Patient-selected media and knowledge of risk to kidneys of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

Pai, Amy Barton; Engling, Jason; Chapman, Chris; Volk, R. Scott; Costello, Gabrielle; Codd, Christopher; Ashjian, Emily; Wright-Nunes, Julie

doi:10.1016/j.japh.2019.01.012

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the need for de-implementing NSAIDs in patients with CVD, heart failure and hypertension,10 11 they were the focus of less than one-third of interventions. Additionally, despite evidence that patients may have limited NSAID literacy,50–53 the issue of duplicate NSAID use was minimally addressed by previous interventions. Thus, moving forward, there are numerous opportunities to focus and tailor de-implementation approaches to the patient populations and contexts where needs exist.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scoping review of interventions to de-implement potentially harmful non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in healthcare settings

Rockwell,

Oyese,

Singh

et al. 2024

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesPotentially harmful non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) utilisation persists at undesirable rates worldwide. The purpose of this paper is to review the literature on interventions to de-implement potentially harmful NSAIDs in healthcare settings and to suggest directions for future research.DesignScoping review.Data sourcesPubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Central and Google Scholar (1 January 2000 to 31 May 2022).Study selectionStudies reporting on the effectiveness of interventions to systematically reduce potentially harmful NSAID utilisation in healthcare settings.Data extractionUsing Covidence systematic review software, we extracted study and intervention characteristics, including the effectiveness of interventions in reducing NSAID utilisation.ResultsFrom 7818 articles initially identified, 68 were included in the review. Most studies took place in European countries (45.6%) or the USA (35.3%), with randomised controlled trial as the most common design (55.9%). Interventions were largely clinician-facing (76.2%) and delivered in primary care (60.2%) but were rarely (14.9%) guided by an implementation model, framework or theory. Academic detailing, clinical decision support or electronic medical record interventions, performance reports and pharmacist review were frequent approaches employed. NSAID use was most commonly classified as potentially harmful based on patients’ age (55.8%), history of gastrointestinal disorders (47.1%), or history of kidney disease (38.2%). Only 7.4% of interventions focused on over-the-counter (OTC) NSAIDs in addition to prescription. The majority of studies (76.2%) reported a reduction in the utilisation of potentially harmful NSAIDs. Few studies (5.9%) evaluated pain or quality of life following NSAIDs discontinuation.ConclusionMany varied interventions to de-implement potentially harmful NSAIDs have been applied in healthcare settings worldwide. Based on these findings and identified knowledge gaps, further efforts to comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness of interventions and the combination of intervention characteristics associated with effective de-implementation are needed. In addition, future work should be guided by de-implementation theory, focus on OTC NSAIDs and incorporate patient-focused strategies and outcomes, including the evaluation of unintended consequences of the intervention.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%