3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The effect of polypharmacy on healthcare services utilization in older adults with comorbidities: a retrospective cohort study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Older adults are more prone to increasing comorbidities and polypharmacy. Polypharmacy is associated with inappropriate prescribing and an increased risk of adverse effects. This study examined the effect of polypharmacy in older adults on healthcare services utilization (HSU). It also explored the impact of different drug classes of polypharmacy including psychotropic, antihypertensive, and antidiabetic polypharmacy on HSU.

          Methods

          This is a retrospective cohort study. Community-dwelling older adults aged ≥ 65 years were selected from the primary care patient cohort database of the ambulatory clinics of the Department of Family Medicine at the American University of Beirut Medical Center. Concomitant use of 5 or more prescription medications was considered polypharmacy. Demographics, Charlson Comorbidity index (CCI), and HSU outcomes, including the rate of all-cause emergency department (ED) visits, rate of all-cause hospitalization, rate of ED visits for pneumonia, rate of hospitalization for pneumonia, and mortality were collected. Binomial logistic regression models were used to predict the rates of HSU outcomes.

          Results

          A total of 496 patients were analyzed. Comorbidities were present in all patients, with 22.8% (113) of patients having mild to moderate comorbidity and 77.2% (383) of patients having severe comorbidity. Patients with polypharmacy were more likely to have severe comorbidity compared to patients with no polypharmacy (72.3% vs. 27.7%, p = 0.001). Patients with polypharmacy were more likely to visit the ED for all causes as compared to patients without polypharmacy (40.6% vs. 31.4%, p = 0.05), and had a significantly higher rate of all-cause hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio aOR 1.66, 95 CI = 1.08–2.56, p = 0.022). Patients with psychotropic polypharmacy were more likely to be hospitalized due to pneumonia (crude odds ratio cOR 2.37, 95 CI = 1.03–5.46, p = 0.043), and to visit ED for Pneumonia (cOR 2.31, 95 CI = 1.00–5.31, p = 0.049). The association lost significance after adjustment.

          Conclusions

          The increasing prevalence of polypharmacy amongst the geriatric population with comorbidity is associated with an increase in HSU outcomes. As such, frequent medication revisions in a holistic, multi-disciplinary approach are needed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: Development and validation

          The objective of this study was to develop a prospectively applicable method for classifying comorbid conditions which might alter the risk of mortality for use in longitudinal studies. A weighted index that takes into account the number and the seriousness of comorbid disease was developed in a cohort of 559 medical patients. The 1-yr mortality rates for the different scores were: "0", 12% (181); "1-2", 26% (225); "3-4", 52% (71); and "greater than or equal to 5", 85% (82). The index was tested for its ability to predict risk of death from comorbid disease in the second cohort of 685 patients during a 10-yr follow-up. The percent of patients who died of comorbid disease for the different scores were: "0", 8% (588); "1", 25% (54); "2", 48% (25); "greater than or equal to 3", 59% (18). With each increased level of the comorbidity index, there were stepwise increases in the cumulative mortality attributable to comorbid disease (log rank chi 2 = 165; p less than 0.0001). In this longer follow-up, age was also a predictor of mortality (p less than 0.001). The new index performed similarly to a previous system devised by Kaplan and Feinstein. The method of classifying comorbidity provides a simple, readily applicable and valid method of estimating risk of death from comorbid disease for use in longitudinal studies. Further work in larger populations is still required to refine the approach because the number of patients with any given condition in this study was relatively small.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            American Geriatrics Society 2019 Updated AGS Beers Criteria® for Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use in Older Adults

            (2019)
            The American Geriatrics Society (AGS) Beers Criteria® (AGS Beers Criteria®) for Potentially Inappropriate Medication (PIM) Use in Older Adults are widely used by clinicians, educators, researchers, healthcare administrators, and regulators. Since 2011, the AGS has been the steward of the criteria and has produced updates on a 3-year cycle. The AGS Beers Criteria® is an explicit list of PIMs that are typically best avoided by older adults in most circumstances or under specific situations, such as in certain diseases or conditions. For the 2019 update, an interdisciplinary expert panel reviewed the evidence published since the last update (2015) to determine if new criteria should be added or if existing criteria should be removed or undergo changes to their recommendation, rationale, level of evidence, or strength of recommendation. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:674-694, 2019.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              What is polypharmacy? A systematic review of definitions

              Background Multimorbidity and the associated use of multiple medicines (polypharmacy), is common in the older population. Despite this, there is no consensus definition for polypharmacy. A systematic review was conducted to identify and summarise polypharmacy definitions in existing literature. Methods The reporting of this systematic review conforms to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE and Cochrane were systematically searched, as well as grey literature, to identify articles which defined the term polypharmacy (without any limits on the types of definitions) and were in English, published between 1st January 2000 and 30th May 2016. Definitions were categorised as i. numerical only (using the number of medications to define polypharmacy), ii. numerical with an associated duration of therapy or healthcare setting (such as during hospital stay) or iii. Descriptive (using a brief description to define polypharmacy). Results A total of 1156 articles were identified and 110 articles met the inclusion criteria. Articles not only defined polypharmacy but associated terms such as minor and major polypharmacy. As a result, a total of 138 definitions of polypharmacy and associated terms were obtained. There were 111 numerical only definitions (80.4% of all definitions), 15 numerical definitions which incorporated a duration of therapy or healthcare setting (10.9%) and 12 descriptive definitions (8.7%). The most commonly reported definition of polypharmacy was the numerical definition of five or more medications daily (n = 51, 46.4% of articles), with definitions ranging from two or more to 11 or more medicines. Only 6.4% of articles classified the distinction between appropriate and inappropriate polypharmacy, using descriptive definitions to make this distinction. Conclusions Polypharmacy definitions were variable. Numerical definitions of polypharmacy did not account for specific comorbidities present and make it difficult to assess safety and appropriateness of therapy in the clinical setting.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                ga62@aub.edu.lb
                Journal
                BMC Prim Care
                BMC Prim Care
                BMC Primary Care
                BioMed Central (London )
                2731-4553
                26 May 2023
                26 May 2023
                2023
                : 24
                : 120
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.411654.3, ISNI 0000 0004 0581 3406, Faculty of Medicine, , American University of Beirut Medical Center, ; Beirut, Lebanon
                [2 ]GRID grid.22903.3a, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 9801, Department of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, , American University of Beirut, ; Beirut, Lebanon
                [3 ]GRID grid.22903.3a, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 9801, Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, , American University of Beirut, ; Beirut, Lebanon
                [4 ]GRID grid.185648.6, ISNI 0000 0001 2175 0319, Division of Academic Internal Medicine & Geriatrics, , The University of Illinois at Chicago, ; Chicago, USA
                Article
                2070
                10.1186/s12875-023-02070-0
                10214698
                37237338
                56da5577-4e9b-4790-a515-de463154f5e5
                © The Author(s) 2023

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 30 November 2022
                : 17 May 2023
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2023

                aged,polypharmacy,outcome assessment, health care
                aged, polypharmacy, outcome assessment, health care

                Comments

                Comment on this article