Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38704778›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2024

Prevalence and trends in polypharmacy and excessive polypharmacy: a retrospective national database analysis (2012-2021).

Lorenz Van der Linden, Jos Tournoy

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

2 authors.

Lorenz Van der LindenPharmacy Department, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. lorenz.vanderlinden@uzleuven.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5195-1891
Jos TournoyDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0265-9154

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPolypharmacy is a growing concern, impacting patient safety and healthcare costs. Monitoring its prevalence and temporal trends is essential for effective healthcare management.

aimThis study aimed to determine prevalence and trends of polypharmacy and excessive polypharmacy in Belgium.

methodUtilizing a federal claims database, medication data were analyzed from 2012 to 2021. Polypharmacy (≥ 5 medications) and excessive polypharmacy (≥ 10 medications) were evaluated, with prevalence calculated per 1000 inhabitants, and reported per year, age group and region. Linear regression estimated the impact of age and year on polypharmacy prevalence.

resultsIn 2021, polypharmacy and excessive polypharmacy were reported in 135/1000 and 31/1000 Belgians respectively. Prevalence of both increased steadily from 2012 to 2021, with excessive polypharmacy rising more prominently. Among adults aged ≥ 65 years, prevalence rates were higher, with polypharmacy at 434/1000 and excessive polypharmacy at 106/1000. Regional variations were observed, with prevalence highest in the Walloons region. Patient age and year (2012-2021) were associated with both polypharmacy and excessive polypharmacy (p < 0.001).

conclusionWe observed increases in polypharmacy and excessive polypharmacy over a decade in Belgium, particularly among older adults. Efforts to monitor, manage, and optimize medication use are imperative to ensure safe and effective healthcare delivery.

Indexed as

Databases, FactualPolypharmacyAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsBelgiumChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInfantMaleMiddle AgedPrevalenceAgingBelgiumInsurance claim reportingPolypharmacy

Identifiers

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.