Consensus Validated List of Potentially Inappropriate Medication for the Elderly and Their Prevalence in South Korea

Perspectives of Non-Pharmacy Professionals in Long-Term Care Facilities on Pharmacist-Involved Medication Management in South Korea: A Qualitative Study

“…This finding had to be noted because the reported prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications was high among LTCFs in Korea. The studies found that the incidence of at least one potentially inappropriate medication was 41.4–58.2% in elderly individuals who resided in LTCFs [15,16]. Indeed, demands for the improved integration of pharmacists for better medication management in LTCFs have emerged in recent years in Korea.…”

Identifying potential prescribing safety indicators related to mental health disorders and medications: A systematic review

“…Most studies developed prescribing indicator tools to be used in the United States of America (USA) [32, 34, 39, 69, 79–81, 88, 89, 102, 105, 106, 109, 111, 113, 117, 118] (n = 17/70, 24.3%), followed by the United Kingdom (UK) [10, 11, 15, 17, 22, 61, 62, 73] (n = 8, 11.4%) and Canada [41, 72, 86, 93, 107, 112] (n = 6, 8.6%). The remaining studies described tools developed for Ireland [68, 78, 99, 115] (n = 4, 5.7%), Spain [43, 75, 77] (n = 3, 4.3%), Australia [64, 65, 74] (n = 3, 4.3%), Norway [95, 96, 108] (n = 3, 4.3%), Belgium [42, 48, 104] (n = 3, 4.3%), The Netherlands [92, 114] (n = 2, 2.9%), Italy [31, 44] (n = 2, 2.9%), France [87, 103] (n = 2, 2.9%), Korea [83, 84] (n = 2, 2.9%), Germany [45] (n = 1, 1.4%), Taiwan [66] (n = 1, 1.4%), Austria [90] (n = 1, 1.4%), the Czech Republic [47] (n = 1, 1.4%), Portugal [50] (n = 1, 1.4%), Japan [85] (n = 1, 1.4%), Argentina […”

“…The elderly population was the most common patient group specifically targeted by the indicator tools (n = 38/70, 54.3%). Of these, 26/38 (68.4%) [25, 31, 32, 34, 41, 43–47, 61, 64, 66, 74, 77, 83, 84, 88, 90, 92, 101, 106–108, 112, 118] studies defined their elderly population as ≥65 years old, 3 (7.9%) [68, 95, 96] as ≥70 years old, 2 (5.3%) [85, 87] as ≥75 years old, and the remaining 7 (18.4%) [38, 42, 48, 91, 93, 114, 116] tools did not define a specific age. Of the remaining studies, 5/70 (7.1%) [39, 71, 81, 111, 113] described tools specifically for adults, 2 (2.9%) [79, 103] for paediatric patients, 4 (5.7%) for psychiatric patients (including bipolar disorder (n = 1),[49] general psychiatric patients (n = 1)[22] and severe/advanced dementia (n = 2)[80, 86]), and 1 (1.4%) [72] for patients with chronic kidney disease.…”

Reducing Potentially Inappropriate Medications in Older Adults: A Way Forward

“…It focuses on engaging patients throughout the sequence, with the aim of improving long-term health outcomes (Reeve, Shakib, Hendrix, Roberts, & Wiese, 2014a) Barriers to De-prescribing For most prescribers, prescribing medications is much easier than de-prescribing, possibly because of insufficient awareness of de-prescribing (Lai & Fok, 2017). A study surveying family physicians in Vancouver observed that they were reluctant to de-prescribe the medications prescribed by another practitioner or specialist, and many physicians felt that they lacked the knowledge and skills to de-prescribe in a safe and effective manner out of fear of initiating an adverse The quality indicators for Assessing Care of Vulnerable Elders (ACOVE) (San-José et al, 2014) The EU(7) PIM list (Renom-Guiteras et al, 2015) The Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set (HEDIS) criteria (Pugh et al, 2006) The List of Potentially Inappropriate Drugs for the elderly in Korea (Kim et al, 2015) The comprehensive protocol by Matanovic et al (Matanovic & Vlahovic-Palcevski, 2012) The PIM-Taiwan criteria (Chang et al, 2012) The criteria for high-risk medication use in Thai older patients (Winit-Watjana et al, 2008) The Zhan classification (Barnett, Perry, Langstaff, & Kaboli, 2006) USA, 1994(Fitzgerald et al, 1997) (Anrys et al, 2016;Hanlon & Schmader, 2013) (Koria et al, 2018) 1. First implicit criteria used in research and clinical practice.…”