88% vs. 75.86%, χ2(4) = 40.02, p < 0.001, 86.87% vs. 66.13%, χ2(4) = 35.05, p < 0.001, and 80.44% vs. 77.41% χ2(4) = 29.01, p < 0.001, respectively).

3.3. Facilitators and Barriers of Deprescribing

Four factors pertaining to the facilitators and barriers of deprescribing were examined: patient, collaboration, competencies, and healthcare system.
In the patient facilitators factor, participants agreed the most with the statement “I am keener to suggest stopping medications to patients who show greater involvement in their medication” with 83.74% being positive answers. Conversely, only 39.22% of participants agreed that they would suggest deprescribing to patients if patients expressed their desire to have their number of medications reduced. There was no difference in agreement between professions for any of the statements.
In the collaboration facilitators factor, both professions agreed that a public healthcare project on deprescribing would be encouraging (81.30% of all participants). In the physicians’ version, 77.19% considered having pharmacists’ evidence-based deprescribing rationale to be useful for suggesting deprescribing, and more than half (57.89%) found a close collaboration with a pharmacist encouraging. A greater majority of pharmacists agreed that a close collaboration with a physician would encourage them to suggest deprescribing (92.59%).
The majority of participants (85.34 of physicians and 89.82% of pharmacists) agreed that they needed incentives when it came to their competencies. Physicians were less likely to state that they needed education on medication review, how to approach patients regarding deprescribing, or guidelines and algorithms than pharmacists (69.45% vs. 93.32%, χ2(4) = 62.69, p < 0.001; 70.83% vs. 87.83%, χ2(4) = 34.19, p < 0.001; 69.44% vs. 92.36%, χ2(4) = 52.39, p < 0.001, respectively).
Even though more than 60% (64.15%) of all participants believed that reimbursement for deprescribing is needed, physicians were more likely to disagree with this statement than pharmacists (36.11% vs. 13.60%, χ2(4) = 42.53, p < 0.001). There was no difference in agreement between professions for other items in the healthcare system facilitators factor.
In the patient barriers factor, healthcare providers were the least worried about deprescribing suggestions negatively influencing their relationship with patients, with 15.04% of participants agreeing with this statement. On the other hand, the majority of healthcare providers (83.69%) found it difficult to suggest deprescribing to patients with low involvement in medication decision-making. Pharmacists were more likely to find this statement to be a barrier than physicians (88.07% vs. 49.06%, χ2(4) = 58.73, p < 0.001).
In the collaboration barriers factor, pharmacists were most concerned about physicians finding their suggestions inappropriate (70.80%), while physicians found the biggest barrier being a lack of real-time communication with other healthcare providers (70.64%).
Competencies barriers differed amongst healthcare providers. Pharmacists found recommending deprescribing preventative medications a higher barrier than physicians (44.63% vs. 13.21%, χ2(4) = 38.46, p < 0.0001). Pharmacists indicated that they had lower confidence and found it more difficult to identify potentially inappropriate medications than physicians (32.22% vs. 13.20%, χ2(4) = 12.46, p = 0.014, and 57.28% vs. 33.96%, χ2(4) = 11.94, p = 0.018, respectively).
Within a healthcare system, participants perceived a lack of time and lack of legislation as being the biggest barriers (72.25% and 78.39%, respectively). Physicians were less hindered by a lack of legislation than pharmacists (49.06% vs. 82.10%, χ2(4) = 43.52, p < 0.001). Pharmacists considered a lack of time to be a higher obstacle than physicians (74.46% vs. 54.72%, χ2(4) = 10.80, p = 0.029).
Detailed answers to all of the questions within both versions of the CHOPPED questionnaire can be seen in Supplementary Figure S1.
When analyzing differences in factor scores between pharmacists and physicians, it was found that pharmacists had statistically significantly higher scores in all factors except for patient facilitators, patient barriers, and healthcare system barriers (Figure 1).

3.4. Willingness to Suggest Deprescribing

More than 80% (n = 473, 87.12%) of all healthcare providers stated that they would suggest deprescribing to a patient if this was appropriate. Pharmacists were more likely to show uncertainty, with 11.97% of them stating “neither agree nor disagree” in comparison to 3.36% of physicians (χ2(4) = 44.93, p < 0.001). In both the pharmacists’ and the physicians’ samples, there was no difference in willingness to suggest deprescribing between participants based on age, years of experience, education, location, or practice characteristics. The median willingness to suggest deprescribing score was statistically significantly higher in physicians than in pharmacists (5.00 (IQR 5–5) vs. (4.00 (IQR 4–5)), U = 15293.00, z = −6.62, p < 0.001).
Several factors were associated with an increased willingness to suggest deprescribing in both samples. In the pharmacists’ sample, all factors, except healthcare system barriers, were statistically significantly associated with a willingness to suggest deprescribing. The strength of association was weak to moderate, with collaboration facilitator and healthcare system facilitator factors showing the strongest correlation in the pharmacists’ sample. In the physicians’ sample, four factors were associated with a willingness to suggest deprescribing. The knowledge factor was very strongly associated with a willingness to suggest deprescribing, while the awareness factor exhibited a strong correlation. Patient facilitators and competencies barriers factors were moderately associated with a wiliness to suggest deprescribing. The negative correlation found between a willingness to suggest deprescribing and the competencies barriers factor indicates that an increased perception of a lack of personal competencies was associated with a lower willingness to suggest deprescribing. Additional information on the correlation between the willingness to suggest deprescribing and the CHOPPED factors can be found in Figure 2.

4. Discussion

Healthcare providers are willing to suggest deprescribing, with pharmacists showing more uncertainty than physicians. Contrariwise, pharmacists showed higher knowledge and awareness of the deprescribing benefits than physicians. An Irish study on community pharmacists highlights a similar finding, where pharmacists express high knowledge, but their willingness is hindered by different obstacles [21]. Pharmacists’ uncertainty could be attributed to the lower confidence that they expressed in comparison to physicians. These results are in line with research confirming that the majority of physicians feel comfortable and self-assured with deprescribing [22,23], as well as that pharmacists often feel less confident in their role in deprescribing [24].
There is a noticeable distinction between pharmacists and physicians when it comes to the correlation between the willingness to suggest deprescribing and other factors. For pharmacists, it was the collaboration facilitators and healthcare system facilitators factors, and for physicians it was knowledge, awareness, and patient facilitators factors. This not only accentuates the differences between professions, but also highlights the possible target areas which one could focus upon to help to engage healthcare providers in deprescribing.
Each healthcare system is different and needs a customized implementational strategy in order to deliver an intervention. Analyzing determinants which affect this implementation is a critical step in ensuring the success of a clinical intervention [25]. The decision to suggest deprescribing is complex and influenced by a number of factors, and some of which can be overlooked when only explored through the viewpoint of those involved in qualitative studies. Having a tool which can help measure the willingness to deprescribe in a larger number of healthcare providers can give a more realistic insight into the readiness of the setting to implement deprescribing. Tools similar to the CHOPPED questionnaire are being developed, which underlines the need for and importance of exploring deprescribing factors within healthcare systems [26,27]. Most qualitative research has focused on the opinions, beliefs, and attitudes of physicians, with pharmacists and other healthcare providers being less represented [22,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35]. It is sensible to involve those who prescribe medication in deprescribing; nevertheless, research shows that other healthcare providers can be important stakeholders and facilitators of deprescribing [10,11,36]. Deprescribing is an intricate intervention often more successful if a multidisciplinary approach is satisfied [37,38]. The CHOPPED questionnaire explores, among others, collaboration barriers and facilitators in both versions, with the increased collaboration facilitators factor score being associated with an increased willingness to suggest deprescribing in the pharmacists’ version for this sample. Furthermore, increased knowledge and awareness of deprescribing were associated with an increased willingness to suggest deprescribing, while a decreased perception of competencies was associated with a decreased willingness to deprescribe in both versions. Continuous professional education and early introduction to the concept of deprescribing as a part of pharmacy or medical curricula could help future generations of pharmacists and physicians to increase their involvement in proactive deprescribing [8,39,40]. Taking actions to involve patients or the public in deprescribing, such as having open discussion days on medication optimization actions with patient advocacy groups or visiting nursing homes to talk to patients about healthcare, can have multiple benefits. On the one hand it can increase the patient facilitator factor score which is important for healthcare providers to increase their willingness to suggest deprescribing, and on the other hand it creates opportunities for patients to help guide healthcare providers in creating interventions tailored to their specific needs. Finally, the CHOPPED questionnaire as a tool has the potential to help characterize differences in factors influencing deprescribing among healthcare providers and to help recognize target areas needing improvement.

4.1. Limitations

Several limitations of this study should be stated. Nonresponse bias, as a type of selection bias when using an online survey as the method of data collection, could be viewed as a limitation of this study. The true response rate could not be determined since the exact number of healthcare providers reached by the snowballing method is unknown. Additionally, unknown number of email addresses could have been incorrect, duplicated, or unavailable. Differences in sample sizes, age and experience of participants, or female-dominated participation could be viewed as a shortcoming. Regardless, selection bias can be considered to be minimal since the characteristics of both samples of involved healthcare providers (gender, educational attainment, and practice location) correspond to those of the population of interest [19]. The survey reached around 15% of the overall community of the pharmacists’ population and around 6% of the population of primary care physicians in Croatia, which can be considered satisfactory, especially in the circumstances of the pandemic. Based on the number of respondents, the crude estimation of the targeted population for each profession, and the defined confidence interval of 95%, a satisfactory margin of error was determined: 4.43% for the pharmacists’ sample and 8.56% for the physicians’ sample. The results of this study could not be generalized and do not apply to different study populations aside from ours. The study was carried out in Croatia, a small country with a developing healthcare system based on social solidarity. It is important to state that deprescribing is very new concept in the investigated setting and this may have led to healthcare providers being more familiar with the concept being the ones willing to participate in the study, creating a bias. Nevertheless, a significant advantage of this research is a strong methodology for the development and validation of the tool used in this research with confirmed face, content, construct, and criterion validity [18].

4.2. Implications for Research Practice

One advantage of CHOPPED as a tool is that it can be reused to re-evaluate healthcare professionals’ viewpoints as providers as the system changes or adapts. The two versions of the tool allow for a more tailored approach to each profession, yet the universal and shared factors ensure that systematic changes can be achieved where necessary. Optimizing workload, giving access to important patient information, providing patient deprescribing materials, improving knowledge on the advantages of deprescribing, and creating opportunities for inter- and intra-professional communication and collaboration are the possible goals for overcoming the hurdles recognized by the CHOPPED tool. For instance, within a health center, a multidisciplinary workshop focusing on increasing collaborative practice and awareness on deprescribing benefits could be of help to both professions. Studies including more mature pharmacists, a larger sample of physicians, and healthcare providers less interested or aware of deprescribing, as well as studies in countries with different types of healthcare systems and different experiences with deprescribing interventions, should be carried out to additionally confirm the appropriateness and usefulness of the CHOPPED questionnaire. Future research can combine the use of the CHOPPED questionnaire with a model intervention to investigate whether or not the tool can help to identify obstacles prior to and during deprescribing.

5. Conclusions

Primary care physicians and pharmacists are willing to suggest deprescribing but are faced with different barriers and facilitators. For pharmacists, the most important facilitators were extrinsic factors (collaboration and healthcare-system-related), while for physicians these were more intrinsic (knowledge and awareness) and patient-related. This study highlights the differences in determinants influencing deprescribing between professions, and also accentuates the possible target areas upon which one could focus to help to engage healthcare providers in deprescribing.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijerph20064957/s1: File S1: Questions within the CHOPPED questionnaire; Figure S1: Answers to the CHOPPED questionnaire. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, I.B. and M.O.H.; methodology, I.B. and M.O.H.; software, I.B. and M.O.H.; validation, I.B. and M.O.H.; formal analysis, I.B.; investigation, I.B. and M.O.H.; resources, I.B. and M.O.H.; data curation, I.B. and M.O.H.; writing—original draft preparation, I.B. and M.O.H.; writing—review and editing, I.B. and M.O.H.; visualization, I.B.; supervision, M.O.H. All authors have read and agreed to the final published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and was approved by the Ethics Committee of City Pharmacies Zagreb (approved on 25 May 2021; 8/1-25052021) and Ethics Committee of Health Center Zagreb (approved on 17 June 2021; 072-30/21-01/002).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study. All participants digitally signed the informed consent form at the beginning of the study.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Maher, R.L.; Hanlon, J.; Hajjar, E.R. Clinical Consequences of Polypharmacy in Elderly. Expert Opin. Drug Saf. 2014, 13, 57–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Beard, J.R.; Bloom, D.E. Towards a Comprehensive Public Health Response to Population Ageing. Lancet 2015, 385, 658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Fulmer, T.; Reuben, D.B.; Auerbach, J.; Fick, D.M.; Galambos, C.; Johnson, K.S. Actualizing Better Health and Health Care for Older Adults. Health Aff. 2021, 40, 219–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Tynkkynen, L.K.; Pulkki, J.; Tervonen-Gonçalves, L.; Schön, P.; Burström, B.; Keskimäki, I. Health system reforms and the needs of the ageing population—An analysis of recent policy paths and reform trends in Finland and Sweden. Eur. J. Ageing 2022, 19, 221–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Reeve, E.; Gnjidic, D.; Long, J.; Hilmer, S. A systematic review of the emerging definition of ‘deprescribing’ with network analysis: Implications for future research and clinical practice. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2015, 80, 1254–1268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Wright, D.J.; Scott, S.; Bhattacharya, D. Deprescribing: Routine pharmacy practice or an exciting research opportunity? Int. J. Pharm. Pract. 2018, 27, 406–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  7. Dills, H.; Shah, K.; Messinger-Rapport, B.; Bradford, K.; Syed, Q. Deprescribing Medications for Chronic Diseases Management in Primary Care Settings: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials. J. Am. Med. Dir. Assoc. 2018, 19, 923–935.e2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Korenvain, C.; MacKeigan, L.D.; Dainty, K.N.; Guilcher, S.J.T.; McCarthy, L.M. Exploring deprescribing opportunities for community pharmacists using the Behaviour Change Wheel. Res. Soc. Adm. Pharm. 2020, 16, 1746–1753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Farrell, B.; Clarkin, C.; Conklin, J.; Dolovich, L.; Irving, H.; McCarthy, L.; Raman-Wilms, L. Community pharmacists as catalysts for deprescribing: An exploratory study using quality improvement processes. Can. Pharm. J. 2020, 153, 37–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Elbeddini, A.; Zhang, C.X.Y. The pharmacist’s role in successful deprescribing through hospital medication reconciliation. Can. Pharm. J. CPJ 2019, 152, 177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Bužančić, I.; Kummer, I.; Držaić, M.; Ortner Hadžiabdić, M. Community-based pharmacists’ role in deprescribing: A systematic review. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2022, 88, 452–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Anderson, K.; Foster, M.; Freeman, C.; Luetsch, K.; Scott, I. Negotiating “Unmeasurable Harm and Benefit”: Perspectives of General Practitioners and Consultant Pharmacists on Deprescribing in the Primary Care Setting. Qual. Health Res. 2017, 27, 1936–1947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Sawan, M.; Reeve, E.; Turner, J.; Todd, A.; Steinman, M.A.; Petrovic, M.; Gnjidic, D. A systems approach to identifying the challenges of implementing deprescribing in older adults across different health-care settings and countries: A narrative review. Expert Rev. Clin. Pharmacol. 2020, 13, 233–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Isenor, J.E.; Bai, I.; Cormier, R.; Helwig, M.; Reeve, E.; Whelan, A.M.; Burgess, S.; Martin-Misener, R.; Kennie-Kaulbach, N. Deprescribing interventions in primary health care mapped to the Behaviour Change Wheel: A scoping review. Res. Soc. Adm. Pharm. 2021, 17, 1229–1241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. van Poelgeest, E.P.; Seppala, L.J.; Lee, J.M.; Bahat, G.; Ilhan, B.; Lavan, A.H.; Mair, A.; van Marum, R.J.; Onder, G.; Ryg, J.; et al. Deprescribing practices, habits and attitudes of geriatricians and geriatricians-in-training across Europe: A large web-based survey. Eur. Geriatr. Med. 2022, 13, 1455–1466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Scott, I.A.; Reeve, E.; Hilmer, S.N. Establishing the worth of deprescribing inappropriate medications: Are we there yet? Med. J. Aust. 2022, 217, 283–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Scott, S. Deprescribing: A call for research that supports implementation in practice. Int. J. Pharm. Pract. 2021, 29, 525–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Bužančić, I.; Ortner Hadžiabdić, M. Development and Validation of Comprehensive Healthcare Providers’ Opinions, Preferences, and Attitudes towards Deprescribing (CHOPPED Questionnaire). Pharmacy 2022, 10, 76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Croatian Institute of Public Health. Croatian Health Statistics Yearbook 2021. [Internet]. Available online: https://www.hzjz.hr/aktualnosti/hrvatski-zdravstveno-statisticki-ljetopis-za-2021-tablicni-podaci-2/ (accessed on 27 October 2022).
  20. Croatian Chamber of Pharmacists. Pharmacy in Croatia [Internet]. Available online: https://www.hljk.hr/pharmacy-in-croatia-a42 (accessed on 1 March 2023).
  21. Heinrich, C.H.; Donovan, M.D. Assessing community pharmacists’ attitudes towards identifying opportunities for deprescribing in clinical practice in Ireland. Int. J. Pharm. Pract. 2022, 30, 28–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. D’Avanzo, B.; Agosti, P.; Reeve, E.; Pasina, L.; Sabbà, C.; Mannucci, P.M.; Nobili, A. Views of medical practitioners about deprescribing in older adults: Findings from an Italian qualitative study. Maturitas 2020, 134, 29–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Djatche, L.; Lee, S.; Singer, D.; Hegarty, S.E.; Lombardi, M.; Maio, V. How confident are physicians in deprescribing for the elderly and what barriers prevent deprescribing? J. Clin. Pharm. Ther. 2018, 43, 550–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Scott, S.; Twigg, M.J.; Clark, A.; Farrow, C.; May, H.; Patel, M.; Taylor, J.; Wright, D.J.; Bhattacharya, D. Development of a hospital deprescribing implementation framework: A focus group study with geriatricians and pharmacists. Age Ageing 2020, 49, 102–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Ailabouni, N.J.; Reeve, E.; Helfrich, C.D.; Hilmer, S.N.; Wagenaar, B.H. Leveraging implementation science to increase the translation of deprescribing evidence into practice. Res. Soc. Adm. Pharm. 2022, 18, 2550–2555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Motter, F.R.; Cantuaria, N.M.; Lopes, L.C. Healthcare professionals’ knowledge, attitudes and practices toward deprescribing: A protocol of cross-sectional study (Desmedica Study-Brazil). BMJ Open 2021, 11, e044312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Shrestha, S.; Poudel, A.; Reeve, E.; Linsky, A.M.; Steadman, K.J.; Nissen, L.M. Development and validation of a tool to understand health care professionals’ attitudes towards deprescribing (HATD) in older adults with limited life expectancy. Res. Soc. Adm. Pharm. 2022, 18, 3596–3601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Lundby, C.; Graabæk, T.; Ryg, J.; Søndergaard, J.; Pottegård, A.; Nielsen, D.S. Health care professionals’ attitudes towards deprescribing in older patients with limited life expectancy: A systematic review. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2019, 85, 868–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  29. Anderson, K.; Stowasser, D.; Freeman, C.; Scott, I. Prescriber barriers and enablers to minimising potentially inappropriate medications in adults: A systematic review and thematic synthesis. BMJ Open 2014, 4, e006544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ailabouni, N.J.; Nishtala, P.S.; Mangin, D.; Tordoff, J.M. Challenges and enablers of deprescribing: A general practitioner perspective. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0151066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Bolmsjö, B.B.; Palagyi, A.; Keay, L.; Potter, J.; Lindley, R.I. Factors influencing deprescribing for residents in Advanced Care Facilities: Insights from General Practitioners in Australia and Sweden. BMC Fam. Pract. 2016, 17, 152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  32. Goyal, P.; Anderson, T.S.; Bernacki, G.M.; Marcum, Z.A.; Orkaby, A.R.; Kim, D.; Zullo, A.; Krishnaswami, A.; Weissman, A.; Steinman, M.A.; et al. Physician Perspectives on Deprescribing Cardiovascular Medications for Older Adults. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2020, 68, 78–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  33. Kua, C.H.; Mak, V.S.L.; Lee, S.W.H. Perspectives of health professionals towards deprescribing practice in Asian nursing homes: A qualitative interview study. BMJ Open 2019, 9, e030106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Mantelli, S.; Jungo, K.T.; Rozsnyai, Z.; Reeve, E.; Luymes, C.H.; Poortvliet, R.K.E.; Chiolero, A.; Rodondi, N.; Gussekloo, J.; Streit, S. How general practitioners would deprescribe in frail oldest-old with polypharmacy-The LESS study 11 Medical and Health Sciences 1117 Public Health and Health Services 11 Medical and Health Sciences 1103 Clinical Sciences. BMC Fam. Pract. 2018, 19, 169. [Google Scholar]
  35. Schuling, J.; Gebben, H.; Veehof, L.J.G.; Haaijer-Ruskamp, F.M. Deprescribing medication in very elderly patients with multimorbidity: The view of Dutch GPs. A qualitative study. BMC Fam. Pract. 2012, 13, 56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Wright, D.J.; Scott, S.; Buck, J.; Bhattacharya, D. Role of nurses in supporting proactive deprescribing. Nurs. Stand. 2022, 37, 44–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Fixen, D.R.; Farro, S.A.; Shanbhag, P.; Parnes, B.L.; Vejar, M.V. Multidisciplinary Approach to Deprescribing Sedative-Hypnotic Medications in Geriatric Primary Care. J. Prim. Care Community Health 2022, 13, 21501319221103416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Seto, H.; Ishimaru, N.; Ohnishi, J.; Kanzawa, Y.; Nakajima, T.; Shimokawa, T.; Imanaka, Y.; Kinami, S. Multidisciplinary Team Deprescribing Intervention for Polypharmacy in Elderly Orthopedic Inpatients: A Propensity Score-matched Analysis of a Retrospective Cohort Study. Intern. Med. 2022, 61, 2417–2426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Clark, C.M.; Hejna, M.; Shao, E.; Maerten-Rivera, J.L.; Monte, S.V.; Robert, G.; Wahler, J. Knowledge and Attitudes of Student Pharmacists Regarding Polypharmacy and Deprescribing: A Cross-Sectional Study. Pharm. J. Pharm. Educ. Pract. 2020, 8, 220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Poots, A.J.; Jubraj, B.; Ward, E.; Wycoco, A.; Barnett, N. Education around medication review and deprescribing: A survey of medical and pharmacy students’ perspectives. Ther. Adv. Drug Saf. 2020, 11, 2042098620909610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Ijerph 20 04957 g001 550
Figure 1. Differences in factor scores between pharmacists and physicians (Mann–Whitney U test).
Figure 1. Differences in factor scores between pharmacists and physicians (Mann–Whitney U test).
Ijerph 20 04957 g001
Ijerph 20 04957 g002 550
Figure 2. Gamma rank correlation.
Figure 2. Gamma rank correlation.
Ijerph 20 04957 g002
Table
Table 1. Participants’ characteristics.
Table 1. Participants’ characteristics.
CharacteristicPharmacists (n = 419)Physicians
(n = 124)
sex (female gender, %)86.6274.30
age (median, IQR)35 (28–43)50 (33–60)
years of experience (median, IQR)10 (3–19)24 (6.75–33)
highest educational attainment
graduate degree83.9426.16
postgraduate specialist course a11.44n/a
health specialization b3.4172.80
master’s degree (MSc)0.480.72
doctoral degree (PhD)0.730.32
location
urban59.8543.58
suburban31.1538.54
rural9.0017.88
practice location
within another healthcare facility16.5559.78
near another healthcare facility40.1511.17
within a shopping center5.59n/a
displaced/not near another healthcare facility37.7129.05
practice ownership
private/concession54.0023.20
public46.0076.80
type of ownership
single practice13.12n/a
chain pharmacy <10 units28.00n/a
chain pharmacy >10 units58.88n/a
number of patients in practice (median, IQR)n/a1650 (1250–1946)
percentage of elderly patients in practice (median, IQR)n/a35 (28.75–50)
a 1-year course, b 3-year healthcare residency including postgraduate specialist course, IQR—interquartile range; n/a- not applicable.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Bužančić, I.; Ortner Hadžiabdić, M. Differences in Factors Influencing Deprescribing between Primary Care Providers: Cross-Sectional Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 4957. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20064957

AMA Style

Bužančić I, Ortner Hadžiabdić M. Differences in Factors Influencing Deprescribing between Primary Care Providers: Cross-Sectional Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023; 20(6):4957. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20064957

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bužančić, Iva, and Maja Ortner Hadžiabdić. 2023. "Differences in Factors Influencing Deprescribing between Primary Care Providers: Cross-Sectional Study" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 20, no. 6: 4957. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20064957

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop