Discussing proton pump inhibitor deprescribing: the views of Danish GPs and older patients.

Wade Thompson, Malene Nissen, Peter Haastrup, Jette Videbæk Le, Carina Lundby, Jesper Bo Nielsen, Dorte Ejg Jarbøl
Author Information
  1. Wade Thompson: Research Unit of General Practice, University of Southern Denmark, J.B. Winsløwsvej 9, 5000, Odense, Denmark. wthomp01@gmail.com. ORCID
  2. Malene Nissen: Hospital Pharmacy Funen, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
  3. Peter Haastrup: Research Unit of General Practice, University of Southern Denmark, J.B. Winsløwsvej 9, 5000, Odense, Denmark.
  4. Jette Videbæk Le: Research Unit of General Practice, University of Southern Denmark, J.B. Winsløwsvej 9, 5000, Odense, Denmark.
  5. Carina Lundby: Hospital Pharmacy Funen, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
  6. Jesper Bo Nielsen: Research Unit of General Practice, University of Southern Denmark, J.B. Winsløwsvej 9, 5000, Odense, Denmark.
  7. Dorte Ejg Jarbøl: Research Unit of General Practice, University of Southern Denmark, J.B. Winsløwsvej 9, 5000, Odense, Denmark.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Deprescribing of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) can be considered in situations where the drug may no longer be necessary; however, this requires a careful discussion between patients and healthcare providers, often general practitioners (GPs). The aim of our study was to explore how GPs discuss PPI deprescribing with patients and compare that to how older patients would like to discuss this decision.
METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with GPs (n = 11) and patients aged ≥65 years who were taking PPIs (n = 4). Analysis of interviews was based on systematic text condensation.
RESULTS: We identified four main themes: (1) Reasons PPI deprescribing comes up, (2) Considering PPI deprescribing, (3) Discussion topics, and (4) Incorporating patient preferences into PPI deprescribing decisions. We found that PPI deprescribing often comes up during consultations for other problems or due to concern about medication burden in general. GPs discussed topics related to symptom control, such as the possibility of rebound symptoms, the need to taper PPIs, and what to do if symptoms returned. This aligned with what patients felt was important to discuss. Some GPs routinely incorporated patient preferences into decisions, whereas others did not.
CONCLUSION: When discussing PPI deprescribing, the GPs in our study generally focused on topics related to symptom control. There was variability in how and if patient preferences were discussed. Greater focus may be needed on developing mechanisms to elicit and incorporate patient preferences into PPI deprescribing decisions. Future research could also explore more systematic approaches to reassess ongoing PPI use in an effort to curb unnecessary long-term use of PPIs.

Keywords

References

  1. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2018 Aug;123(2):114-121 [PMID: 29658189]
  2. J Manag Care Pharm. 2013 May;19(4):325-33 [PMID: 23627578]
  3. Patient Educ Couns. 2019 May;102(5):879-887 [PMID: 30578105]
  4. Can Fam Physician. 2017 May;63(5):354-364 [PMID: 28500192]
  5. Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2018 Nov 19;10:2042098618809927 [PMID: 31019676]
  6. Fam Pract. 2019 Nov 18;36(6):758-764 [PMID: 31165863]
  7. BMJ Open. 2014 Dec 08;4(12):e006544 [PMID: 25488097]
  8. Lancet. 2018 Oct 20;392(10156):1397-1399 [PMID: 30343853]
  9. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2015 Dec;80(6):1254-68 [PMID: 27006985]
  10. BMJ. 2019 Dec 5;367:l6762 [PMID: 31806646]
  11. Patient. 2018 Feb;11(1):17-28 [PMID: 28608038]
  12. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2019 Jul;85(7):1396-1406 [PMID: 30848837]
  13. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2018 Dec;17(12):1185-1196 [PMID: 30540223]
  14. Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2019 Apr 05;10:2042098619838796 [PMID: 31057788]
  15. BMJ. 2016 Jun 03;353:i2893 [PMID: 27260319]
  16. Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2018 Oct 20;9(12):687-698 [PMID: 30546863]
  17. Aging Med (Milton). 2019 May 07;2(2):112-117 [PMID: 31942521]
  18. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007 Dec;19(6):349-57 [PMID: 17872937]
  19. BMC Med. 2016 Nov 9;14(1):179 [PMID: 27825371]
  20. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2015 Sep;42(5):533-44 [PMID: 24193818]
  21. Scand J Public Health. 2012 Dec;40(8):795-805 [PMID: 23221918]
  22. Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2012 Jul;5(4):219-32 [PMID: 22778788]
  23. Drugs Real World Outcomes. 2019 Sep;6(3):105-113 [PMID: 31264165]
  24. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2018 Sep 20;73(7):e98-e107 [PMID: 29190369]
  25. Qual Health Res. 2016 Nov;26(13):1753-1760 [PMID: 26613970]
  26. Fundam Clin Pharmacol. 2007 Jun;21(3):217-30 [PMID: 17521291]
  27. Gastroenterology. 2017 Mar;152(4):706-715 [PMID: 28257716]
  28. Can Pharm J (Ott). 2018 Dec 17;152(1):18-22 [PMID: 30719193]

MeSH Term

Denmark
Deprescriptions
General Practitioners
Humans
Patient Preference
Proton Pump Inhibitors

Chemicals

Proton Pump Inhibitors

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0GPsPPIdeprescribingpatientsPPIspatientpreferencespumpstudydiscusstopicsdecisionsDeprescribingprotoninhibitorsmayoftengeneralexploreolderinterviewssystematiccomesdiscussedrelatedsymptomcontrolsymptomsuseBACKGROUND:canconsideredsituationsdruglongernecessaryhoweverrequirescarefuldiscussionhealthcareproviderspractitionersaimcomparelikedecisionMETHODS:conductedqualitativeusingsemi-structuredn = 11aged≥65 yearstakingn = 4AnalysisbasedtextcondensationRESULTS:identifiedfourmainthemes:1Reasons2Considering3Discussion4Incorporatinginto PPIfoundconsultationsproblemsdueconcernmedicationburdenpossibilityreboundneedtaperreturnedalignedfeltimportantroutinelyincorporatedwhereasothersnotCONCLUSION:discussinggenerallyfocusedvariabilityGreaterfocusneededdevelopingmechanismselicitincorporateFutureresearchalsoapproachesreassessongoingeffortcurbunnecessarylong-termDiscussinginhibitordeprescribing:viewsDanishCommunicationProtonShareddecision-making

Similar Articles

Cited By