ArticleScientific reports2023
Comparing prevalence and types of potentially inappropriate medications among patient groups in a post-acute and secondary care hospital.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reducing potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) is a challenge in post-acute care hospitals. Some PIMs may be associated with patient characteristics and it may be useful to focus on frequent PIMs. This study aimed to identify characteristic features of PIMs by grouping patients as in everyday clinical practice. A retrospective review of medical records was conducted for 541 patients aged 75 years or older in a Japanese post-acute and secondary care hospital. PIMs on admission were identified using the Screening Tool for Older Person's Appropriate Prescriptions for Japanese. The patients were divided into four groups based on their primary disease and reason for hospitalization: post-acute orthopedics, post-acute neurological disorders, post-acute others, and subacute. Approximately 60.8% of the patients were taking PIMs, with no significant difference among the four patient groups in terms of prevalence of PIMs (p = 0.08). However, characteristic features of PIM types were observed in each patient group. Hypnotics and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were common in the post-acute orthopedics group, multiple antithrombotic agents in the post-acute neurological disorders group, diuretics in the post-acute others group, and hypnotics and diuretics in the subacute group. Grouping patients in clinical practice revealed characteristic features of PIM types in each group.
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.