Research ArticlePractice

Deprescribing proton pump inhibitors

Evidence-based clinical practice guideline

Barbara Farrell, Kevin Pottie, Wade Thompson, Taline Boghossian, Lisa Pizzola, Farah Joy Rashid, Carlos Rojas-Fernandez, Kate Walsh, Vivian Welch and Paul Moayyedi
Canadian Family Physician May 2017, 63 (5) 354-364;

Abstract

Objective To develop an evidence-based guideline to help clinicians make decisions about when and how to safely taper or stop proton pump inhibitors (PPIs); to focus on the highest level of evidence available and seek input from primary care professionals in the guideline development, review, and endorsement processes.

Methods Five health professionals (1 family physician, 3 pharmacists, and 1 gastroenterologist) and 5 nonvoting members comprised the overall team; members disclosed conflicts of interest. The guideline process included the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach, with a detailed evidence review in in-person, telephone, and online meetings. Uniquely, the guideline development process included a systematic review of PPI deprescribing trials and examination of reviews of the harm of continued PPI use. Narrative syntheses of patient preferences and resource-implication literature informed recommendations. The team refined guideline content and recommendation wording through consensus and synthesized clinical considerations to address common front-line clinician questions. The draft guideline was distributed to clinicians and then to health care professional associations for review and revisions made at each stage. A decision-support algorithm was developed in conjunction with the guideline.

Recommendations This guideline recommends deprescribing PPIs (reducing dose, stopping, or using “on-demand” dosing) in adults who have completed a minimum of 4 weeks of PPI treatment for heartburn or mild to moderate gastroesophageal reflux disease or esophagitis, and whose symptoms are resolved. The recommendations do not apply to those who have or have had Barrett esophagus, severe esophagitis grade C or D, or documented history of bleeding gastrointestinal ulcers.

Conclusion This guideline provides practical recommendations for making decisions about when and how to reduce the dose of or stop PPIs. Recommendations are meant to assist with, not dictate, decision making in conjunction with patients.

Deprescribing is the planned and supervised process of dose reduction or stopping of medication that might be causing harm or might no longer be providing benefit.1 The goal of deprescribing is to reduce medication burden and harm while maintaining or improving quality of life. However, deprescribing can be difficult, especially when medications do not appear to be causing overt harm.2 In an effort to provide evidence-based recommendations and tools to aid clinicians in stopping medications that might no longer be needed or that might be causing harm, we initiated the Deprescribing Guidelines in the Elderly project (www.open-pharmacy-research.ca/research-projects/emerging-services/deprescribing-guidelines).

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) were selected in a national modified Delphi consensus process as an important medication class for developing deprescribing guidelines, given their high prevalence of use and overuse.3

Concern about overuse of PPIs has been growing. 4–6 In a report summarizing prescription drug use in Canada, pantoprazole was the fifth most common drug prescribed, with more than 11 million prescriptions dispensed in 2012.7 Most common indications such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) require short-term treatment (ie, up to 4 to 8 weeks).8–10 However, chronic use appears to be problematic, with studies showing a lack of documented ongoing indication for between 40% and 65% of hospitalized patients in the United States and Australia11–13 and between 40% and 55% of primary care patients in the United States and the United Kingdom.4,14

Proton pump inhibitors are often viewed as safe and well tolerated medications, and while the incidence of side effects, such as diarrhea,15 impaired B12 absorption, 16 hypomagnesemia,12,17 Clostridium difficile infection, 18 hip fractures,19 and pneumonia20 might be small, older people might be at higher risk of these conditions. 21 When PPIs are inappropriately prescribed or used for too long, they can contribute to polypharmacy with its attendant risks of nonadherence, prescribing cascades, adverse reactions, medication errors, drug interactions, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations. 22–24 In addition, there are economic implications of overuse of PPIs. Spending on PPIs by public drug programs in Canada (excluding Quebec and the territories) totaled $249.6 million of the $7.8 billion spent on prescription drugs by these programs in 2013.25

Our target audience includes primary care physicians, pharmacists, nurse practitioners, and specialists who care for patients who might use PPIs.

The target population includes adults older than 18 years of age (including the elderly) taking a continuous PPI for longer than 28 days for the purpose of treating GERD or esophagitis. The guideline does not apply to those with Barrett esophagus, those with severe esophagitis (grade C or D on endoscopy, as outlined in Box 1),26 or those with documented history of bleeding gastrointestinal (GI) ulcers. Individual situations in which there might be risk factors that warrant continued use of PPIs are also outlined.

Box 1.

Los Angeles Classification for the endoscopic assessment of reflux esophagitis

The classification uses a 4-grade system

  • Grade A: 1 or more mucosal breaks no longer than 5 mm, none of which extends between the tops of the mucosal folds

  • Grade B: 1 or more mucosal breaks more than 5 mm long, none of which extends between the tops of 2 mucosal folds

  • Grade C: Mucosal breaks that extend between the tops of 2 or more mucosal folds but that involve less than 75% of the esophageal circumference

  • Grade D: Mucosal breaks that involve at least 75% of the esophageal circumference

Data from Saraf et al.26

METHODS

We used a comprehensive checklist for a successful guideline enterprise to develop the methods for the PPI deprescribing guideline.27,28

The Guideline Development Team (GDT) comprised 5 clinicians—a family physician (K.P.), a gastroenterologist (P.M.), and 3 pharmacists (B.F., C.R.F., K.W.)—and 5 nonvoting members—a methodologist (V.W.), 2 pharmacy residents (F.J.R., T.B.), and 2 project coordinators (W.T., L.P.). Additional support was provided by a librarian and a master’s student. Three GDT members were investigators with the Deprescribing Guidelines in the Elderly project (B.F., K.P., C.R.F.). All GDT members had expertise in the clinical management of patients taking PPIs. Team members’ expertise, role descriptions, and conflict of interest statements are available at CFPlus.*

We used the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system for guideline development (Box 2).29–32 The GDT articulated the main clinical management question as follows, using the PICO (patient or problem, intervention, comparison, outcome) approach: In adults, what are the effects (harms and benefits) associated with deprescribing long-term daily PPI therapy compared with continuous and chronic use? Definitions specific to PPI deprescribing were articulated by the GDT and are listed in Box 3.6,33

Box 2.

Notes on the GRADE framework for guideline development

This guideline was developed in accordance with the methods proposed by the GRADE Working Group29 and was informed by a systematic review30,31 and a subset of data from an existing systematic review32

  • We focused our review and recommendations on outcomes important to patients, such as harms or benefits resulting from deprescribing a PPI, pill burden, and cost or resource use. Outcomes were proposed by the systematic review team and revised by the Guideline Development Team based on feasibility and the literature available

  • Ratings of the evidence profile tables included high, moderate, low, or very low and depended on our confidence in estimates of effect. Because only randomized controlled trials were used, they started with a high quality rating, but could be rated down by limitations in any of 4 domains: risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, and imprecision. Publication bias could not be rated owing to the paucity of studies.29 Other areas that were considered in formulating a final rating included harms, patient values and preferences, and resource use

  • The GRADE Working Group outlines appropriate wording for recommendations depending on the rating of strength and confidence in the evidence. A strong recommendation with implications for patients (phrased as “we recommend ...”) implies that all patients in the given situation would want the recommended course of action, and only a small proportion would not. A weak recommendation (phrased as “we suggest ...”) implies that most patients would wish to follow the recommendation, but some patients would not. Clinicians must help patients make management decisions consistent with the patients’ values and preferences. Implications for clinicians are similar such that a strong recommendation implies all or most patients should receive the intervention. A weak recommendation should prompt a clinician to recognize that different choices will be appropriate for individual patients

GRADE—Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation; PPI—proton pump inhibitor.

Box 3.

Definitions of PPI deprescribing

Deprescribing can include stopping, stepping down, or reducing doses

  • Stopping can be done either via abrupt discontinuation or a tapering regimen

  • Stepping down involves abrupt discontinuation or tapering of the PPI followed by prescription of an H2RA (any H2RA at any approved dose and dosing interval according to the drug monograph)

  • Reducing includes the following subcategories:

    • -Intermittent PPI use, which is defined by the Canadian Consensus Conference as “daily intake of a medication for a predetermined, finite period (usually two to eight weeks) to produce resolution of reflux-related symptoms or healing of esophageal lesions following relapse of the individual’s condition”33

    • -On-demand PPI use, which is defined by the Canadian Consensus Conference as “the daily intake of a medication for a period sufficient to achieve resolution of the individual’s reflux-related symptoms; following symptom resolution, the medication is discontinued until the individual’s symptoms recur, at which point, medication is again taken daily until the symptoms resolve”33

    • -Lower dose, which is a reduction from a standard dose to a maintenance dose6

H2RA—histamine-2 receptor antagonist, PPI—proton pump inhibitor.

To ensure studies of all deprescribing approaches for PPI were captured, 2 search strategies were used. We conducted a de novo systematic review to assess effects of on-demand and abrupt-discontinuation deprescribing for people using PPIs for longer than 4 weeks.30,31 The methodology and the search strategy used to conduct this systematic review are outlined in a published protocol. 30 Next, we updated a previously published Cochrane systematic review on dose lowering and stepping down to histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) therapy.32 Summarized pooled estimates of treatment effects from both systematic reviews for important and critical outcomes for decision making are provided in GRADE evidence tables, available at CFPlus.*

The systematic reviews focused on outcomes relevant to patients, caregivers, and health care providers. Primary outcomes included change in upper GI symptoms (positive or negative), pill burden, and cost. Secondary outcomes included patient satisfaction, positive drug withdrawal events (eg, resolution of a side effect such as diarrhea), and adverse drug withdrawal events (eg, recurrence of esophagitis on endoscopy).

Draft recommendations were initially formulated by the GDT members (during an in-person meeting) from the evidence tables using confidence in estimated effects (following dose lowering, switching to on-demand therapy, or stepping down to H2RA therapy), and taking into account literature on patient preferences for PPI use, a review of harms of continuing PPIs, team members’ clinical experience with such harms, and resource implications (both in terms of PPI costs and costs that might be associated with complications arising from stopping PPIs). The GDT members met by teleconference to review and discuss recommendations drafted from the in-person meeting. Voting on the recommendations was subsequently conducted anonymously by e-mail. Unanimous agreement was sought; 80% agreement among the 5 GDT members was considered the cutoff for consensus. All 5 members of the PPI deprescribing GDT agreed with the final recommendations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The recommendations are outlined in Box 4. The algorithm developed for this guideline is provided in Figure 1. The rationale for the recommendations is outlined in Table 1. The recommendations apply to adults who have completed a minimum 4-week course of PPIs for upper GI symptoms. The evidence base mainly relates to patients with GERD or esophagitis but can be extrapolated to other upper GI disorders for which the efficacy of PPIs is more modest or for which short-term use is usually recommended (eg, stress ulcer prophylaxis, peptic ulcer disease) and therefore deprescribing is likely to be more effective.34 The recommendations do not apply to those who have or have had Barrett esophagus, severe esophagitis grade C or D, or documented history of bleeding GI ulcers.

Figure 1

Proton Pump Inhibitor (PPI) Deprescribing Algorithm

View this table:
Table 1.

Evidence to recommendations table: Does deprescribing PPIs (dose reduction, on-demand use, abrupt discontinuation, stepping down to H2RA therapy) compared with continuous PPI use result in benefits or harms for adults > 18 y (excluding those with history of bleeding ulcer, Barrett esophagus, and severe esophagitis grade C and D) in primary care and long-term care settings?

Box 4.

Recommendations

For adults (>18 y) with upper GI symptoms, who have completed a minimum 4-wk course of PPI treatment, resulting in resolution of upper GI symptoms, we recommend the following:

  • Decrease the daily dose or stop and change to on-demand (as needed) use (strong recommendation, low-quality evidence)

Alternatively, we suggest the following:

  • Consider an H2RA as an alternative to PPIs (weak recommendation, moderate-quality evidence)

GI—gastrointestinal, H2RA—histamine-2 receptor antagonist, PPI—proton pump inhibitor.

For those with mild to moderate GERD or upper GI symptoms who have no ongoing symptoms, lowering the dose of a PPI does not lead to significantly greater relapse compared with continuing at a standard dose. Lowering the PPI dose was believed to have greater benefit than harm owing to a lack of evidence of harm, the potential to reduce costs, and the potential to reduce the risk of rare PPI side effects and drug interactions. Both on-demand therapy and stepping down to H2RA therapy increase the risk of symptom relapse more so than lowering the dose does. However, on-demand use is associated with lower pill burden and cost, which might be desirable to patients. Please refer to Box 229–32 for definitions of the strength and quality of deprescribing trial evidence and to Table 1 for evidence to recommendations considerations across all decision domains (quality of evidence, balance of benefits and harms, patient values and preferences, and resource implications).

Based on a lack of evidence of serious harm from deprescribing, the evidence for the benefits of reducing inappropriate PPI use in terms of pill burden and reduced risk of side effects, the high societal cost of inappropriate PPI use, and the feasibility of a PPI deprescribing intervention, we rated the recommendation to lower the dose or switch to on-demand PPI use as strong. The recommendation to step down to H2RA therapy was rated as weak owing to the higher risk of symptom return.

Consideration of harm includes the potential for commonly reported side effects such as diarrhea, headache, and vitamin B12 and magnesium deficiency, as well as associations with increased risk of fractures, C difficile infection, community-acquired pneumonia, gastric cancer, gastric atrophy, intestinal metaplasia, colorectal cancer, bacterial peritonitis, small intestine bacterial overgrowth, and possibly increased vascular events in those taking clopidogrel. (Frequency ratios of the harms are available at CFPlus.*)

With regard to patient values and preferences, PPIs are considered to improve quality of life, but patients often do not take them daily as prescribed; some patients taking on-demand PPIs are more willing to continue treatment. Some fear recurrence of symptoms, and for this reason the guideline contains clinical considerations for alternative management strategies for occasional symptoms. (The evidence reviews and related references are available at CFPlus.*)

Spending on PPIs is high ($249.6 million for public drug programs across Canada [except Quebec and the territories] in 2013).25 Studies consistently show inappropriate PPI use in 40% to 65% of patients,4,11–14 suggesting considerable health care dollars are spent on therapy that might not be providing benefit. Step-down, intermittent, and on-demand PPI use reduces direct medical costs; however, there is no evidence comparing these strategies. The cost-effectiveness of continuous treatment for those with severe GERD has been demonstrated, and for this reason, patients with severe GERD should continue PPI treatment at the lowest effective dose. (The evidence reviews and related references are available at CFPlus.*)

Clinical considerations

This guideline is a tool to be used together with consideration of a patient’s personal and medical context. Patients might be less accustomed to dialogue about reducing or stopping medications, and so heightened health care provider awareness to potential concerns might help foster improved patient uptake. The decision to continue, reduce, or discontinue a medication is based on a balance of knowledge about its indication and effectiveness, and risks of use including actual or potential side effects, drug interactions, pill burden, and cost. Patient and family values and preferences play an important role. Decisions about continuing, tapering, or stopping medications should be consistent with the patient’s goals of care. We developed a patient pamphlet to facilitate discussion, which is available at CFPlus.*

The following questions were articulated by the GDT as being important to consider when making decisions about the steps for deprescribing PPIs.

Are there indications or risk factors that warrant continued use?

An important first step is determining the original indication for the PPI and whether there are ongoing risk factors for GI disease that warrant chronic use. Reviewing patient history and consultation notes for evidence of Barrett esophagus, grade C or D esophagitis, or documented history of bleeding GI ulcers will identify patients for whom deprescribing is unlikely to be beneficial. Advice should be sought from gastroenterologists for these patients to assess ongoing risk factors.

Risk of GI ulceration and the need for gastroprotection with a PPI should be given careful consideration in patients receiving regular daily doses of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Patients at high risk of GI ulceration include those with a history of a previous complicated ulcer or those with 3 or more risk factors (age older than 65 years; high-dose NSAID use; previous history of uncomplicated ulcer; concurrent use of acetylsalicylic acid [including low-dose acetylsalicylic acid], corticosteroids, or anticoagulants).35,36 Patients at moderate risk of GI ulceration include those with 1 or 2 risk factors, while low-risk patients do not have any of these risk factors. Patients at moderate risk of GI ulceration taking chronic NSAIDs likely require a PPI or misoprostol, or can be treated with cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors without a PPI. Patients at high risk should receive a cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor plus a PPI or misoprostol.35,36 Concomitant use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and NSAIDs has also been associated with an elevated risk of upper GI bleeding. 37 Consideration could be given to using a PPI in such patients if both a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and NSAIDs are deemed necessary and the patient has other risk factors as described above.37 For a more detailed overview of indications for gastroprotection, the reader is referred elsewhere.35,36

Once it is determined that a patient has been treated for a minimum of 4 weeks for GERD or mild to moderate (grade A or B) esophagitis and symptoms have resolved, deprescribing can be considered. Similarly, if a patient has completed treatment for known short-term indications like Helicobacter pylori eradication, intensive care unit stress ulcer prophylaxis, or uncomplicated peptic ulcer disease (without ongoing chronic NSAID use), the PPI should be deprescribed in accordance with practice guidelines for these indications.10,38,39

How should tapering be approached?

Our systematic search did not identify trials that adequately addressed optimal tapering approaches to minimize symptom recurrence. There is very low-quality evidence that abrupt discontinuation (without tapering or using on-demand strategies) does increase symptom relapse. Therefore, it might be prudent to reduce the PPI to the lowest effective dose before discontinuation and to provide patients with a symptom management strategy that might include on-demand PPIs. Anecdotally, clinicians seem to prefer gradual dose reduction (eg, from twice daily to once daily, from high dose to low dose, from daily to every other day) and any of these approaches can be used, taking into consideration the patient’s current medication supply, as well as the convenience of the approach.

Explaining the rationale for deprescribing PPIs, and the option of beginning with lowering the dose or using on-demand therapy, will facilitate patient and family acceptance.

What monitoring needs to be done and how often, and how should symptoms be managed?

Follow-up times varied among trials of deprescribing.40–50 Typically, patients attended follow-up appointments 4 and 12 weeks after deprescribing and again at 6 to 12 months. Patients also reported recurrence of symptoms by contacting their health care providers. Health care providers can consider following up with patients 4 weeks after deprescribing (or having patients contact them) to assess symptom control (heartburn, regurgitation, epigastric pain, dyspepsia, or pain on swallowing) and at 12 weeks after deprescribing to assess symptoms, frequency of on-demand use (if applicable), and the need for further investigation or a change back to continuous treatment.40–50

Differentiating “rebound hypersecretion” from symptoms of an underlying disorder such as GERD is challenging. 51 While studies of healthy volunteers taking PPIs have resulted in acid-related symptoms following deprescribing, the clinical significance remains unknown.51–53 Regardless, we recommend monitoring for symptom recurrence and managing symptoms with on-demand PPIs, stepping down to H2RA therapy (if appropriate, safe, and effective for the patient), other over-the-counter agents (eg, calcium carbonate), or nonpharmacologic approaches.

Some nonpharmacologic interventions have demonstrated reduction in symptoms, and these include weight loss, avoiding meals within 2 to 3 hours of bedtime, and raising the head of the bed.54 Attention should also be paid to avoiding dietary triggers. In situations where symptoms continue to return despite use of on-demand or intermittent PPIs, the clinician should ensure testing for and treatment of H pylori has been completed.55

What other approaches help with PPI deprescribing?

Inclusion of a pharmacist within the interdisciplinary team has been shown to reduce unnecessary PPI use and can facilitate patient education, dose changes, monitoring, and alerting the prescriber to ongoing symptoms.56,57

Clinical and stakeholder review

External clinical review of the guideline was conducted by a practising family physician and a pharmacist using the AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation) Global Rating Scale tool.58 Relevant stakeholder organizations (ie, gastroenterology, family practice, pharmacy, and nurse practitioner) were invited to similarly review and endorse the guidelines (Box 5). Modifications were made to the original guideline draft to address reviewer comments.

How this deprescribing guideline relates to other clinical practice guidelines for PPI

Current GERD and peptic ulcer disease guideline recommendations support a short duration of PPI use and suggest attempting to discontinue PPIs in most patients or maintaining therapy at the lowest effective dose.8,33 There is no information in current guidelines that assists clinicians with deprescribing PPIs (ie, tapering, discontinuation, or use of intermittent, step-down, or on-demand strategies). While a limited number of protocols for deprescribing PPIs have been proposed, there are no comprehensive evidence-based guidelines available for deprescribing PPIs.57,59 A PPI deprescribing guideline works in conjunction with current treatment guidelines because it offers clinicians recommendations and clinical considerations to help them deprescribe PPIs in patients after an appropriate treatment duration or if long-term therapy is being reevaluated.

Guidelines for recommended PPI treatment duration

Guidelines for management of GERD suggest short-term treatment (4 to 8 weeks) for most patients.8,33 After 4 to 8 weeks, in patients without a compelling indication for maintenance therapy (such as erosive esophagitis or Barrett esophagus), PPI therapy should be reassessed.8,33 Canadian GERD management guidelines recommend that in individuals who have responded well to long-term PPI therapy (and who do not have an indication for maintenance therapy), the medication can be discontinued to assess the need for ongoing therapy (rated as poor-quality evidence).33 If maintenance therapy is required, the medication should be instituted at the lowest possible dose, which includes on-demand therapy (recommendation derived from multiple randomized controlled trials, rated as fair-quality evidence).33 The American College of Gastroenterologists 2013 guideline recommends PPI therapy for 8 weeks initially (rated as a strong recommendation with a high level of evidence derived from meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials), after which time the PPI should be discontinued in most patients and the need for maintenance therapy should be assessed.8 If long-term PPI maintenance therapy is required, the lowest effective dose should be used, which can include reducing medication to on-demand or intermittent PPI use (a conditional recommendation based on a low level of evidence).8

Peptic ulcer disease treatment guidelines recommend short-term PPI use in most patients (2 to 12 weeks), after which time PPI therapy should be discontinued unless maintenance therapy is clearly indicated (for example, in patients with daily NSAID use who have GI risk factors).10,38,39,60 These recommendations are based on randomized controlled trial data and systematic reviews. The American College of Gastroenterologists 2012 guideline on management of bleeding ulcers recommends stopping antisecretory therapy after H pylori eradication unless patients require NSAIDs (rated as strong, supported by high-quality evidence).60

Gaps in knowledge

Proton pump inhibitors are used for a number of reasons; however, most deprescribing research has been done in relatively healthy patients (primarily adults and younger elderly patients) with mild or moderate GERD or esophagitis only. In conditions for which PPI treatment is usually of limited duration (eg, intensive care unit stress ulcer prophylaxis, peptic ulcer disease, H pylori treatment) or uncertain effectiveness (eg, cough), there were no trials that compared a deprescribing approach with continuous PPI use. In addition, the optimal approach to deprescribing PPIs has not been evaluated (eg, tapering before stopping). Direct comparison of different deprescribing approaches (to one another and to continuous PPI use, as well as various tapering approaches and stepping down to H2RA therapy) would be helpful to determine if there is a best approach. Trials examining the outcomes of deprescribing for the frail elderly or those with other conditions (aside from GERD or esophagitis) would help clinicians weigh the harms and benefits of deprescribing in patients who might also be at higher risk of adverse effects of continued PPI treatment. Studies employed different definitions of symptom relapse and patient satisfaction; consistency would be helpful to improve the quality of the body of evidence and should include patients’ perspectives in terms of what is meaningful to them. Attention to both the positive (such as resolution of side effects caused by the PPI) and negative (such as recurrence of upper GI symptoms) patient-specific effects of PPI deprescribing, particularly over the longer term, would be helpful. Evaluating cost-effectiveness and long-term medical resource use is also important.

Box 5.

Guideline endorsements

This evidence-based clinical practice guideline for deprescribing PPIs has been endorsed by the following groups:

  • Canadian Association of Gastroenterology

  • Canadian Nurses Association

  • College of Family Physicians of Canada

  • Canadian Pharmacists Association

  • Canadian Society of Consultant Pharmacists

  • Ontario Pharmacists Association

  • RxFiles

PPI—proton pump inhibitor.

Next steps

The deprescribing team will provide routine guideline updates as new evidence emerges that might change the recommendations. Prospective evaluation of the effects of adoption of this and other deprescribing guidelines will be part of a research strategy in the future.

Conclusion

Overuse of medication is acknowledged to be a key contributor to polypharmacy, with attendant negative effects on health. Proton pump inhibitors are commonly indicated for short-term use, and the potential for harm is not insignificant. A systematic review identified that PPIs can be safely deprescribed in many patients taking them for the common indications of GERD and mild esophagitis. This evidence-based guideline is the first in a series of guidelines aimed at helping clinicians make decisions about when and how to safely stop medications. Implementation of such guidelines will encourage clinicians to carefully evaluate the ongoing use of medications and potentially reduce the negative effects of polypharmacy.

Acknowledgments

We thank Ms Shannon Gordon, Bibliometrics and Research Impact Librarian, and Mr Zain Hudani, graduate student, from the University of Waterloo in Ontario, for their assistance with the review of harms, and Dr Norah Duggan and Ms Candra Cotton for their clinical review of the guideline and invaluable feedback. We are also grateful to review committee members from the following organizations for their thoughtful comments: the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology, the Canadian Nurses Association, the College of Family Physicians of Canada, the Canadian Pharmacists Association, the Canadian Society of Consultant Pharmacists, the Ontario Pharmacists Association, and RxFiles. We also thank Mr Michael Elten and Mr Cody Black for administrative assistance in preparing the guideline for publication. Funding was provided by the Government of Ontario.

Notes

EDITOR’S KEY POINTS

  • Many patients continue to take proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) beyond the recommended course of treatment, and this has potential for harm and large economic implications.

  • Systematic review of the evidence for PPI deprescribing (reducing dose, discontinuing, switching to “on-demand” dosing) failed to demonstrate important clinical harms in deprescribing PPIs in adults.

  • This guideline recommends deprescribing PPIs in adults who have completed a minimum 4-week course of PPI treatment, resulting in resolution of upper gastrointestinal symptoms.

  • Future PPI deprescribing research should address deprescribing for other PPI indications and in the frail elderly population, optimal tapering regimens or alternate treatments to minimize symptom recurrence, consistent approaches to measuring outcomes, measurement of both positive and adverse drug withdrawal events, long-term harms and benefits, and costs.

Footnotes

  • ↵* Descriptions of contributors’ expertise, roles, and conflicts of interest; the GRADE evidence tables; frequency ratios for the harms associated with proton pump inhibitor use; evidence reviews; a patient handout; and an easy-to-print version of the algorithm are available at www.cfp.ca. Go to the full text of the article online and click on the CFPlus tab.

  • This article is eligible for Mainpro+ certified Self-Learning credits. To earn credits, go to www.cfp.ca and click on the Mainpro+ link.

  • This article has been peer reviewed.

  • La traduction en français de cet article se trouve à www.cfp.ca dans la table des matières du numéro de mai 2017 à la page e253.

  • Contributors

    All authors made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the guideline; the acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data; and drafting the article, revising it critically for important intellectual content, and approving the final version.

  • Competing interests

    Dr Farrell received research funding to develop this guideline; received financial payments from the Institute for Healthcare Improvement and Commonwealth Fund for a deprescribing guidelines summary; and from the Ontario Long Term Care Physicians Association, the Ontario Pharmacists Association, and the Canadian Society of Hospital Pharmacists for speaking engagements. Dr Moayyedi holds a chair partially funded by AstraZeneca and has received financial payments from AstraZeneca for speaking engagements. None of the other authors has any competing interests to declare.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Thompson W,
    2. Farrell B
    . Deprescribing: what is it and what does the evidence tell us? Can J Hosp Pharm 2013;66(3):201-2.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Anthierens S,
    2. Tansens A,
    3. Petrovic M,
    4. Christiaens T
    . Qualitative insights into general practitioners views on polypharmacy. BMC Fam Pract 2010;11:65.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Farrell B,
    2. Tsang C,
    3. Raman-Wilms L,
    4. Irving H,
    5. Conklin J,
    6. Pottie K
    . What are priorities for deprescribing for elderly patients? Capturing the voice of practitioners: a modified Delphi process. PLoS One 2015;10(4):e0122246.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Heidelbaugh JJ,
    2. Goldberg KL,
    3. Inadomi JM
    . Magnitude and economic effect of overuse of antisecretory therapy in the ambulatory care setting. Am J Manag Care 2010;16(9):e228-34.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  5. 5.
    1. Heidelbaugh JJ,
    2. Goldberg KL,
    3. Inadomi JM
    . Overutilization of proton pump inhibitors: a review of cost-effectiveness and risk. Am J Gastroenterol 2009;104(Suppl 10):S27-32. Errata in: Am J Gastroenterol 2009;104(4):1072;Am J Gastroenterol 2009;104(Suppl 2):S39.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Canadian Optimal Medication Prescribing and Utilization Service.
    Evidence for PPI use in gastroesophageal reflux disease, dyspepsia and peptic ulcer disease. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health; 2007.
  7. 7.↵
    Top 100 drugs. Pharm Pract 2013 Mar 4. Available from: www.canadianhealthcarenetwork.ca/pharmacists/magazines/pharmacypractice/february-2013. Accessed 2017 Apr 10.
  8. 8.↵
    1. Katz PO,
    2. Gerson LB,
    3. Vela MF
    . Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Am J Gastroenterol 2013;108(3):308-28. Epub 2013 Feb 19. Erratum in: Am J Gastroenterol 2013;108(10):1672.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.
    1. Jacobson BC,
    2. Ferris TG,
    3. Shea TL,
    4. Mahlis EM,
    5. Lee TH,
    6. Wang TC
    . Who is using chronic acid suppression therapy and why? Am J Gastroenterol 2003;98(1):51-8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Ramakrishnan K,
    2. Salinas RC
    . Peptic ulcer disease. Am Fam Physician 2007;76(7):1005-12.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Nardino RJ,
    2. Vender RJ,
    3. Herbert PN
    . Overuse of acid-suppressive therapy in hospitalized patients. Am J Gastroenterol 2000;95(11):3118-22.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Naunton M,
    2. Peterson GM,
    3. Bleasel MD
    . Overuse of proton pump inhibitors. J Clin Pharm Ther 2008;25(5):333-40.
    OpenUrl
  13. 13.↵
    1. Heidelbaugh JJ,
    2. Kim AH,
    3. Chang R,
    4. Walker PC
    . Overutilization of protonpump inhibitors: what the clinician needs to know. Therap Adv Gastroenterol 2012;5(4):219-32.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Batuwitage BT,
    2. Kingham JG,
    3. Morgan NE,
    4. Bartlett RL
    . Inappropriate prescribing of proton pump inhibitors in primary care. Postgrad Med J 2007;83(975):66-8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    1. Pilotto A,
    2. Franceschi M,
    3. Vitale D,
    4. Zaninelli A,
    5. Di Mario F,
    6. Seripa D,
    7. et al
    . The prevalence of diarrhea and its association with drug use in elderly outpatients: a multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol 2008;103(11):2816-23. Epub 2008 Aug 21.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Lam JR,
    2. Schneider JL,
    3. Zhao W,
    4. Corley DA
    . Proton pump inhibitor and histamine 2 receptor antagonist use and vitamin B12 deficiency. JAMA 2013;310(22):2435-42.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Pillans PI,
    2. Kubler PA,
    3. Radford JM,
    4. Overland V
    . Concordance between use of proton pump inhibitors and prescribing guidelines. Med J Aust 2000;172(1):16-8.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. US Food and Drug Administration
    . FDA drug safety communication: Clostridium difficile–associated diarrhea can be associated with stomach acid drugs known as proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Silver Spring, MD: US Food and Drug Administration; 2013.
  19. 19.↵
    1. Kwok CS,
    2. Yeong JK,
    3. Loke YK
    . Meta-analysis: risk of fractures with acidsuppressing medication. Bone 2011;48(4):768-76. Epub 2010 Dec 23.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Fohl AL,
    2. Regal RE
    . Proton pump inhibitor-associated pneumonia: not a breath of fresh air after all? World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther 2011;2(3):17-26.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Masclee GM,
    2. Sturkenboom MC,
    3. Kuipers EJ
    . A benefit-risk assessment of the use of proton pump inhibitors in the elderly. Drugs Aging 2014;31(4):263-82.
    OpenUrl
  22. 22.↵
    1. Kalisch LM,
    2. Caughey GE,
    3. Roughead EE,
    4. Gilbert AL
    . The prescribing cascade. Aust Prescr 2011;34:162-6.
    OpenUrl
  23. 23.
    1. Reason B,
    2. Terner M,
    3. Moses McKeag A,
    4. Tipper B,
    5. Webster G
    . The impact of polypharmacy on the health of Canadian seniors. Fam Pract 2012;29(4):427-32. Epub 2012 Jan 5.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    1. Hilmer SN,
    2. Gnjidic D
    . The effects of polypharmacy in older adults. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2009;85(1):86-8. Epub 2008 Nov 26.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Canadian Institute for Health Information.
    Prescribed drug spending in Canada, 2013: a focus on public drug programs. North York, ON: Canadian Institute for Health Information; 2015. Available from: https://secure.cihi.ca/free_products/PrescribedDrugSpendinginCanada_2014_EN.pdf. Accessed 2017 Mar 21.
  26. 26.↵
    1. Saraf SS,
    2. Udupi GR,
    3. Hajare SD
    . Los Angeles Classification of esophagitis using image processing techniques. Int J Comput Appl 2012;42(18):45-50.
    OpenUrl
  27. 27.↵
    1. Schünemann HJ,
    2. Wiercioch W,
    3. Etxeandia I,
    4. Falavigna M,
    5. Santesso N,
    6. Mustafa R,
    7. et al
    . Guidelines 2.0: systematic development of a comprehensive checklist for a successful guideline enterprise. CMAJ 2014;186(3):E123-42. Epub 2013 Dec 16.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  28. 28.↵
    1. Farrell B,
    2. Pottie K,
    3. Rojas-Fernandez C,
    4. Bjerre L,
    5. Thompson W,
    6. Welch V
    . Methodology for developing deprescribing guidelines: using evidence and GRADE to guide recommendations for deprescribing. PLoS One 2016;11(8):e0161248.
    OpenUrl
  29. 29.↵
    1. Guyatt G,
    2. Oxman AD,
    3. Akl EA,
    4. Kunz R,
    5. Vist G,
    6. Brozek J,
    7. et al
    . GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64(4):383-94. Epub 2010 Dec 31.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    1. Boghossian TA,
    2. Rashid FJ,
    3. Welch V,
    4. Rojas-Fernandez C,
    5. Moayyedi P,
    6. Pottie K,
    7. et al
    . Deprescribing versus continuation of chronic proton pump inhibitor use in adults (protocol). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015;(11):CD011969.
  31. 31.↵
    1. Boghossian TA,
    2. Rashid FJ,
    3. Thompson W,
    4. Welch V,
    5. Moayyedi P,
    6. Rojas-Fernandez C,
    7. et al
    . Deprescribing versus continuation of chronic proton pump inhibitor use in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;(3):CD011969.
  32. 32.↵
    1. Donnellan C,
    2. Sharma N,
    3. Preston C,
    4. Moayyedi P
    . Medical treatments for the maintenance therapy of reflux oesophagitis and endoscopic negative reflux disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004;(2):CD003245.
  33. 33.↵
    1. Armstrong D,
    2. Marshall JK,
    3. Chiba N,
    4. Enns R,
    5. Fallone CA,
    6. Fass R,
    7. et al
    . Canadian Consensus Conference on the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease in adults—update 2004. Can J Gastroenterol 2005;19(1):15-35.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    1. Moayyedi P,
    2. Delaney BC,
    3. Vakil N,
    4. Forman D,
    5. Talley NJ
    . The efficacy of proton pump inhibitors in non-ulcer dyspepsia: a systematic review and economic analysis. Gastroenterology 2004;127(5):1329-37.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. 35.↵
    1. Malfertheiner P,
    2. Chan FK,
    3. McColl KE
    . Peptic ulcer disease. Lancet 2009;374(9699):1449-61. Epub 2009 Aug 13.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. 36.↵
    1. Lanza FL,
    2. Chan FK,
    3. Quigley EM,
    4. Practice Parameters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology.
    Guidelines for prevention of NSAID-related ulcer complications. Am J Gastroenterol 2009;104(3):728-38. Epub 2009 Feb 24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. 37.↵
    1. Anglin R,
    2. Yuan Y,
    3. Moayyedi P,
    4. Tse F,
    5. Armstrong D,
    6. Leontiadis GI
    . Risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors with or without concurrent nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory use: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol 2014;109(6):811-9. Epub 2014 Apr 29.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. 38.↵
    1. Chey WD,
    2. Wong BC,
    3. Practice Parameters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology.
    American College of Gastroenterology guideline on the management of Helicobacter pylori infection. Am J Gastroenterol 2007;102(8):1808-25. Epub 2007 Jun 29.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. 39.↵
    1. Canadian Optimal Medication Prescribing and Utilization Service.
    Economic models and conclusions for the treatment of dyspepsia; and gastroesophageal reflux disease-related heartburn and the prevention of non-steroidal antiinflammatory drug-induced gastrointestinal complications. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health; 2007.
  40. 40.↵
    1. Bour B,
    2. Staub JL,
    3. Chousterman M,
    4. Labayle D,
    5. Nalet B,
    6. Nouel O,
    7. et al
    . Longterm treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease patients with frequent symptomatic relapses using rabeprazole: on-demand treatment compared with continuous treatment. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2005;21(7):805-12.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  41. 41.
    1. Morgan DG,
    2. O’Mahony MF,
    3. O’Mahony WF,
    4. Roy J,
    5. Camacho F,
    6. Dinniwell J,
    7. et al
    . Maintenance treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease: an evaluation of continuous and on-demand therapy with rabeprazole 20 mg. Can J Gastroenterol 2007;21(12):820-6.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  42. 42.
    1. Janssen W,
    2. Meier E,
    3. Gatz G,
    4. Pfaffenberger B,
    5. Pfivate I
    . Effects of pantoprazole 20 mg in mild gastroesophageal reflux disease: once-daily treatment in the acute phase, and comparison of on-demand versus continuous treatment in the long term. Curr Ther Res Clin Exp 2005;66(4):345-63.
    OpenUrl
  43. 43.
    1. Van der Velden AW,
    2. de Wit NJ,
    3. Quartero AO,
    4. Grobbee DE,
    5. Numans ME
    . Pharmacological dependency in chronic treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Digestion 2010;81(1):43-52. Epub 2009 Dec 22.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  44. 44.
    1. Pilotto A,
    2. Leandro G,
    3. Franceschi M,
    4. Ageing and Acid-Related Disease Study Group.
    Short- and long-term therapy for reflux oesophagitis in the elderly: a multi-centre, placebo-controlled study with pantoprazole. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2003;17(11):1399-406.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. 45.
    1. Robinson M,
    2. Lanza F,
    3. Avner D,
    4. Haber M
    . Effective maintenance treatment of reflux esophagitis with low-dose lansoprazole. A randomized, doubleblind, placebo-controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 1996;124(10):859-67.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  46. 46.
    1. Gough AL,
    2. Long RG,
    3. Cooper BT,
    4. Fosters CS,
    5. Garrett AD,
    6. Langworthy CH
    . Lansoprazole versus ranitidine in the maintenance treatment of reflux oesophagitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1996;10(4):529-39.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  47. 47.
    1. Escourrou J,
    2. Deprez P,
    3. Saggioro A,
    4. Geldof H,
    5. Fischer R,
    6. Maier C
    . Maintenance therapy with pantoprazole 20 mg prevents relapse of reflux oesophagitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1999;13(11):1481-91.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  48. 48.
    1. Plein K,
    2. Hotz J,
    3. Wurzer H,
    4. Fumagalli I,
    5. Lühmann RS,
    6. Schneider A
    . Pantoprazole 20 mg is an effective maintenance therapy for patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2000;12(4):425-32.
    OpenUrl
  49. 49.
    1. Annibale B,
    2. Franceschi M,
    3. Fusillo M,
    4. Beni M,
    5. Cesana B,
    6. Delle Fave G
    . Omeprazole in patients with mild or moderate reflux esophagitis induces lower relapse rates than ranitidine during maintenance treatment. Hepatogastroenterology 1998;45(21):742-51.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  50. 50.↵
    1. Metz DC,
    2. Pilmer BL,
    3. Han C,
    4. Perez MC
    . Withdrawing PPI therapy after healing esophagitis does not worsen symptoms or cause persistent hypergastrinemia: analysis of dexlansoprazole MR clinical trial data. Am J Gastroenterol 2011;106(11):1953-60. Epub 2011 Aug 16.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  51. 51.↵
    1. Lødrup AB,
    2. Reimer C,
    3. Bytzer P
    . Systematic review: symptoms of rebound acid hypersecretion following proton pump inhibitor treatment. Scand J Gastroenterol 2013;48(5):515-22. Epub 2013 Jan 14.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  52. 52.
    1. Niklasson A,
    2. Lindström L,
    3. Simrén M,
    4. Lindberg G,
    5. Björnsson E
    . Dyspeptic symptom development after discontinuation of a proton pump inhibitor: a double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Am J Gastroenterol 2010;105(7):1531-7. Epub 2010 Mar 23.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  53. 53.↵
    1. Reimer C,
    2. Søndergaard B,
    3. Hilsted L,
    4. Bytzer P
    . Proton-pump inhibitor therapy induces acid-related symptoms in healthy volunteers after withdrawal of therapy. Gastroenterology 2009;137(1):80-7, 87.e1. Epub 2009 Apr 10.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  54. 54.↵
    1. Kaltenbach T,
    2. Crockett S,
    3. Gerson LB
    . Are lifestyle measures effective in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease? An evidence-based approach. Arch Intern Med 2006;166(9):965-71.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  55. 55.↵
    1. Raghunath AS,
    2. Hungin AP,
    3. Mason J,
    4. Jackson W
    . Helicobacter pylori eradication in long-term proton pump inhibitor users in primary care: a randomized controlled trial. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2007;25(5):585-92.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  56. 56.↵
    1. Hughes GJ,
    2. Belgeri MT,
    3. Perry HM
    . The impact of pharmacist interventions on the inappropriate use of acid-suppression therapy. Consult Pharm 2011;26(7):485-90.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  57. 57.↵
    1. Bundeff AW,
    2. Zaiken K
    . Impact of clinical pharmacists’ recommendations on a proton pump inhibitor taper protocol in an ambulatory care practice. J Manag Care Pharm 2013;19(4):325-33.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  58. 58.↵
    1. Brouwers MC,
    2. Kho ME,
    3. Browman GP,
    4. Burgers JS,
    5. Cluzeau F,
    6. Feder G,
    7. et al
    . The Global Rating Scale complements the AGREE II in advancing the quality of practice guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 2012;65(5):526-34. Epub 2011 Dec 19.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  59. 59.↵
    Stopping your proton pump inhibitor or “PPI.”. Burlington, VT: Vermont Academic Detailing Program; 2013.
  60. 60.↵
    1. Laine L,
    2. Jensen DM
    . Management of patients with ulcer bleeding. Am J Gastroenterol 2012;107(3):345-60. Epub 2012 Feb 7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
View Abstract
Back to top

In this issue

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Email Article
Citation Tools
Respond to this article
Deprescribing proton pump inhibitors
Barbara Farrell, Kevin Pottie, Wade Thompson, Taline Boghossian, Lisa Pizzola, Farah Joy Rashid, Carlos Rojas-Fernandez, Kate Walsh, Vivian Welch, Paul Moayyedi
Canadian Family Physician May 2017, 63 (5) 354-364;
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo

Jump to section