Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29589066›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2018

Potentially inappropriate medication in the elderly: a systematic review of validated explicit criteria.

Fabiane Raquel Motter, Janaína Soder Fritzen, Sarah Nicole Hilmer, Érika Vieira Paniz, Vera Maria Vieira Paniz

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 135 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
135citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

135 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  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. Trial
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article

75 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

5 authors.

Fabiane Raquel MotterPostgraduate Program in Collective Health, University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos (UNISINOS), Av. Unisinos, 920, Sao Leopoldo, RS, 93022-000, Brazil. fabianemotter@gmail.com.
Janaína Soder FritzenPostgraduate Program in Collective Health, University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos (UNISINOS), Av. Unisinos, 920, Sao Leopoldo, RS, 93022-000, Brazil.
Sarah Nicole HilmerDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Aged Care, Kolling Institute, Royal North Shore Hospital and University of Sydney, Reserve Road, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia.
Érika Vieira PanizFaculty of Medical Sciences, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 2400,4º andar Faculdade de Medicin, Porto Alegre, RS, 90035-003, Brazil.
Vera Maria Vieira PanizPostgraduate Program in Collective Health, University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos (UNISINOS), Av. Unisinos, 920, Sao Leopoldo, RS, 93022-000, Brazil.

Funding

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico 477069/2009-6Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior 88881.134589/2016-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePotentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use causes preventable adverse drug reactions in older patients. Several assessment tools have been published to identify and avoid PIM use. In this systematic literature review, we aim to provide summaries and comparisons of validated PIMs lists published between 1991 and 2017 internationally.

methodsIn accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Statement (PRISMA), we performed a systematic review of articles describing the development and validation of criteria for identification of PIMs among older people published between January 1991 and April 2017. The searches were conducted on PUBMED, AgeLine, Academic Search, Academic Search Premier, and CINAHL. We identified the most common medications/classes described as PIM. We also identified the drug-disease interactions and drug-drug interactions reported among criteria.

resultsFrom 2933 articles screened, 36 met our inclusion criteria. The majority used the Delphi method to validate their criteria. We identified 907 different medications/classes, 536 different drug disease interactions involving 84 diseases/conditions, and 159 drug-drug interactions. Benzodiazepines and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were the medications most commonly reported as potentially inappropriate for older people.

conclusionAlthough approaches aimed at detecting inappropriate prescribing have intensified in recent years, we observed limited overlap between different PIM lists. Additionally, some PIM lists did not provide special considerations of use and alternative therapies to avoid PIMs. These facts may compromise the use of PIM lists in clinical practice. Future PIM lists should integrate information about alternative therapies and special considerations of use in order to help clinicians in the drug prescription.

Indexed as

Inappropriate PrescribingPotentially Inappropriate Medication ListAgedDrug InteractionsHumansAgedDrug-related side effects and adverse reactionsInappropriate prescribingPotentially inappropriate medication list

Identifiers

PMID29589066

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.