Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us

Clinical Medicine Journal

  • ClinMed Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About ClinMed
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
RCP Journals
Home
  • Log in
  • Home
  • Our journals
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Future Healthcare Journal
  • Subject collections
  • About the RCP
  • Contact us
Advanced

Clinical Medicine Journal

clinmedicine Logo
  • ClinMed Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Author guidance
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit online
  • About ClinMed
    • Scope
    • Editorial board
    • Policies
    • Information for reviewers
    • Advertising

A review in general practice: the appropriate prescription of PPIs with those taking aspirin over the age of 70

Mahima Charan
Download PDF
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7861/clinmedicine.19-2-s24
Clin Med March 2019
Mahima Charan
Diabetes and Endocrinology, East, Midlands, Lincoln, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
Loading

Aims

Are we prescribing proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) to all registered patients who are on aspirin and above the age of 70?

Methods

Using population reporting, we looked at patients who were:

  • active patients at our practice,

  • over the age of 70,

  • have aspirin as a repeat medication.

If a patient fulfilled all three criteria, we checked if they were on any PPIs, with a further analysis onto the most common PPIs used.

Results

There were 246 patients who were over the age of 70 and on aspirin as a repeat prescription, and we found that 116 patients were not on any form of PPI. Of those that were (n=130) 88% were on omeprazole, 28% were on lansoprazole and 8% were on ranitidine. We have therefore identified a number of patients who were not receiving any form of gastrointestinal (GI) protection which has significant consequences for our patients’ quality of life.

Conclusion

NICE advises caution in prescribing aspirin for those over the age of 65 due to increased risks of intracranial and GI bleeds, dyspepsia, ulceration and perforation. However, in many patients they are prescribed aspirin for primary and secondary prevention of heart disease, therefore we are advised to use PPIs to reduce this risk. We must improve our staff's awareness, to ensure they check, during routine clinics, if a patient is on aspirin if they are also on PPIs. We have sent these results to all staff to highlight this issue.

As a leading point for this study we can now explore reasons why PPIs were not prescribed and educate our staff as well as prescribe PPIs to offer GI protection. The aim is that this will reduce the rate of peptic ulcers and life-threatening bleeds in our patients.

Conflict of interest statement

This research is important for the Quality and Outcome Frameworks at our practice to ensure we are adequately reducing health risk in patients who are on aspirin among other medications.

  • © Royal College of Physicians 2019. All rights reserved.
Back to top
Previous articleNext article

Article Tools

Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
A review in general practice: the appropriate prescription of PPIs with those taking aspirin over the age of 70
Mahima Charan
Clinical Medicine Mar 2019, 19 (Suppl 2) 24; DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.19-2-s24

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
A review in general practice: the appropriate prescription of PPIs with those taking aspirin over the age of 70
Mahima Charan
Clinical Medicine Mar 2019, 19 (Suppl 2) 24; DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.19-2-s24
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Aims
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Conclusion
    • Conflict of interest statement
  • Info & Metrics

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Rapid access neurology: a 2-year evaluation of ‘hot clinics’ in a tertiary neuroscience centre
  • Comparison of brief clinical delirium and cognitive testing among patients admitted via the trauma and orthopaedic acute intake – a service evaluation on the clinical dependence, efficacy and accessibility of implementing Gwent orientation and awareness listing testing in relation to the 4AT at the Royal Gwent Hospital, Newport
  • Mechanical thrombectomy and the ‘weekend effect’: does admission time influence outcomes?
Show more Clinical

Similar Articles

Navigate this Journal

  • Journal Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive

Related Links

  • ClinMed - Home
  • FHJ - Home
clinmedicine Footer Logo
  • Home
  • Journals
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
HighWire Press, Inc.

Follow Us:

  • Follow HighWire Origins on Twitter
  • Visit HighWire Origins on Facebook

Copyright © 2021 by the Royal College of Physicians