Purpose: screening tool of older people's prescriptions (STOPP) and screening tool to alert to right treatment (START) criteria were first published in 2008. Due to an expanding therapeutics evidence base, updating of the criteria was required.Methods: we reviewed the 2008 STOPP/START criteria to add new evidence-based criteria and remove any obsolete criteria. A thorough literature review was performed to reassess the evidence base of the 2008 criteria and the proposed new criteria. Nineteen experts from 13 European countries reviewed a new draft of STOPP & START criteria including proposed new criteria. These experts were also asked to propose additional criteria they considered important to include in the revised STOPP & START criteria and to highlight any criteria from the 2008 list they considered less important or lacking an evidence base. The revised list of criteria was then validated using the Delphi consensus methodology.Results: the expert panel agreed a final list of 114 criteria after two Delphi validation rounds, i.e. 80 STOPP criteria and 34 START criteria. This represents an overall 31% increase in STOPP/START criteria compared with version 1. Several new STOPP categories were created in version 2, namely antiplatelet/anticoagulant drugs, drugs affecting, or affected by, renal function and drugs that increase anticholinergic burden; new START categories include urogenital system drugs, analgesics and vaccines.Conclusion: STOPP/START version 2 criteria have been expanded and updated for the purpose of minimizing inappropriate prescribing in older people. These criteria are based on an up-to-date literature review and consensus validation among a European panel of experts.

STOPP criteria PIMs, unlike Beers criteria PIMs, are significantly associated with avoidable ADEs in older people that cause or contribute to urgent hospitalization.

No abstract

of older person's potentially inappropriate prescriptions, screening tool to alert doctors to the right treatment SUMMARYWhat is known and Objective: Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) has significant clinical, humanistic and economic impacts. Identifying PIP in older adults may reduce their burden of adverse drug events. Tools with explicit criteria are being developed to screen for PIP in this population. These tools vary in their ability to identify PIP in specific care settings and jurisdictions due to such factors as local prescribing practices and formularies. One promising set of screening tools are the STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Person's potentially inappropriate Prescriptions) and START (Screening Tool of Alert doctors to the Right Treatment) criteria. We conducted a systematic review of research studies that describe the application of the STOPP/START criteria and examined the evidence of the impact of STOPP/START on clinical, humanistic and economic outcomes in older adults. Methods: We performed a systematic review of studies from relevant biomedical databases and grey literature sources published from January 2007 to January 2012. We searched citation and reference lists and contacted content experts to identify additional studies. Two authors independently selected studies using a predefined protocol. We did not restrict selection to particular study designs; however, non-English studies were excluded during the selection process. Independent extraction of articles by two authors used predefined data fields. For randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing STOPP/START to other explicit criteria, we assessed risk of bias using an adapted tool. Results and Discussion: We included 13 studies: a single randomized controlled trial and 12 observational studies. We performed a descriptive analysis as heterogeneity of study populations, interventions and study design precluded metaanalysis. All observational studies reported the prevalence of PIP; however, the application of the criteria was not consistent across all studies. Seven of the observational studies compared STOPP/ START with other explicit criteria. The STOPP/START criteria were reported to be more sensitive than the more-frequentlycited Beers criteria in six studies, but less sensitive than a set of criteria developed in Australia. The STOPP criteria identified more medications associated with adverse drug events than the 2002 version of the Beers criteria. Patients with PIP, as identified by STOPP, had an 85% increased risk of adverse drug events in one study (OR = 1Á85, 95% CI: 1Á51-2Á26; P < 0Á001). There was limited evidence that the application of STOPP/START criteria optimized prescribing. Research involving the application of STOPP/START on the impact on the quality of life was not found. The direct costs of PIP were documented in three studies from Ireland, but more extensive analyses on the economic impact or studies from other jurisdictions were not found. What is new and Conclusion: The STOPP/START c...

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT • Potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people is a well‐documented problem and has been associated with adverse drug reactions and hospitalization.• Beers' criteria, Screening Tool of Older Persons' potentially inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) and Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment (START) are screening tools that have been formulated to help physicians and pharmacists identify potentially inappropriate prescribing and potential prescribing omissions.• The prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing and prescribing omissions in the elderly population presenting to hospital with acute illness is high according to STOPP and START criteria. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS • Potential errors of prescribing and of omission of medicines are prevalent among medically stable older people in primary care.• Screening tools should be incorporated into the everyday practice of primary care doctors and community pharmacists as a means of preventing potential errors of prescribing commission and prescribing omission in older people.AIMS Screening tools have been formulated to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing (IP) in older people. Beers' criteria are the most widely used but have disadvantages when used in Europe. New IP screening tools called Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions (STOPP) and Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment (START) have been developed to identify potential IP and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs). The aim was to measure the prevalence rates of potential IP and PPOs in primary care using Beers' criteria, STOPP and START.METHODS Case records of 1329 patients ≥65 years old from three general practices in one region of southern Ireland were studied. The mean age ± SD of the patients was 74.9 ± 6.4 years, 60.9% were female. Patients' current diagnoses and prescription medicines were reviewed and the Beers' criteria, STOPP and START tools applied.RESULTS The total number of medicines prescribed was 6684; median number of medicines per patient was five (range 1–19). Overall, Beers' criteria identified 286 potentially inappropriate prescriptions in 18.3% (243) of patients, whilst the corresponding IP rate identified by STOPP was 21.4% (284), in respect of 346 potentially inappropriate prescriptions. A total of 333 PPOs were identified in 22.7% (302) of patients using the START tool.CONCLUSION Potentially inappropriate drug prescribing and errors of drug omission are highly prevalent among older people living in the community. Prevention strategies should involve primary care doctors and community pharmacists.