4.7 Article

Detection tools for prediction and identification of adverse drug reactions in older patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-17410-w

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Ministry of Research, Technology and Higher Education of Indonesia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There is currently no definitive and validated assessment tool for detecting and predicting adverse drug reactions (ADR) in elderly patients. Further research is needed to refine existing tools or develop new ones.
Tools to accurately predict and detect adverse drug reactions (ADR) in elderly patients have not been developed. We aimed to identify and evaluate reports on tools that predict and detect ADR in elderly patients (>= 60 years). In this review, we followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Databases were searched until January 2022 using key terms elderly, adverse drug reaction, and detection instruments. Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria, and they examined assorted interventions: STOPP/START version 1/2 (n = 10), Beers Criteria 2012 or 2015 (n = 4), Systematic Tool to Reduce Inappropriate Prescribing (STRIP) (n = 2), Tool to Reduce Inappropriate Medications (TRIM) (n = 1), Medication Risk Score (MERIS) (n = 1), Computerized alert systems (n = 1), and Norwegian General Practice-Nursing Home criteria (n = 1). The interventions affected the number of potential prescription omissions (OR, 0.50 [0.37-0.69]; p < 0.0001; four studies). No apparent reduction in the number of drug interactions within 2 months (OR, 0.84 [0.70-1.02]; p = 0.08; two studies) and mortality (OR, 0.92 [0.76-1.12]; p = 0.41; three studies) was observed. In conclusion, there is no definitive and validated assessment tool for detecting and predicting ADR in elderly patients. Thus, more research on refining existing tools or developing new ones is warranted.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available