Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33981140›Full record

SynthesisClinical interventions in aging2021

Economic Evaluations of Interventions to Optimize Medication Use in Older Adults with Polypharmacy and Multimorbidity: A Systematic Review.

Maude Laberge, Caroline Sirois, Carlotta Lunghi, Myriam Gaudreault, Yumiko Nakamura, Carolann Bolduc, Marie-Laure Laroche

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical interventions in aging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
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

7 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Maude LabergeDepartment of Operations & Decision Systems, Faculty of Administration, Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1274-136X
Caroline SiroisVitam, Centre de recherche en santé durable-Université Laval, Quebec, Canada.
Carlotta LunghiCentre de recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-7636-6285
Myriam GaudreaultFaculty of Administration, Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
Yumiko NakamuraCollege of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Carolann BolducFaculty of Pharmacy, Université Laval, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.
Marie-Laure LarocheCentre de Pharmacovigilance, de Pharmacoépidémiologie et d'information sur les médicaments, Service de Pharmacologie, Toxicologie et Pharmacovigilance, CHU de Limoges, Limoges, France.
Université Laval · CACentre hospitalier de l'Université Laval · CACentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Limoges · FRInstitut National de Santé Publique du Québec · CAUniversité du Québec à Rimouski · CAUniversity of Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo conduct a systematic review of the economic impact of interventions intended at optimizing medication use in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy.

methodsWe searched Ovid-Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Ageline, Cochrane, and Web of Science, for articles published between 2004 and 2020 that studied older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. The intervention studied had to be aimed at optimizing medication use and present results on costs.

resultsOut of 3,871 studies identified by the search strategy, eleven studies were included. The interventions involved different provider types, with a majority described as a multidisciplinary team involving a pharmacist and a general practitioner, in the decision-making process. Interventions were generally associated with a reduction in medication expenditure. The benefits of the intervention in terms of clinical outcomes remain limited. Five studies were cost-benefit analyses, which had a net benefit that was either null or positive. Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses resulted in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios that were generally within the willingness-to-pay thresholds of the countries in which the studies were conducted. However, the quality of the studies was generally low. Omission of key cost elements of economic evaluations, including intervention cost and payer perspective, limited interpretability.

conclusionInterventions to optimize medication use may provide benefits that outweigh their implementation costs, but the evidence remains limited. There is a need to identify and address barriers to the scaling-up of such interventions, starting with the current incentive structures for pharmacists, physicians, and patients.

Indexed as

PolypharmacyAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansMultiple Chronic ConditionsPatient Care TeamPharmacistscost-benefitcost-effectivenesscost-utilityeconomic evaluationpolypharmacypotentially inappropriate medication

Identifiers

PMID33981140
PMCPMC8108125
OpenAlexW3158438084

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.