Diagnosis and control of polypharmacy in the elderly

The article had the purpose of commenting on studies on polypharmacy in the elderly, focusing on diagnosis and control. Polypharmacy is defined as the use of a number of medications at the same time and the use of additional drugs to correct drug adverse effects. The fact that the elderly take more medications for the treatment of several diseases makes them more susceptible to the occurrence of adverse reactions. Prophylactic actions such as balanced prescriptions are vital to reduce the incidence of these reactions and prevent longer hospital stay, increased costs and aggravation of the elderly health condition.

Swallowing difficulties with oral drugs among polypharmacy patients attending community pharmacies.

Background Swallowing difficulties are common and can affect patients' ability to take solid oral dosage forms, thus compromising medication adherence. Strategies developed by patients to overcome such difficulties while taking medicines have seldom been described. Objective To determine prevalence and characteristics of swallowing difficulties among primary care patients attending their community pharmacies; to explore strategies developed by patients to overcome their difficulties, and health professionals' awareness of these problems. Setting Prospective study with a semi-structured questionnaire in random community pharmacies located in two Swiss regions. Method In each pharmacy, an interviewer asked 16 questions to each consecutive patient (18 years and older) with a prescription for at least 3 different solid oral forms. Main outcome measure Quantification of number of patients with swallowing difficulties and detailed description of difficulties. Results Among 122 pharmacies, 59 (48 %) accepted to join the study and 410 patients were enrolled. Thirty-seven patients (9.0 %) reported ongoing swallowing difficulties, while 55 patients (13.4 %) reported past difficulties. For the majority of patients, difficulties occurred at each single dose (83.7 %), with a single medication (59.8 %) and lasted for less than 12 months (53.8 %). Number of tablets was not the main trigger. Swallowing difficulties impaired extremely daily life in 12 % of the patients. Intentional non adherence (23 % of patients) and altering the oral dose formulation were the most common and potentially harmful strategies used by patients to overcome their swallowing difficulties. According to the patients, pharmacists and physicians rarely inquired about their swallowing difficulties. Conclusion We report a fairly high prevalence of swallowing difficulties in polypharmacy patients attending their community pharmacies. Pharmacists have to interview patients on their swallowing difficulties in a more systematic way, support patients in finding solutions and refer them to their physician if necessary to ensure continuity in care.

Polymédication et personne agée: ni trop ni trop peu [Polypharmacy and the elderly: neither too much nor too little].

Elderly persons are at high risk of polypharmacy. Polypharmacy has been associated with numerous adverse outcomes, such as poorer quality of life, higher morbidity and mortality. However, deciding to stop or to continue a treatment is a difficult task, which confronts the physician to complex clinical and ethical choices. Such a decision requires a geriatric multidimensional assessment of the patient, an estimation of his or her prognosis, the definition of the goals of care and a careful assessment of the time to benefit of each drug. Diverse methods and tools to support the physician in this process are discussed in this article. However these can not replace a reflexive approach of the physician that integrates the values and representations of the patient with regard to his or her health and end of life, as well as his or her needs, fears and choices.

Polypharmacy is Associated with an Increased Risk of Bleeding in Elderly Patients with Venous Thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy, defined as the concomitant use of multiple medications, is very common in the elderly and may trigger drug-drug interactions and increase the risk of falls in patients receiving vitamin K antagonists. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether polypharmacy increases the risk of bleeding in elderly patients who receive vitamin K antagonists for acute venous thromboembolism (VTE). DESIGN: We used a prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: In a multicenter Swiss cohort, we studied 830 patients aged ≥ 65 years with VTE. MAIN MEASURES: We defined polypharmacy as the prescription of more than four different drugs. We assessed the association between polypharmacy and the time to a first major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding, accounting for the competing risk of death. We adjusted for known bleeding risk factors (age, gender, pulmonary embolism, active cancer, arterial hypertension, cardiac disease, cerebrovascular disease, chronic liver and renal disease, diabetes mellitus, history of major bleeding, recent surgery, anemia, thrombocytopenia) and periods of vitamin K antagonist treatment as a time-varying covariate. KEY RESULTS: Overall, 413 (49.8 %) patients had polypharmacy. The mean follow-up duration was 17.8 months. Patients with polypharmacy had a significantly higher incidence of major (9.0 vs. 4.1 events/100 patient-years; incidence rate ratio [IRR] 2.18, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.32-3.68) and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (14.8 vs. 8.0 events/100 patient-years; IRR 1.85, 95 % CI 1.27-2.71) than patients without polypharmacy. After adjustment, polypharmacy was significantly associated with major (sub-hazard ratio [SHR] 1.83, 95 % CI 1.03-3.25) and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (SHR 1.60, 95 % CI 1.06-2.42). CONCLUSIONS: Polypharmacy is associated with an increased risk of both major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding in elderly patients receiving vitamin K antagonists for VTE.

Polypharmacy as predictor of drug cost, length of hospital stay and mortality rate in nursing homes : a retrospective analysis of pharmacy medication records

Background and objectives: Polypharmacy (PP) is a typical con-sequence of multiple chronic conditions in elderly patients. PP is commonly defined as the use of multiple concurrent drug therapies although a standard definition is not used. The aims of this study were to assess the PP rate among nursing home (NH) residents using the data of the pharmacy medication records and to investigate the threshold level of PP as predictor of drug cost, length of hospital stay and mortality rate

Antipsychotic polypharmacy in a regional health service: a population-based study

Background To analyse the extent and profile of outpatient regular dispensation of antipsychotics, both in combination and monotherapy, in the Barcelona Health Region (Spain), focusing on the use of clozapine and long-acting injections (LAI). Methods Antipsychotic drugs dispensed for people older than 18 and processed by the Catalan Health Service during 2007 were retrospectively reviewed. First and second generation antipsychotic drugs (FGA and SGA) from the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification (ATC) code N05A (except lithium) were included. A patient selection algorithm was designed to identify prescriptions regularly dispensed. Variables included were age, gender, antipsychotic type, route of administration and number of packages dispensed. Results A total of 117,811 patients were given any antipsychotic, of whom 71,004 regularly received such drugs. Among the latter, 9,855 (13.9%) corresponded to an antipsychotic combination, 47,386 (66.7%) to monotherapy and 13,763 (19.4%) to unspecified combinations. Of the patients given antipsychotics in association, 58% were men. Olanzapine (37.1%) and oral risperidone (36.4%) were the most common dispensations. Analysis of the patients dispensed two antipsychotics (57.8%) revealed 198 different combinations, the most frequent being the association of FGA and SGA (62.0%). Clozapine was dispensed to 2.3% of patients. Of those who were receiving antipsychotics in combination, 6.6% were given clozapine, being clozapine plus amisulpride the most frequent association (22.8%). A total of 3.800 patients (5.4%) were given LAI antipsychotics, and 2.662 of these (70.1%) were in combination. Risperidone was the most widely used LAI. Conclusions The scant evidence available regarding the efficacy of combining different antipsychotics contrasts with the high number and variety of combinations prescribed to outpatients, as well as with the limited use of clozapine. Background To analyse the extent and profile of outpatient regular dispensation of antipsychotics, both in combination and monotherapy, in the Barcelona Health Region (Spain), focusing on the use of clozapine and long-acting injections (LAI). Methods Antipsychotic drugs dispensed for people older than 18 and processed by the Catalan Health Service during 2007 were retrospectively reviewed. First and second generation antipsychotic drugs (FGA and SGA) from the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification (ATC) code N05A (except lithium) were included. A patient selection algorithm was designed to identify prescriptions regularly dispensed. Variables included were age, gender, antipsychotic type, route of administration and number of packages dispensed. Results A total of 117,811 patients were given any antipsychotic, of whom 71,004 regularly received such drugs. Among the latter, 9,855 (13.9%) corresponded to an antipsychotic combination, 47,386 (66.7%) to monotherapy and 13,763 (19.4%) to unspecified combinations. Of the patients given antipsychotics in association, 58% were men. Olanzapine (37.1%) and oral risperidone (36.4%) were the most common dispensations. Analysis of the patients dispensed two antipsychotics (57.8%) revealed 198 different combinations, the most frequent being the association of FGA and SGA (62.0%). Clozapine was dispensed to 2.3% of patients. Of those who were receiving antipsychotics in combination, 6.6% were given clozapine, being clozapine plus amisulpride the most frequent association (22.8%). A total of 3.800 patients (5.4%) were given LAI antipsychotics, and 2.662 of these (70.1%) were in combination. Risperidone was the most widely used LAI. Conclusions The scant evidence available regarding the efficacy of combining different antipsychotics contrasts with the high number and variety of combinations prescribed to outpatients, as well as with the limited use of clozapine.

Polypharmacy is Associated with an Increased Risk of Bleeding in Elderly Patients with Venous Thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND Polypharmacy, defined as the concomitant use of multiple medications, is very common in the elderly and may trigger drug-drug interactions and increase the risk of falls in patients receiving vitamin K antagonists. OBJECTIVE To examine whether polypharmacy increases the risk of bleeding in elderly patients who receive vitamin K antagonists for acute venous thromboembolism (VTE). DESIGN We used a prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS In a multicenter Swiss cohort, we studied 830 patients aged ≥ 65 years with VTE. MAIN MEASURES We defined polypharmacy as the prescription of more than four different drugs. We assessed the association between polypharmacy and the time to a first major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding, accounting for the competing risk of death. We adjusted for known bleeding risk factors (age, gender, pulmonary embolism, active cancer, arterial hypertension, cardiac disease, cerebrovascular disease, chronic liver and renal disease, diabetes mellitus, history of major bleeding, recent surgery, anemia, thrombocytopenia) and periods of vitamin K antagonist treatment as a time-varying covariate. KEY RESULTS Overall, 413 (49.8 %) patients had polypharmacy. The mean follow-up duration was 17.8 months. Patients with polypharmacy had a significantly higher incidence of major (9.0 vs. 4.1 events/100 patient-years; incidence rate ratio [IRR] 2.18, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.32-3.68) and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (14.8 vs. 8.0 events/100 patient-years; IRR 1.85, 95 % CI 1.27-2.71) than patients without polypharmacy. After adjustment, polypharmacy was significantly associated with major (sub-hazard ratio [SHR] 1.83, 95 % CI 1.03-3.25) and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (SHR 1.60, 95 % CI 1.06-2.42). CONCLUSIONS Polypharmacy is associated with an increased risk of both major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding in elderly patients receiving vitamin K antagonists for VTE.

Polypharmacy and specific comorbidities in university primary care settings.

AIMS Polypharmacy is associated with adverse events and multimorbidity, but data are limited on its association with specific comorbidities in primary care settings. We measured the prevalence of polypharmacy and inappropriate prescribing, and assessed the association of polypharmacy with specific comorbidities. METHODS We did a cross-sectional analysis of 1002 patients aged 50-80years followed in Swiss university primary care settings. We defined polypharmacy as ≥5 long-term prescribed drugs and multimorbidity as ≥2 comorbidities. We used logistic mixed-effects regression to assess the association of polypharmacy with the number of comorbidities, multimorbidity, specific sets of comorbidities, potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) and potential prescribing omission (PPO). We used multilevel mixed-effects Poisson regression to assess the association of the number of drugs with the same parameters. RESULTS Patients (mean age 63.5years, 67.5% ≥2 comorbidities, 37.0% ≥5 drugs) had a mean of 3.9 (range 0-17) drugs. Age, BMI, multimorbidity, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, and cardiovascular diseases were independently associated with polypharmacy. The association was particularly strong for hypertension (OR 8.49, 95%CI 5.25-13.73), multimorbidity (OR 6.14, 95%CI 4.16-9.08), and oldest age (75-80years: OR 4.73, 95%CI 2.46-9.10 vs.50-54years). The prevalence of PPO was 32.2% and PIP was more frequent among participants with polypharmacy (9.3% vs. 3.2%, p<0.006). CONCLUSIONS Polypharmacy is common in university primary care settings, is strongly associated with hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease and cardiovascular diseases, and increases potentially inappropriate prescribing. Multimorbid patients should be included in further trials for developing adapted guidelines and avoiding inappropriate prescribing.

Appropriate Polypharmacy and Medicine Safety: When Many is not Too Many

The use of multiple medicines (polypharmacy) is increasingly common in middle-aged and older populations. Ensuring the correct balance between the prescribing of ‘many’ drugs and ‘too many’ drugs is a significant challenge. Clinicians are tasked with ensuring that patients receive the most appropriate combinations of medications based on the best available evidence, and that medication use is optimised according to patients’ clinical needs (appropriate polypharmacy). Historically, polypharmacy has been viewed negatively because of the associated medication safety risks, such as drug interactions and adverse drug events. More recently, polypharmacy has been identified as a risk factor for under-prescribing, such that patients do not receive necessary medications and this can also pose risks to patients’ safety and well-being. The negative connotations that have long been associated with the term polypharmacy could potentially be acting as a driving factor for under-prescribing, whereby clinicians are reluctant to prescribe necessary medicines for patients who are already receiving ‘many’ medicines. It is now recognised that the prescribing of ‘many’ medicines can be entirely appropriate in patients with several chronic conditions and that the risks of adverse drug events that have been associated with polypharmacy may be greatly reduced when patients’ clinical context is taken into consideration. In this article, we outline the current perspectives on polypharmacy and make the case for adopting the term ‘appropriate polypharmacy’ in differentiating between the prescribing of ‘many’ drugs and ‘too many’ drugs. We also outline the inherent challenges in doing so and provide recommendations for future clinical practice and research.

Pharmaceutical strategies towards optimising polypharmacy in older people

This paper focuses on the issue of polypharmacy in older people and potential pharmaceutical strategies to optimize the use of multiple medicines. Although polypharmacy has long been viewed negatively, increasing emphasis is being placed on the difference between appropriate and inappropriate polypharmacy. This is largely being driven by the increasing prevalence of multimorbidity and the use of evidence-based guidelines. In this paper, we outline a number of key considerations that are pertinent to optimizing polypharmacy, notably prescribing appropriate polypharmacy, pharmaceutical formulations, the involvement of older people in clinical trials and patient adherence.

‘Potentially inappropriate or specifically appropriate?’ Qualitative evaluation of general practitioners views on prescribing, polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people

Background: Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) is common in older people in primary care, as evidenced by a significant body of quantitative research. However, relatively few qualitative studies have investigated the phenomenon of PIP and its underlying processes from the perspective of general practitioners (GPs). The aim of this paper is to explore qualitatively, GP perspectives regarding prescribing and PIP in older primary care patients.

Method: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with GPs participating in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of an intervention to decrease PIP in older patients (≥70 years) in Ireland. Interviews were conducted with GP participants (both intervention and control) from the OPTI-SCRIPT cluster RCT as part of the trial process evaluation between January and July 2013. Interviews were conducted by one interviewer and audio recorded. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and a thematic analysis was conducted.

Results: Seventeen semi-structured interviews were conducted (13 male; 4 female). Three main, inter-related themes emerged (complex prescribing environment, paternalistic doctor-patient relationship, and relevance of PIP concept). Patient complexity (e.g. polypharmacy, multimorbidity), as well as prescriber complexity (e.g. multiple prescribers, poor communication, restricted autonomy) were all identified as factors contributing to a complex prescribing environment where PIP could occur, as was a paternalistic-doctor patient relationship. The concept of PIP was perceived to be of variable usefulness to GPs and the criteria to measure it may be at odds with the complex processes of prescribing for this patient population.

Conclusions: Several inter-related factors contributing to the occurrence of PIP were identified, some of which may be amenable to intervention. Improvement strategies focused on improved management of polypharmacy and multimorbidity, and communication across primary and secondary care could result in substantial improvements in PIP.

Polypharmacy and inappropriate medication use in patients with dementia: an underresearched problem

Multimorbidity and polypharmacy are increasingly prevalent across healthcare systems and settings as global demographic trends shift towards increased proportions of older people in populations. Numerous studies have demonstrated an association between polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP), and have reported high prevalence of PIP across settings of care in Europe and North America and, as a consequence, increased risk of adverse drug reactions, healthcare utilisation, morbidity and mortality. These studies have not focused specifically on people with dementia, despite the high risk of adverse drug reactions and PIP in this patient cohort. This narrative review considers the evidence currently available in the area, including studies examining prevalence of PIP in older people with dementia, how appropriateness of prescribing is assessed, the medications most commonly implicated, the clinical consequences, and research priorities to optimise prescribing for this vulnerable patient group. Although there has been considerable research effort to develop criteria to assess medication appropriateness in older people in recent years, the majority of tools do not focus on people with dementia. Of the limited number of tools available, most focus on the advanced stages of dementia in which life-expectancy is limited. The development of tools to assess medication appropriateness in people with mild-to-moderate dementia or across the full spectrum of disease severity represents an important gap in the research literature and is beginning to attract research interest, with recent studies considering the medication regimen as a whole, or misprescribing, overprescribing or underprescribing of certain medications/medication classes including anticholinergics, psychotropics, antibiotics and analgesics. Further work is required in development and validation of criteria to assess prescribing appropriateness in this vulnerable patient population, to determine prevalence of PIP in large cohorts of people with the full spectrum of dementia variants and severities and to examine the impact of PIP on health outcomes.