Amanda Lavan1, Joseph Eustace1, Darren Dahly2, Evelyn Flanagan3, Paul Gallagher1, Shane Cullinane4, Mirko Petrovic5, Katrina Perehudoff6, Adalsteinn Gudmondsson7, Ólafur Samuelsson7, Ástrós Sverrisdóttir7, Antonio Cherubin8, Frederica Dimitri8, Joe Rimland8, Alfonso Cruz-Jentoft9, Manuel Vélez-Díaz-Pallarés9, Isabel Lozano Montoya10, Roy L Soiza11, Selvarani Subbarayan12, Denis O'Mahony13. 1. Department of Medicine, University College Cork National University of Ireland, Cork, Ireland. 2. Department of Epidemiology, University College Cork National University of Ireland, Cork, Ireland. 3. Health Research Board Clinical Research Facility, Ireland. 4. Department of Pharmacy, University College Cork National University of Ireland, Cork, Ireland. 5. Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Geriatrics, Universiteit Gent, Gent, Belgium. 6. Universiteit Gent, Gent, Belgium. 7. Department of Geriatric Medicine, Landspitali University Hospital, Reykjavik, Iceland. 8. Geriatria ed Accettazione Geriatrica d'urgenza, IRCCS-INRCA, Ancona, Italy. 9. Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal (IRYCIS), Spain. 10. Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain. 11. NHS Grampian, Aberdeen, UK. 12. University of Aberdeen School of Medicine and Dentistry, Aberdeen, UK. 13. Department of Medicine, University College Cork & Department of Geriatric Medicine, Cork University Hospital, Wilton, Cork, Ireland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are common in older adults and frequently have serious clinical and economic consequences. This study was conducted as a feasibility study for a randomized control trial (RCT) that will investigate the efficacy of a software engine to optimize medications and reduce incident (in-hospital) ADRs. This study's objectives were to (i) establish current incident ADR rates across the six sites participating in the forthcoming RCT and (ii) assess whether incident ADRs are predictable. METHODS: This was a multicentre, prospective observational study involving six European hospitals. Adults aged ⩾ 65 years, hospitalized with an acute illness and on pharmacological treatment for three or more conditions were eligible for inclusion. Adverse events (AEs) were captured using a trigger list of 12 common ADRs. An AE was deemed an ADR when its association with an administered drug was adjudicated as being probable/certain, according to the World Health Organization Uppsala Monitoring Centre causality assessment. The proportion of patients experiencing at least one, probable/certain, incident ADR within 14 days of enrolment/discharge was recorded. RESULTS: A total of 644 patients were recruited, evenly split by sex and overwhelmingly of White ethnicity. Over 80% of admissions were medical. The median number of chronic conditions was five (interquartile range 4-6), with eight or more conditions present in approximately 10%. The mean number of prescribed medications was 9.9 (standard deviation 3.8), which correlated strongly with the number of conditions (r = 0.54, p < 0.0001). A total of 732 AEs were recorded in 382 patients, of which 363 were incident. The majority of events were classified as probably or possibly drug related, with heterogeneity across sites (χ2 = 88.567, df = 20, p value < 0.001). Out of 644 patients, 139 (21.6%; 95% confidence interval 18.5-25.0%) experienced an ADR. Serum electrolyte abnormalities were the most common ADR. The ADRROP (ADR Risk in Older People) and GerontoNet ADR risk scales correctly predicted ADR occurrence in 61% and 60% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: This feasibility study established the rates of incident ADRs across the six study sites. The ADR predictive power of ADRROP and GerontoNet ADR risk scales were limited in this population.
BACKGROUND: Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are common in older adults and frequently have serious clinical and economic consequences. This study was conducted as a feasibility study for a randomized control trial (RCT) that will investigate the efficacy of a software engine to optimize medications and reduce incident (in-hospital) ADRs. This study's objectives were to (i) establish current incident ADR rates across the six sites participating in the forthcoming RCT and (ii) assess whether incident ADRs are predictable. METHODS: This was a multicentre, prospective observational study involving six European hospitals. Adults aged ⩾ 65 years, hospitalized with an acute illness and on pharmacological treatment for three or more conditions were eligible for inclusion. Adverse events (AEs) were captured using a trigger list of 12 common ADRs. An AE was deemed an ADR when its association with an administered drug was adjudicated as being probable/certain, according to the World Health Organization Uppsala Monitoring Centre causality assessment. The proportion of patients experiencing at least one, probable/certain, incident ADR within 14 days of enrolment/discharge was recorded. RESULTS: A total of 644 patients were recruited, evenly split by sex and overwhelmingly of White ethnicity. Over 80% of admissions were medical. The median number of chronic conditions was five (interquartile range 4-6), with eight or more conditions present in approximately 10%. The mean number of prescribed medications was 9.9 (standard deviation 3.8), which correlated strongly with the number of conditions (r = 0.54, p < 0.0001). A total of 732 AEs were recorded in 382 patients, of which 363 were incident. The majority of events were classified as probably or possibly drug related, with heterogeneity across sites (χ2 = 88.567, df = 20, p value < 0.001). Out of 644 patients, 139 (21.6%; 95% confidence interval 18.5-25.0%) experienced an ADR. Serum electrolyte abnormalities were the most common ADR. The ADRROP (ADR Risk in Older People) and GerontoNet ADR risk scales correctly predicted ADR occurrence in 61% and 60% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: This feasibility study established the rates of incident ADRs across the six study sites. The ADR predictive power of ADRROP and GerontoNet ADR risk scales were limited in this population.
Authors: Kenneth E Schmader; Joseph T Hanlon; Carl F Pieper; Richard Sloane; Christine M Ruby; Jack Twersky; Susan Dove Francis; Laurence G Branch; Catherine I Lindblad; Margaret Artz; Morris Weinberger; John R Feussner; Harvey Jay Cohen Journal: Am J Med Date: 2004-03-15 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Emma C Davies; Christopher F Green; Stephen Taylor; Paula R Williamson; David R Mottram; Munir Pirmohamed Journal: PLoS One Date: 2009-02-11 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Tadele Mekuriya Yadesa; Freddy Eric Kitutu; Serawit Deyno; Patrick Engeu Ogwang; Robert Tamukong; Paul E Alele Journal: SAGE Open Med Date: 2021-08-18
Authors: Maria Jose Otero; María Dolores Toscano Guzmán; Mercedes Galván-Banqueri; Jesus Martinez-Sotelo; María Dolores Santos-Rubio Journal: Eur J Hosp Pharm Date: 2020-05-08
Authors: L J Seppala; N van der Velde; T Masud; H Blain; M Petrovic; T J van der Cammen; K Szczerbińska; S Hartikainen; R A Kenny; J Ryg; P Eklund; E Topinková; A Mair; L Laflamme; H Thaler; G Bahat; M Gutiérrez-Valencia; M A Caballero-Mora; F Landi; M H Emmelot-Vonk; A Cherubini; J P Baeyens; A Correa-Pérez; A Gudmundsson; A Marengoni; D O'Mahony; N Parekh; F E Pisa; C Rajkumar; M Wehling; G Ziere Journal: Drugs Aging Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 3.923
Authors: Amanda H Lavan; Denis O'Mahony; Paul Gallagher; Richard Fordham; Evelyn Flanagan; Darren Dahly; Stephen Byrne; Mirko Petrovic; Adalsteinn Gudmundsson; Olafur Samuelsson; Antonio Cherubini; Alfonso J Cruz-Jentoft; Roy L Soiza; Joseph A Eustace Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2019-02-13 Impact factor: 3.921