Dataset Information

Prevalence and Predictors of Potentially Inappropriate Medication Prescription Among Older Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study in the State of Qatar.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) often lead to sub-optimal or poor health outcomes in older adults.

Objective

The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence and predictors of PIM prescription among older adults in Qatar.

Patients and methods

This was a cross-sectional, retrospective study using data from the electronic medical records of Qatari patients (age ≥ 65 years) attending the 23 primary healthcare (PHC) centers in Qatar from April 1, 2017 to September 30, 2017. PIMs were identified based on the Beers 2015 criteria: (1) medications to avoid for many or most older adults, and (2) medications to be used with caution in older adults. Descriptive statistics were used to estimate the prevalence of PIM prescription; multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of PIM prescription among the study population.

Results

5639 older adults were included with a mean age of 72.8 (± 6.5) years; 53.8% were females. The prevalence of PIMs that should be avoided was 60.7%, with the most prevalent ones being gastrointestinal (84.2%), pain (49.9%), and central nervous system (10.4%) drugs. Most patients (61.1%) were prescribed one PIM, 26.9% two PIMs, and 12.0% three or more PIMs. The prevalence of PIMs that should be used with caution was 40.6%, with diuretics (83.1%), antidepressants (25.7%), and antiplatelets (18.3%) as the most prevalent drug classes. Multivariable logistic regression showed female gender, polypharmacy, and certain comorbidities to be significant predictors of PIM prescription.

Conclusions

Older adults attending Qatar's 23 PHC centers are prescribed a high number of PIMs. Because of the high risk of PIM prescription, the practice of medication reconciliation should be strengthened and reinforced.

SUBMITTER: Al-Dahshan A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7984128 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use in Hong Kong older patients visiting general outpatient clinics (GOPCs) between 2006 and 2014 and to identify factors associated with PIM use among older adults visiting GOPCs in 2014.DesignCross-sectional study.SettingGOPC.ParticipantsTwo study samples were constructed including a total of 844 910 patients aged 65 and above from 2006 to 2014 and a cohort of 489 301 older patients in 2014.MeasurementsTwo subsets of the 2015 American Geriatrics Society Beers criteria-PIMs independent of diagnosis and PIMs due to drug-disease interactions-were used to estimate the prevalence of PIM use over 12 months. PIMs that were not included in the Hospital Authority drug formulary or with any specific restriction or exception in terms of indication, dose or therapy duration were excluded. Characteristics of PIM users and non-PIM users visiting GOPCs in 2014 were compared. Independent associations between patient variables and PIM use were assessed by stepwise multivariable logistic regression analysis.ResultsThe 12-month period prevalence of PIM use decreased from 55.56% (95% CI 55.39% to 55.72%) in 2006 to 47.51% (95% CI 47.37% to 47.65%) in 2014. In the multivariable regression analysis, the strongest factor associated with PIM use was the number of different drugs prescribed (adjusted OR, AOR 23.01, 95% CI 22.36 to 23.67). Being female (AOR 0.89, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.87 for males vs females) and having a greater number of GOPC visits (AOR 1.83, 95% CI 1.78 to 1.88) as well as more than six diagnoses (AOR 1.43, 95% CI 1.36 to 1.52) were associated with PIM use.ConclusionsThe overall prevalence of PIM use in older adults visiting GOPCs decreased from 2006 to 2014 in Hong Kong although the prevalence of PIM use was still high in 2014. Patients with female gender, a larger number of medications prescribed, more frequent visits to GOPCs, and more than six diagnoses were at higher risk for PIM use.

Project description:Background: Older people often receive multiple medications for chronic conditions, which often result in polypharmacy (concomitant use of 5‒9 medicines) and hyperpolypharmacy (concomitant use of ≥10 medicines). A limited number of studies have been performed to evaluate the prevalence of polypharmacy, hyperpolypharmacy, and potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use in older people of developing countries. The present study aimed to investigate regional variations in the prevalence of polypharmacy, hyperpolypharmacy, and PIM use in older people (60 + years) in India. Methods: Studies were identified using Medline/PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases published from inception (2002) to September 31, 2020. Out of the total 1890 articles, 27 were included in the study. Results: Overall, the pooled prevalence of polypharmacy was 49% (95% confidence interval: 42-56; p < 0.01), hyperpolypharmacy was 31% (21-40; p < 0.01), and PIM use was 28% (24-32; p < 0.01) among older Indian adults. Polypharmacy was more prevalent in North-east India (65%, 50-79), whereas hyperpolypharmacy was prevalent in south India (33%, 17-48). Region-wize estimates for the pooled prevalence of PIM use in India were as follows: 23% (21-25) in East, 33% in West (24-42), 17.8% in North (11-23), and 32% (26-38) in South India. The prevalence of PIM use in adults aged ≥70°years was 35% (28-42), in those taking more medications (≥5.5/day) was 27% (22-31), and in adults using a high number of PIMs (≥3) was 29% (22-36). Subgroup analysis showed that cross-sectional studies had a higher pooled prevalence of polypharmacy 55% (44-65) than cohorts 45% (37-54). Hyperpolypharmacy in inpatient care settings was 37% (26-47), whereas PIM use was higher in private hospitals 31% (24-38) than government hospitals 25% (19-31). Conclusion: Polypharmacy and hyperpolypharmacy are widely prevalent in India. About 28% of older Indian adults are affected by PIM use. Thus, appropriate steps are needed to promote rational geriatric prescribing in India. Systematic Review Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov, identifier [CRD42019141037].

Project description:ObjectivesTo estimate and compare the prevalence and type of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs) among community-dwelling older adults (?65 years) enrolled to a clinical trial in three European countries.DesignA secondary analysis of the Thyroid Hormone Replacement for Subclinical Hypothyroidism Trial dataset.ParticipantsA subset of 48/80 PIP and 22/34 PPOs indicators from the Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions/Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right Treatment (STOPP/START) V2 criteria were applied to prescribed medication data for 532/737 trial participants in Ireland, Switzerland and the Netherlands.ResultsThe overall prevalence of PIP was lower in the Irish participants (8.7%) compared with the Swiss (16.7%) and Dutch (12.5%) participants (P=0.15) and was not statistically significant. The overall prevalence of PPOs was approximately one-quarter in the Swiss (25.3%) and Dutch (24%) participants and lower in the Irish (14%) participants (P=0.04) and the difference was statistically significant. The hypnotic Z-drugs were the most frequent PIP in Irish participants, (3.5%, n=4), while it was non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug and oral anticoagulant combination, sulfonylureas with a long duration of action, and benzodiazepines (all 4.3%, n=7) in Swiss, and benzodiazepines (7.1%, n=18) in Dutch participants. The most frequent PPOs in Irish participants were vitamin D and calcium in osteoporosis (3.5%, n=4). In the Swiss and Dutch participants, they were bone antiresorptive/anabolic therapy in osteoporosis (9.9%, n=16, 8.6%, n=22) respectively. The odds of any PIP after adjusting for age, sex, multimorbidity and polypharmacy were (adjusted OR (aOR)) 3.04 (95% CI 1.33 to 6.95, P<0.01) for Swiss participants and aOR 1.74 (95% CI 0.79 to 3.85, P=0.17) for Dutch participants compared with Irish participants. The odds of any PPOs were aOR 2.48 (95% CI 1.27 to 4.85, P<0.01) for Swiss participants and aOR 2.10 (95% CI 1.11 to 3.96, P=0.02) for Dutch participants compared with Irish participants.ConclusionsThis study has estimated and compared the prevalence and type of PIP and PPOs among this cohort of community-dwelling older people. It demonstrated a significant difference in the prevalence of PPOs between the three populations. Further research is urgently needed into the impact of system level factors as this has important implications for patient safety, healthcare provision and economic costs.