Chien-Han Tsao1, Chin-Feng Tsai2, Yuan-Ti Lee2, Mao-Chung Weng3, Huei-Chao Lee4, Ding-Bang Lin5, Chun-Chieh Chen6, Meng-Chih Lee7, Shiuan-Chih Chen8. 1. Institute of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; School of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; Department of Otolaryngology, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan. 2. School of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; Department of Internal Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan. 3. Institute of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; Department of Family and Community Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan; Department of Family Medicine, Taichung Hospital, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Taichung, Taiwan. 4. Institute of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; School of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; Department of Pharmacy, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan. 5. Institute of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; School of Medical Laboratory and Biotechnology, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan. 6. School of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; Department of Family and Community Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan; Center for Education and Research on Geriatrics and Gerontology, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan. 7. Institute of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; School of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; Center for Education and Research on Geriatrics and Gerontology, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; Department of Family Medicine, Taichung Hospital, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Taichung, Taiwan. 8. Institute of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; School of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; Center for Education and Research on Geriatrics and Gerontology, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; Department of Family and Community Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan. Electronic address: sccy399@yahoo.com.tw.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To compare the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) using the 2012 and 2003 Beers Criteria in frail older patients receiving home health care services (HHS), and to explore the correlates of PIMs based on the 2012 Beers criteria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 145 older patients (mean age, 80.9 ± 7.6 years) with Barthel scale ≤ 60 receiving regular HHS from a university hospital between January 2013 and June 2013 were retrospectively enrolled. The 2003 and 2012 Beers criteria were used separately to detect PIMs. Logistic regressions, receiver-operating-characteristic curve analyses and number needed to harm were used, where appropriate. RESULTS: The 2012 Beers Criteria identified more PIM cases than did the 2003 Beers Criteria (66.9% versus 55.9%, P < 0.05). Multivariate analysis revealed that PIM identified by the 2012 Beers Criteria was associated with an increased number of medications prescribed (P = 0.019) and the presence of psychiatric diseases (P = 0.001). Moreover, the area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve for the number of drugs to predict the risk of PIM was 0.674 (P < 0.001) with the optimal cutoff value of 6 medications. After adjusting for age, sex, Charlson comorbidity index and psychiatric disorders, patients taking ≥6 drugs (adjusted odds ratio, 2.33; adjusted number needed to harm, 3.93; P < 0.05) had a significantly higher risk for PIM than those taking <6 drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed that the 2012 Beers Criteria was more sensitive in detecting PIMs than the 2003 Beers Criteria. Furthermore, frail older patients receiving HHS with polymedication and with psychiatric illnesses had higher risk of PIM when using the 2012 criteria. The number of medications prescribed could be a useful index for risk stratification, and at the same time help physicians to be aware of the high risk for PIM when prescribing 6 or more drugs to frail older adults during in-home visits.
BACKGROUND: To compare the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) using the 2012 and 2003 Beers Criteria in frail older patients receiving home health care services (HHS), and to explore the correlates of PIMs based on the 2012 Beers criteria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 145 older patients (mean age, 80.9 ± 7.6 years) with Barthel scale ≤ 60 receiving regular HHS from a university hospital between January 2013 and June 2013 were retrospectively enrolled. The 2003 and 2012 Beers criteria were used separately to detect PIMs. Logistic regressions, receiver-operating-characteristic curve analyses and number needed to harm were used, where appropriate. RESULTS: The 2012 Beers Criteria identified more PIM cases than did the 2003 Beers Criteria (66.9% versus 55.9%, P < 0.05). Multivariate analysis revealed that PIM identified by the 2012 Beers Criteria was associated with an increased number of medications prescribed (P = 0.019) and the presence of psychiatric diseases (P = 0.001). Moreover, the area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve for the number of drugs to predict the risk of PIM was 0.674 (P < 0.001) with the optimal cutoff value of 6 medications. After adjusting for age, sex, Charlson comorbidity index and psychiatric disorders, patients taking ≥6 drugs (adjusted odds ratio, 2.33; adjusted number needed to harm, 3.93; P < 0.05) had a significantly higher risk for PIM than those taking <6 drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed that the 2012 Beers Criteria was more sensitive in detecting PIMs than the 2003 Beers Criteria. Furthermore, frail older patients receiving HHS with polymedication and with psychiatric illnesses had higher risk of PIM when using the 2012 criteria. The number of medications prescribed could be a useful index for risk stratification, and at the same time help physicians to be aware of the high risk for PIM when prescribing 6 or more drugs to frail older adults during in-home visits.
Authors: Jinjiao Wang; Jenny Y Shen; Fang Yu; Yeates Conwell; Kobi Nathan; Avantika S Shah; Sandra F Simmons; Yue Li; Erika Ramsdale; Thomas V Caprio Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2022-04-28 Impact factor: 7.802