No abstract

The Beers Criteria are a valuable tool for clinical care and quality improvement, but may be misinterpreted and implemented in ways that cause unintended harms. In this paper, we describe the intended role of the 2015 AGS Beers Criteria, and provide guidance on how they should be used by patients, clinicians, health systems, and payors. A key theme underlying these recommendations is to use common sense and clinical judgment in applying the 2015 AGS Beers Criteria, and to remain mindful of nuances in the criteria. The criteria serve as a “warning light” to identify medications that have an unfavorable balance of benefits and harms in many older adults, particularly when compared to pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic alternatives. However, there are situations in which use of medications included in the criteria can be appropriate. As such, the 2015 AGS Beers Criteria work best not only when they identify potentially inappropriate medications, but when they educate clinicians and patients about the reasons those medications are included and the situations in which their use may be more or less problematic. The criteria are designed to support, rather than supplant, good clinical judgment.

No abstract