ArticleBMC geriatrics2023
Assessment of potentially inappropriate medication use among geriatric outpatients in the Slovak Republic.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing potentially inappropriate medication use among older adults in Central and Eastern Europe.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Identification of the Potential Pharmacotherapeutic Risk in Hospitalized Geriatric Patients.Cureus · 2025Article
- Study protocol for identification of patients with risk of cognitive impairment in advanced pharmaceutical care in a community pharmacy.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPotentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use is a highly prevalent problem among older people, making it challenging to improve patient safety. The aim of this study was to assess the use of PIMs among geriatric outpatients (OUTs) in the Slovak Republic according to the EU(7) PIM list and to identify the differences in PIM prescriptions among general practitioners (GPs), internists (INTs) and geriatricians (GERs).
methodsIn total, 449 patients (65 years and older) from 4 medical centres who were in the care of GPs (32.5%), INTs (22.7%) or GERs (44.8%) were included in this retrospective analysis. Data were collected from 1.12.2019-31.3.2020. PIMs were identified according to the EU(7) PIM list from patients' records. PIM prescriptions by GPs, INTs and GERs were assessed. All obtained data were statistically analysed.
resultsPolypharmacy (68.8% of patients), and PIM use (73% of patients) were observed. The mean number of all prescribed drugs was 6.7 ± 0.2 drugs per day/patient. The mean number of prescribed PIMs was 1.7 ± 0.1 PIMs per day/patient. Drugs from Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classes C, N and A accounted for the greatest number of PIMs. Significantly higher numbers of prescribed drugs as well as PIMs were prescribed by GPs than INTs or GERs. There were 4.2 times higher odds of being prescribed PIMs by GPs than by GERs (p < 0.001).
conclusionsPolypharmacy and overprescription of PIMs were identified among geriatric patients in our study. We found a positive relationship between the number of prescribed drugs and PIMs. The lowest odds of being prescribed PIMs were observed among those who were in the care of a geriatrician. The absence of geriatricians and lack of information about PIMs among general practitioners leads to high rates of polypharmacy and overuse of potentially inappropriate medications in geriatric patients in the Slovak Republic.
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.