Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33355278›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice2021

Prevalence of drug interactions in hospitalised elderly patients: a systematic review.

Luciana Mello de Oliveira, Juliana do Amaral Carneiro Diel, Alessandra Nunes, Tatiane da Silva Dal Pizzol

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Central nervous system medication use around hospitalization.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Luciana Mello de OliveiraPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Epidemiologia, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil oliveiralm@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-2065-2001
Juliana do Amaral Carneiro DielPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Epidemiologia, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Alessandra NunesFaculdade de Farmácia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
Tatiane da Silva Dal PizzolPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Epidemiologia, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe prevalence of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) in hospital settings is variable, and elderly patients are considered a high risk population for DDIs. There are no systematic reviews describing the prevalence of DDIs in hospitalised elderly patients.

objectivesTo assess and summarise the available data on the prevalence of DDIs in hospitalised elderly patients and to describe which drugs, drug classes and drug combinations are most commonly involved in DDIs. DATA SOURCE: A systematic electronic literature search was conducted on Medline/PubMed, Embase, Lilacs, SciElo, Web of Science, Cinahl, Scopus, Cochrane, OpenGrey, Capes Thesis Bank, OasisBR, OpenAire and abstracts from scientific events, without limitation on language or period of publication. Study selection was completed on 21 September 2018. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS AND

interventionsOriginal observational studies that reported the prevalence of actual or potential DDIs during hospitalisation in patients aged 60 years or older were included. The main outcome measure was prevalence of DDIs and number of DDIs per patient. Subgroup analysis was performed in studies that reported the prevalence of DDIs in geriatric units. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS

methodsStudy quality was assessed using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality methodological checklist for cross sectional and prevalence studies.

results34 studies were included, involving 9577 patients. The prevalence of DDIs ranged from 8.34% to 100%. In studies conducted in geriatric units, the prevalence ranged from 80.5% to 90.5%. The number of DDIs per patient ranged from 1.2 to 30.6. Single drugs most commonly involved in DDIs were furosemide, captopril, warfarin and dipyrone. Drug classes mostly involved were potassium sparing diuretics and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors. LIMITATIONS: The main limitation is the heterogeneity between the included studies that precluded a meta-analysis. Several different methods were used to identify DDIs, majorly, and potential DDIs. Few studies have reported measures to control the quality of the collected data. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY

findingsThe prevalence of DDIs ranged widely, and the variation may reflect differences in the conditions of the elderly patients and level of attention (or complexity of care), as well as methodological differences, especially the methods and/or software used to identify DDIs. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018096720.

Indexed as

HospitalizationAgedCross-Sectional StudiesDrug InteractionsHumansMiddle AgedPrevalenceUnited Statesdrug administration (others)geriatric medicineinformation managementpharmacologysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID33355278
PMCPMC7788180
OpenAlexW3005886101

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.