Christina Raae Hansen1, Stephen Byrne2, Shane Cullinan3, Denis O'Mahony4,5, Laura J Sahm2,6, Patricia M Kearney7. 1. Pharmaceutical Care Research Group, School of Pharmacy, University College Cork, Cavanagh Pharmacy Building, College Road, Cork, Ireland. christina.raaehansen@ucc.ie. 2. Pharmaceutical Care Research Group, School of Pharmacy, University College Cork, Cavanagh Pharmacy Building, College Road, Cork, Ireland. 3. School of Pharmacy, Royal College of Surgeons of Ireland, 123 St. Stephen's Green, Dublin 2, Ireland. 4. Department of Medicine, University College Cork, Brookfield Health Sciences Complex, College Road, Cork, Ireland. 5. Department of Geriatric Medicine, Cork University Hospital, Wilton, Cork, Ireland. 6. Pharmacy Department, Mercy University Hospital, Greenville Place, Cork, Ireland. 7. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College Cork, Western Gateway Building, Western Road, Cork, Ireland.
Abstract
PURPOSE: It is contentious whether potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is predominantly a phenomenon of late life or whether it has its origins in early old age. This study examined the pattern of PIP in an early old-aged population over 5 years. METHODS: Secondary data analysis of a population-based primary care cohort, of patients aged 60-74 years. Medication data were extracted from electronic patient records in addition to information on comorbidities and demographics. Explicit START criteria (PPOs) and STOPP criteria (PIMs) were used to identify PIP. Generalised estimating equations were used to describe trends in PIP over time and adjusted for age, gender and number of medicines. RESULTS: A total of 978 participants (47.8%) aged 60-74 years were included from the cohort. At baseline, PPOs were detected in 31.2% of patients and PIMs were identified in 35.6% at baseline. Prevalence of PPOs and PIMs increased significantly over time (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.07; 1.09 and OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.0; 1.06, respectively). A higher number of medicines and new diagnoses were associated with the increasing trend in both PPO and PIM prevalence observed over time, independent of PPOs and PIMs triggered by drug combinations. CONCLUSIONS: Potentially inappropriate prescribing is highly prevalent among early old-aged people in primary care and increases as they progress to more advanced old age, suggesting that routine application of STOPP/START criteria in this population would significantly improve medication appropriateness.
PURPOSE: It is contentious whether potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is predominantly a phenomenon of late life or whether it has its origins in early old age. This study examined the pattern of PIP in an early old-aged population over 5 years. METHODS: Secondary data analysis of a population-based primary care cohort, of patients aged 60-74 years. Medication data were extracted from electronic patient records in addition to information on comorbidities and demographics. Explicit START criteria (PPOs) and STOPP criteria (PIMs) were used to identify PIP. Generalised estimating equations were used to describe trends in PIP over time and adjusted for age, gender and number of medicines. RESULTS: A total of 978 participants (47.8%) aged 60-74 years were included from the cohort. At baseline, PPOs were detected in 31.2% of patients and PIMs were identified in 35.6% at baseline. Prevalence of PPOs and PIMs increased significantly over time (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.07; 1.09 and OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.0; 1.06, respectively). A higher number of medicines and new diagnoses were associated with the increasing trend in both PPO and PIM prevalence observed over time, independent of PPOs and PIMs triggered by drug combinations. CONCLUSIONS: Potentially inappropriate prescribing is highly prevalent among early old-aged people in primary care and increases as they progress to more advanced old age, suggesting that routine application of STOPP/START criteria in this population would significantly improve medication appropriateness.
Authors: O Dalleur; B Boland; C Losseau; S Henrard; D Wouters; N Speybroeck; J M Degryse; A Spinewine Journal: Drugs Aging Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 3.923
Authors: Patricia M Kearney; Janas M Harrington; Vera J C Mc Carthy; Anthony P Fitzgerald; Ivan J Perry Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2012-09-14 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Anne Marie O'Flynn; Sheena M McHugh; Jamie M Madden; Janas M Harrington; Ivan J Perry; Patricia M Kearney Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2015-01-05 Impact factor: 2.882
Authors: Janine A Cooper; Cristín Ryan; Susan M Smith; Emma Wallace; Kathleen Bennett; Caitriona Cahir; David Williams; Mary Teeling; Tom Fahey; Carmel M Hughes Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2014-10-30 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Dana Clarissa Muhlack; Liesa Katharina Hoppe; Christian Stock; Walter E Haefeli; Hermann Brenner; Ben Schöttker Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2018-08-29 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Christina R Hansen; Denis O'Mahony; Patricia M Kearney; Laura J Sahm; Shane Cullinan; C J A Huibers; Stefanie Thevelin; Anne W S Rutjes; Wilma Knol; Sven Streit; Stephen Byrne Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2018-09-22 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: N R Samaranayake; A Balasuriya; G H Fernando; D Samaraweera; L G T Shanika; J K P Wanigasuriya; C N Wijekoon; C A Wanigatunge Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2019-10-22 Impact factor: 3.921