Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25489239›Full record

SynthesisClinical interventions in aging2014

A systematic review of the prevalence and risk factors for adverse drug reactions in the elderly in the acute care setting.

Tariq M Alhawassi, Ines Krass, Beata V Bajorek, Lisa G Pont

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical interventions in aging, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 164 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
164citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

164 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 242 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

104 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Tariq M AlhawassiFaculty of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia ; College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Ines KrassFaculty of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Beata V BajorekGraduate School of Health - Pharmacy, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia ; Pharmacy Department, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Lisa G PontSydney Nursing School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AUKing Saud University · SARoyal North Shore Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are an important health issue. While prevalence and risk factors associated with ADRs in the general adult population have been well documented, much less is known about ADRs in the elderly population. The aim of this study was to review the published literature to estimate the prevalence of ADRs in the elderly in the acute care setting and identify factors associated with an increased risk of an ADR in the elderly. A systematic review of studies published between 2003 and 2013 was conducted in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, Google Scholar and MEDLINE. Key search terms included: "adverse drug reactions", "adverse effects", "elderly patients and hospital admission", "drug therapy", "drug adverse effects", "drug related", "aged", "older patients", "geriatric", "hospitalization", and "emergency admissions". For inclusion in the review, studies had to focus on ADRs in the elderly and had to include an explicit definition of what was considered an ADR and/or an explicit assessment of causality, and a clear description of the method used for ADR identification, and had to describe factors associated with an increased risk of an ADR. Fourteen hospital-based observational studies exploring ADRs in the elderly in the acute care setting were eligible for inclusion in this review. The mean prevalence of ADRs in the elderly in the studies included in this review was 11.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.1%-16.8%). The median prevalence of ADRs leading to hospitalization was 10.0% (95% CI: 7.2%-12.8%), while the prevalence of ADRs occurring during hospitalization was 11.5% (95% CI: 0%-27.7%). There was wide variation in the overall ADR prevalence, from 5.8% to 46.3%. Female sex, increased comorbid complexity, and increased number of medications were all significantly associated with an increased risk of an ADR. Retrospective studies and those relying on identification by the usual treating team reported lower prevalence rates. From this review, we can conclude that ADRs constitute a significant health issue for the elderly in the acute care setting. While there was wide variation in the prevalence of ADRs in the elderly, based on the findings of this study, at least one in ten elderly patients will experience an ADR leading to or during their hospital stay. Older female patients and those with multiple comorbidities and medications appear to be at the highest risk of an ADR in the acute care setting.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overComorbidityDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleHospitalizationHumansMalePolypharmacyPrevalenceRetrospective StudiesRisk Factorsdrug utilizationhospital

Identifiers

PMID25489239
PMCPMC4257024
OpenAlexW2022123581

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.