Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Artificial Intelligence in Primary Care: call for articles
    • Social Care Integration with Primary Care: call for articles
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • BJGP CONFERENCE →
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
BJGP Open
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow BJGP Open on Instagram
  • Visit bjgp open on Bluesky
  • Blog
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
BJGP Open

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Artificial Intelligence in Primary Care: call for articles
    • Social Care Integration with Primary Care: call for articles
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • BJGP CONFERENCE →
Practice & Policy

Potentially inappropriate prescribing in middle-aged adults: a significant problem with a lack of action and evidence to address it

Michael Naughton, Frank Moriarty and Patrick Redmond
BJGP Open 2025; 9 (1): BJGPO.2023.0209. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2023.0209
Michael Naughton
1 The Clinical Effectiveness Group, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: m.naughton@qmul.ac.uk
Frank Moriarty
2 School of Pharmacy and Biomolecular Sciences, RCSI University of Medicine & Health Sciences, Dublin, Republic of Ireland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Frank Moriarty
Patrick Redmond
3 Department of General Practice, RCSI University of Medicine & Health Sciences, Dublin, Republic of Ireland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading
  • Potentially inappropriate prescribing
  • middle-aged adults
  • medicines optimisation
  • primary healthcare
  • general practitioners

Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP), prescribing where the potential harms outweigh the potential benefits, or where a medication that a patient would benefit from is not prescribed, is an important healthcare challenge. PIP has been well characterised among older adults and is linked to adverse drug reactions (ADRs), hospitalisations, and increased healthcare costs.1 While studies have been conducted to address PIP in older adults, middle-aged adults remain overlooked despite also being vulnerable to PIP due to age-related chronic conditions.2

Our recently published systematic review showed that PIP is common in middle-aged adults, with an estimated 38% being exposed to PIP annually.3 PIP in middle-aged adults is known to occur in higher risk and disadvantaged groups: those with multimorbidity, polypharmacy, and those from deprived areas.4 It has been shown to be associated with ADRs,5 and may be associated with increased healthcare utilisation.6 A further study by our team, examined the cost of PIP in 1.2 million middle-aged adults in South London, finding that the total cost of PIP in this age group across 6 years was £2.8 million. The cost of adequate alternative prescribing would be £2.2 million, a cost-saving of approximately £553 874 compared with PIP.7

Following on from these studies, we conducted a further systematic search (unpublished) to examine interventions to reduce this prescribing. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane library, ProQuest, Web of Science, OpenGrey, Clinicaltrials.gov, and the WHO Clinical Trials Registry Platform. All English language studies that included adults aged 45–64 years, applied explicit PIP criteria, implemented an intervention to reduce PIP, and were published by June 2022, were eligible. In total, 12 384 studies underwent title and abstract screening, with 248 articles identified for full text screening, however ultimately none met our inclusion criteria.

Our search has revealed a literature gap, with no studies having been conducted with interventions aiming to reduce PIP in middle-aged adults. Conversely, there are numerous interventional studies to reduce PIP in older adults.8,9 PIP in older adults has a similar prevalence,10 but in absolute terms the largest burden of PIP exists in middle-aged adults, due to the larger population size. Intervening earlier in middle age may allow patients’ medicines to be optimised and avoid adverse outcomes as they age.

Furthermore, the benefits of targeting high risk prescribing independent of age, rather than concentrating only on older adults, have been demonstrated by multiple studies. Concentrating on high risk prescribing across all age groups, these studies have shown interventions can reduce high risk prescribing, and associated adverse outcomes such as gastrointestinal bleeds, heart failure, and hospital admissions.11 The PINCER intervention has also shown that interventions to reduce high risk prescribing can be highly cost effective.12 The current, extremely welcome, deprescribing initiatives (https://deprescribing.org/) are applicable beyond older adults and could also be used to benefit the middle-aged in particular. Therefore, as well as extending interventions to middle-aged people specifically, it is also worth considering a whole population approach to high risk prescribing or PIP, given the demonstrated successes and cost effectiveness of these approaches previously.

As practising clinical academics, we are concerned about the lack of policy and research activity to develop interventions to reduce PIP in middle-aged adults. This is an issue affecting a significant proportion of the middle-aged population and it is vital to understand how to reduce this prescribing to avoid preventable harms and unnecessary cost to the health service. I urge primary care journals, including BJGP Open, to prioritise the issue of appropriate prescribing outside of the narrow focus on older adults by encouraging submissions and facilitating discourse among researchers, practitioners, and policymakers. This would contribute to our understanding of PIP in other age groups, including middle-aged adults, and help to develop interventions to address the issue in wider patient groups. I hope this article serves as a catalyst for discussion and research on this pressing issue.

Notes

Funding

There are no funders to report for this submission.

Ethical approval

N/A

Provenance

Freely submitted; externally peer reviewed.

Data

N/A

Competing interests

The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

  • Received October 19, 2023.
  • Accepted January 26, 2024.
  • Copyright © 2025, The Authors

This article is Open Access: CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. O’Connor MN,
    2. Gallagher P,
    3. O’Mahony D
    (2012) Inappropriate prescribing: criteria, detection and prevention. Drugs Aging 29 (6):437–452, doi:10.2165/11632610-000000000-00000, pmid:22642779.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Gallagher PF,
    2. O’Connor MN,
    3. O’Mahony D
    (2011) Prevention of potentially inappropriate prescribing for elderly patients: A randomized controlled trial using STOPP/START criteria. Clin Pharmacol Ther 89 (6):845–854, doi:10.1038/clpt.2011.44, pmid:21508941.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Naughton M,
    2. Moriarty F,
    3. Bailey J,
    4. Bowen L,
    5. et al.
    (2022) A systematic review of the prevalence, determinants, and impact of potentially inappropriate prescribing in middle-aged adults. Drugs Ther Perspect 38 (1):21–32, doi:10.1007/s40267-021-00884-5.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. 4.↵
    1. Khatter A,
    2. Moriarty F,
    3. Ashworth M,
    4. Durbaba S,
    5. et al.
    (2021) Prevalence and predictors of potentially inappropriate prescribing in middle-aged adults: a repeated cross-sectional study. Br J Gen Pract 71 (708):e491–e497, doi:10.3399/BJGP.2020.1048, pmid:33606659.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Smeaton T,
    2. McElwaine P,
    3. Cullen J,
    4. Santos-Martinez MJ,
    5. et al.
    (2020) A prospective observational pilot study of adverse drug reactions contributing to hospitalization in A cohort of middle-aged adults aged 45–64 years. Drugs Ther Perspect 36 (3):123–130, doi:10.1007/s40267-019-00700-1.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  6. 6.↵
    1. Moriarty F,
    2. Cahir C,
    3. Bennett K,
    4. Hughes CM,
    5. et al.
    (2017) Potentially inappropriate prescribing and its association with health outcomes in middle-aged people: a prospective cohort study in Ireland. BMJ Open 7 (10), doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016562, pmid:29042380. e016562.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Jayesinghe R,
    2. Moriarty F,
    3. Khatter A,
    4. Durbaba S,
    5. et al.
    (2022) Cost outcomes of potentially inappropriate prescribing in middle-aged adults: A Delphi consensus and cross-sectional study. Br J Clin Pharmacol 88 (7):3404–3420, doi:10.1111/bcp.15295, pmid:35244286.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Spinewine A,
    2. Schmader KE,
    3. Barber N,
    4. Hughes C,
    5. et al.
    (2007) Appropriate prescribing in elderly people: how well can it be measured and optimised? Lancet 370 (9582):173–184, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61091-5, pmid:17630041.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Clyne B,
    2. Fitzgerald C,
    3. Quinlan A,
    4. Hardy C,
    5. et al.
    (2016) Interventions to address potentially inappropriate prescribing in community-dwelling older adults: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. J Am Geriatr Soc 64 (6):1210–1222, doi:10.1111/jgs.14133, pmid:27321600.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Liew TM,
    2. Lee CS,
    3. Goh SKL,
    4. Chang ZY
    (2020) The prevalence and impact of potentially inappropriate prescribing among older persons in primary care settings: multilevel meta-analysis. Age Ageing 49 (4):570–579, doi:10.1093/ageing/afaa057, pmid:32365168.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Dreischulte T,
    2. Donnan P,
    3. Grant A,
    4. Hapca A,
    5. et al.
    (2016) Safer prescribing--A trial of education, informatics, and financial incentives. N Engl J Med 374 (11):1053–1064, doi:10.1056/NEJMsa1508955, pmid:26981935.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Avery AJ,
    2. Rodgers S,
    3. Cantrill JA,
    4. Armstrong S,
    5. et al.
    (2012) A pharmacist-led information technology intervention for medication errors (PINCER): A multicentre, cluster randomised, controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis. Lancet 379 (9823):1310–1319, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61817-5, pmid:22357106.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

BJGP Open
Vol. 9, Issue 1
April 2025
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for recommending BJGP Open.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Potentially inappropriate prescribing in middle-aged adults: a significant problem with a lack of action and evidence to address it
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from BJGP Open
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from BJGP Open.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Potentially inappropriate prescribing in middle-aged adults: a significant problem with a lack of action and evidence to address it
Michael Naughton, Frank Moriarty, Patrick Redmond
BJGP Open 2025; 9 (1): BJGPO.2023.0209. DOI: 10.3399/BJGPO.2023.0209

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Potentially inappropriate prescribing in middle-aged adults: a significant problem with a lack of action and evidence to address it
Michael Naughton, Frank Moriarty, Patrick Redmond
BJGP Open 2025; 9 (1): BJGPO.2023.0209. DOI: 10.3399/BJGPO.2023.0209
del.icio.us logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • Notes
    • References
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • Potentially inappropriate prescribing
  • middle-aged adults
  • medicines optimisation
  • primary healthcare
  • general practitioners

More in this TOC Section

  • The BJGP Open Top 10 Most Read Research Articles of 2024: an editorial
  • The overlooked challenges facing out-of-hours primary care in the NHS: a missed opportunity in policy
Show more Practice & Policy

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Latest articles
  • Authors & reviewers
  • Accessibility statement

RCGP

  • British Journal of General Practice
  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP Open
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP Open: research
  • Writing for BJGP Open: practice & policy
  • BJGP Open editorial process & policies
  • BJGP Open ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP Open

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Open access licence

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Open Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: bjgpopen@rcgp.org.uk

BJGP Open is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners

© 2025 BJGP Open

Online ISSN: 2398-3795