Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23041733›Full record

ArticleThe Indian journal of medical research2012

Adverse drug reactions & their risk factors among Indian ambulatory elderly patients.

Mandavi, Sanjay D'Cruz, Atul Sachdev, Pramil Tiwari

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Indian journal of medical research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Adverse drug reactions experience in a teaching hospital in Jordan.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2015
    Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Promoting drug safety in elderly--needs a proactive approach.The Indian journal of medical research · 2012
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

MandaviDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education & Research, S.A.S. Nagar, Punjab, India.
Sanjay D'Cruz
Atul Sachdev
Pramil Tiwari
National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER) - Ahmedabad · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND &

objectivesSeveral studies have reported adverse drug events ranging from 5 to 35 per cent in all age group from outpatient setting. However, adverse drug reactions (ADRs) particularly among a large sample of ambulatory elderly patients in India has not been reported. This study has attempted to identify ADRs and assessed their causality, preventability and severity, and also their risk factors in Indian ambulatory elderly patients.

methodsA 2 year long term prospective study included 4005 ambulatory elderly patients (60 yr or above; either sex) at a public teaching hospital. Suspected ADRs were assessed for causality, preventability and severity using Naranjo's probability scale, modified Schumock and Thornton's criteria, and modified Hartwig's criteria, respectively.

resultsOf the total 4005 prescriptions, 406 were identified with ADRs, giving the occurrence of 10 per cent ADRs in elderly. The total number of ADRs was 422 in 406 prescriptions. Type A ADRs accounted for 46 per cent of the total ADRs. Majority of the ADRs (88.6%) were classified as 'probable'. The definitely preventable reactions were 22 per cent. The percentage of moderate reaction was 16 per cent. Only 1.6 per cent ADRs was severe in nature. The most common type of ADR was peripheral oedema. The most commonly offending class of drug was cardiovascular drugs (57.6%). Using logistic regression analysis, the risk factors which contributed to ADRs were age above 80 yr (OR=1.7), prescription of multiple drugs (OR=1.8), longer duration of treatment (OR=2.28) and multiple diagnoses (OR=1.8). INTERPRETATION &

conclusionsIn this study, 10 per cent ambulatory elderly patients were found to have ADRs. This indicates that the elderly patients should be closely monitored for ADRs, to avoid clinically significant harmful consequences. The awareness of risk factors of ADRs would help physicians to identify elderly patients with greater risk of ADRs and, therefore, might benefit from ADRs monitoring and reporting programme.

Indexed as

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsAgedFemaleHumansIndiaLogistic ModelsMaleProspective StudiesRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID23041733
PMCPMC3510886
OpenAlexW2130859944

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.