65
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      What is polypharmacy? A systematic review of definitions

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Multimorbidity and the associated use of multiple medicines (polypharmacy), is common in the older population. Despite this, there is no consensus definition for polypharmacy. A systematic review was conducted to identify and summarise polypharmacy definitions in existing literature.

          Methods

          The reporting of this systematic review conforms to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE and Cochrane were systematically searched, as well as grey literature, to identify articles which defined the term polypharmacy (without any limits on the types of definitions) and were in English, published between 1st January 2000 and 30th May 2016. Definitions were categorised as i. numerical only (using the number of medications to define polypharmacy), ii. numerical with an associated duration of therapy or healthcare setting (such as during hospital stay) or iii. Descriptive (using a brief description to define polypharmacy).

          Results

          A total of 1156 articles were identified and 110 articles met the inclusion criteria. Articles not only defined polypharmacy but associated terms such as minor and major polypharmacy. As a result, a total of 138 definitions of polypharmacy and associated terms were obtained. There were 111 numerical only definitions (80.4% of all definitions), 15 numerical definitions which incorporated a duration of therapy or healthcare setting (10.9%) and 12 descriptive definitions (8.7%). The most commonly reported definition of polypharmacy was the numerical definition of five or more medications daily ( n = 51, 46.4% of articles), with definitions ranging from two or more to 11 or more medicines. Only 6.4% of articles classified the distinction between appropriate and inappropriate polypharmacy, using descriptive definitions to make this distinction.

          Conclusions

          Polypharmacy definitions were variable. Numerical definitions of polypharmacy did not account for specific comorbidities present and make it difficult to assess safety and appropriateness of therapy in the clinical setting.

          Related collections

          Most cited references113

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Multimorbidity in older adults.

          M Salive (2013)
          Multimorbidity, the coexistence of 2 or more chronic conditions, has become prevalent among older adults as mortality rates have declined and the population has aged. We examined population-based administrative claims data indicating specific health service delivery to nearly 31 million Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries for 15 prevalent chronic conditions. A total of 67% had multimorbidity, which increased with age, from 50% for persons under age 65 years to 62% for those aged 65-74 years and 81.5% for those aged ≥85 years. A systematic review identified 16 other prevalence studies conducted in community samples that included older adults, with median prevalence of 63% and a mode of 67%. Prevalence differences between studies are probably due to methodological biases; no studies were comparable. Key methodological issues arise from elements of the case definition, including type and number of chronic conditions included, ascertainment methods, and source population. Standardized methods for measuring multimorbidity are needed to enable public health surveillance and prevention. Multimorbidity is associated with elevated risk of death, disability, poor functional status, poor quality of life, and adverse drug events. Additional research is needed to develop an understanding of causal pathways and to further develop and test potential clinical and population interventions targeting multimorbidity. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health 2013.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Updating the Beers criteria for potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults: results of a US consensus panel of experts.

            Medication toxic effects and drug-related problems can have profound medical and safety consequences for older adults and economically affect the health care system. The purpose of this initiative was to revise and update the Beers criteria for potentially inappropriate medication use in adults 65 years and older in the United States. This study used a modified Delphi method, a set of procedures and methods for formulating a group judgment for a subject matter in which precise information is lacking. The criteria reviewed covered 2 types of statements: (1) medications or medication classes that should generally be avoided in persons 65 years or older because they are either ineffective or they pose unnecessarily high risk for older persons and a safer alternative is available and (2) medications that should not be used in older persons known to have specific medical conditions. This study identified 48 individual medications or classes of medications to avoid in older adults and their potential concerns and 20 diseases/conditions and medications to be avoided in older adults with these conditions. Of these potentially inappropriate drugs, 66 were considered by the panel to have adverse outcomes of high severity. This study is an important update of previously established criteria that have been widely used and cited. The application of the Beers criteria and other tools for identifying potentially inappropriate medication use will continue to enable providers to plan interventions for decreasing both drug-related costs and overall costs and thus minimize drug-related problems.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Polypharmacy as commonly defined is an indicator of limited value in the assessment of drug-related problems.

              To investigate whether polypharmacy defined as a definite number of drugs is a suitable indicator for describing the risk of occurrence of drug-related problems (DRPs) in a hospital setting. Patients admitted to six internal medicine and two rheumatology departments in five hospitals were consecutively included and followed during the hospital stay, with particular attention to medication and DRPs. Comparisons were made between patients admitted with five or more drugs and with less than five drugs. Clinical pharmacists assessed DRPs by reviewing medical records and by participating in multidisciplinary team discussions. Of a total of 827 patients, 391 (47%) used five or more drugs on admission. Patients admitted with five or more and less than five drugs were prescribed the same number of drugs after admission: 4.1 vs. 3.9 drugs [P = 0.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 0.57, 0.23], respectively. The proportion of drugs used on admission which was associated with DRPs was similar in the patient group admitted with five or more drugs and in those admitted with less than five drugs. The number of DRPs per patient increased approximately linearly with the increase in number of drugs used; one unit increase in number of drugs yielded a 8.6% increase in the number of DRPs (95% CI 1.07, 1.10). The number of DRPs per patient was linearly related to the number of drugs used on admission. To set a strict cut-off to identify polypharmacy and declare that using more than this number of drugs represents a potential risk for occurrence of DRPs, is of limited value when assessing DRPs in a clinical setting.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Nashwa.Masnoon@mymail.unisa.edu.au
                Sepehr.Shakib@sa.gov.au
                Lisa.Kalisch@unisa.edu.au
                Gillian.Caughey@unisa.edu.au
                Journal
                BMC Geriatr
                BMC Geriatr
                BMC Geriatrics
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2318
                10 October 2017
                10 October 2017
                2017
                : 17
                : 230
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0000 8994 5086, GRID grid.1026.5, Quality Use of Medicines and Pharmacy Research Centre, , School of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences, University of South Australia, ; Frome Road, Adelaide, South Australia Australia
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0367 1221, GRID grid.416075.1, Department of Pharmacy, , Royal Adelaide Hospital, ; North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia Australia
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0367 1221, GRID grid.416075.1, Department of Clinical Pharmacology, , Royal Adelaide Hospital, ; North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia Australia
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7304, GRID grid.1010.0, Discipline of Pharmacology, , School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, ; North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia Australia
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7123-9583
                Article
                621
                10.1186/s12877-017-0621-2
                5635569
                29017448
                b8c21443-794a-492f-bad4-8c2eb1afb5fe
                © The Author(s). 2017

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 15 May 2017
                : 2 October 2017
                Funding
                Funded by: Australian Government Funded Research Training Program Scholarship at the University of South Australia
                Award ID: Not applicable
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2017

                Geriatric medicine
                polypharmacy,multimorbidity,comorbidity,inappropriate prescribing,aged,systematic review

                Comments

                Comment on this article