Deprescribing needs to be considered in the pharmacists’ prescribing role
Authors: Lisa Kouladjian O'Donnell and Mouna J Sawan
Published online: 17 February 2020
To the Editor: Pharmacist prescribing rights in Australia have recently sparked debate between medical practitioners and pharmacists.1 While discussion on the potential role of pharmacists to prescribe is important, the debate has focused on the initiation of medications. There is a need to acknowledge that prescribing is a process, which, according to the World Health Organization's six‐step Guide to good prescribing, includes “Step 6: Monitor (and stop?) the treatment”.2 Given inappropriate polypharmacy is increasing in older people,3 collaborative deprescribing (defined as the supervised withdrawal of inappropriate medications) with pharmacists, medical practitioners, and patients should therefore be given equal priority within this debate.
Expanding the pharmacists’ role to deprescribe in collaboration with the medical practitioner can be considered as an effective mechanism to enact Step 6. Pharmacists are experts in pharmacotherapy, and consistently use a collaborative approach in providing health care. There is growing evidence internationally of the effectiveness of pharmacist prescribing roles that include medication cessation. In New Zealand and the United Kingdom, recent changes in the legislation have enabled suitably trained pharmacists to prescribe, and various studies have tested the feasibility of pharmacists initiating and deprescribing medications in multiple settings, such as nursing homes and general practice.4,5
The pharmacists’ expanded deprescribing role can be achievable with a team‐based approach in which there is a clear delineation of roles and responsibilities, separating the prescribing from the dispensing pharmacist, as in New Zealand.5,6 In Australia, many health practitioners can prescribe medications. For example, nurse practitioners can initiate and deprescribe within the boundaries of legislation and scope; that is, limited by the scope of practice, requirements from the Medicare Benefits Schedule and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, and by relevant hospital formulary or prescribing arrangements. This may be a model to adopt for expanding the pharmacists’ collaborative deprescribing role.
All the steps that underpin prescribing (initiation to withdrawal) are equally important to ensure patient safety, so they receive appropriate medications that are safe and effective. The proposal of expanding the pharmacists’ prescribing role needs to encompass all aspects of the prescribing process. If initiation and continuation of a medication is emphasised, in the context of pharmacists’ prescribing rights in Australia, we may lose focus on patient care and safety.
Competing interests
References
- Yim N. Widening pharmacists’ scope: a prescription for trouble Australia. InSight+ 2019; 27 May. https://insightplus.mja.com.au/2019/20/widening-pharmacists-scope-a-prescription-for-trouble (viewed July 2019).
- De Vries TP, Henning RH, Hogerezeil HV, Fresle DA. Guide to good prescribing: a practical manual. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1994. https://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/en/d/Jwhozip23e/; (viewed Dec 2019).
- Page AT, Falster MO, Litchfield M, et al. Polypharmacy among older Australians, 2006–2017: a population‐based study. Med J Aust 2019; 211: 71–75. https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2019/211/2/polypharmacy-among-older-australians-2006-2017-population-based-study;.
- Inch J, Notman F, Bond CM, et al. The Care Home Independent Prescribing Pharmacist Study (CHIPPS) — a non‐randomised feasibility study of independent pharmacist prescribing in care homes. Pilot Feasibility Stud 2019; 5: 89.
- Raghunandan R, Tordoff J, Smith A. Non‐medical prescribing in New Zealand: an overview of prescribing rights, service delivery models and training. Ther Adv Drug Saf 2017; 8: 349–360.
- Zhou M, Desborough J, Parkinson A, et al. Barriers to pharmacist prescribing: a scoping review comparing the UK, New Zealand, Canadian and Australian experiences. Int J Pharm Pract 2019; 27: 479–489.
Still Treating Yesterday's Risk? Reconsidering Antiviral Use for Mild-to-Moderate COVID-19 Cases in a Broadly Immune Population
Hadar Mudrik-Zohar, Tim Cutfield, Susan Morpeth, Thomas Hills, Eamon Duffy, Laura J. Edwards, Allen C. Cheng, Steven Y. C. Tong
Birth prevalence, clinical sequelae, and management of congenital cytomegalovirus infections in Australia, 1999–2023: a national prospective study
Ece Egilmezer, Suzy M Teutsch, Carlos Nunez, Stuart T Hamilton, Adam W Bartlett, Pamela Palasanthiran, Elizabeth J Elliott, William D Rawlinson
Medication delivery and dispensing interval preferences of people who use antihypertensive medications in Australia: a survey study
Carissa Bonner, Michael A Fajardo, Rachael M Keast, Emily Atkins, Niamh Chapman, Kristie R Weir, Anthony Rodgers, Aletta E Schutte
Concurrent use of hormonal long‐acting reversible contraception by women of reproductive age dispensed teratogenic medications, Australia, 2013–2021
Michelle KY Chen, Adrian Lim, Deshan F Sebaratnam
Concurrent use of hormonal long‐acting reversible contraception by women of reproductive age dispensed teratogenic medications, Australia, 2013–2021
Aaron E Boyce, Tony Caccetta, Jo‐Ann See, Rosemary L Nixon AM