ArticleEuropean journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice2021
Exploring instruments used to evaluate potentially inappropriate medication use in hospitalised elderly patients in Kosovo.
Article 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 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence to assist decision-making on pharmacotherapy: A feasibility study.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2024Article
- Potentially inappropriate medications with older people in intensive care and associated factors: a historic cohort study.Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesA number of instruments are used to identify potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) in the elderly. In this study we identify PIMs in elderly patients and aim to compare three different instruments used to assess PIMs.
methodsIn this prospective cohort study, we compared medications of elderly patients against three commonly used instruments: Beers' list, PRISCUS and STOPP/START, at the point of hospital admission and discharge in the nephrology clinic of Kosovo's largest hospital. Readmission risk was evaluated using the LACE Index and correlations with the number of PIMs and PIMs criteria were analysed.
resultsOf 184 patients admitted to the nephrology clinic, 84 met study inclusion criteria. Patients had a median of three drugs at admission and four at discharge. Hospital readmission risk was high with median LACE Index being 11 (63% of patients). A higher number of PIMs was associated at the point of discharge compared with admission for all three tools (Beers' list: 29% vs 38 %, P=0.04; STOPP/STRART: 20% vs 23%, P<0.001; PRISCUS list: 12% vs 21%, P<0.001). The number of drugs at admission predicted the number of PIMs at discharge only when using Beers' criteria (P=0.006). At discharge, each increase in medication was associated with an increase in PIMs based on Beers' [0.134; (P=0.007)] and STOPP/START criteria [0.130; (P=0.005)]. Nitrofurantoin was the main PIM identified with Beers' and PRISCUS list in comparison to proton- pump-inhibitors being the most prevalent agents identified with STOPP/START criteria.
conclusionsThere are differences when using Beers' criteria, STOPP/START criteria and PRISCUS list during identification of PIMs in elderly patients with high readmission risk. These differences should be considered when identifying PIMs in hospital settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.