Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33104695›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Potentially inappropriate medication and attitudes of older adults towards deprescribing.

Alexandra B Achterhof, Zsofia Rozsnyai, Emily Reeve, Katharina Tabea Jungo, Carmen Floriani, Rosalinde K E Poortvliet, Nicolas Rodondi, Jacobijn Gussekloo, Sven Streit

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Prevalence and factors associated with potentially inappropriate medications in elderly stroke patients: A comparison of Beers 2019 and 2023 criteria.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

9 authors.

Alexandra B AchterhofInstitute of Primary Health Care Bern (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Zsofia RozsnyaiInstitute of Primary Health Care Bern (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Emily ReeveQuality Use of Medicines and Pharmacy Research Centre, UniSA: Clinical and Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Katharina Tabea JungoInstitute of Primary Health Care Bern (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-1782-1345
Carmen FlorianiInstitute of Primary Health Care Bern (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Rosalinde K E PoortvlietDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Nicolas RodondiInstitute of Primary Health Care Bern (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Jacobijn GusseklooDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Sven StreitInstitute of Primary Health Care Bern (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-3813-4616

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMultimorbidity and polypharmacy are current challenges when caring for the older population. Both have led to an increase of potentially inappropriate medication (PIM), illustrating the need to assess patients' attitudes towards deprescribing. We aimed to assess the prevalence of PIM use and whether this was associated with patient factors and willingness to deprescribe.

methodWe analysed data from the LESS Study, a cross-sectional study on self-reported medication and on barriers and enablers towards the willingness to deprescribe (rPATD questionnaire). The survey was conducted among multimorbid (≥3 chronic conditions) participants ≥70 years with polypharmacy (≥5 long-term medications). A subset of the Beers 2019 criteria was applied for the assessment of medication appropriateness.

resultsData from 300 patients were analysed. The mean age was 79.1 years (SD 5.7). 53% had at least one PIM (men: 47.8%%, women: 60.4%%; p = 0.007). A higher number of medications was associated with PIM use (p = 0.002). We found high willingness to deprescribe in both participants with and without PIM. Willingness to deprescribe was not associated with PIM use (p = 0.25), nor number of PIMs (p = 0.81).

conclusionThe willingness of older adults with polypharmacy towards deprescribing was not associated with PIM use in this study. These results suggest that patients may not be aware if they are taking PIMs. This implies the need for raising patients' awareness about PIMs through education, especially in females, in order to implement deprescribing in daily practice.

Indexed as

DeprescriptionsAgedAged, 80 and overAttitude to HealthComorbidityCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMalePatient Acceptance of Health CarePolypharmacyPotentially Inappropriate Medication ListSelf Report

Identifiers

PMID33104695
PMCPMC7588126

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.