4.7 Article

Polypharmacy among HIV positive older adults on anti-retroviral therapy attending an urban clinic in Uganda

Journal

BMC GERIATRICS
Volume 18, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/s12877-018-0817-0

Keywords

Polypharmacy; HIV; Drug-related side effects and adverse reactions

Funding

  1. Mildmay Uganda

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Polypharmacy has not been investigated in patients living with HIV in developing countries. The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence of polypharmacy, the factors associated with polypharmacy and whether polypharmacy was associated with adverse effects among older adults on anti-retroviral therapy (ART). Methods: Cross-sectional study in older adults aged 50 and over on ART attending an outpatient HIV/AIDS care centre in Uganda. Demographic and clinical data collected on number and type of medications plus supplements, possible medication related side-effects, comorbidity, frailty, cognitive impairment, current CD4 count and viral load. Results: Of 411 participants, 63 (15.3, 95% C.I. 11.9, 18.8) had polypharmacy (>= 4 non-HIV medications). In multivariate analyses, polypharmacy was associated with one or more hospitalisations in the last year (Prevalence Ratio PR = 1.8, 95% C.I. 1.1, 3.1, p = 0.02), prescription by an internist (PR = 3.6, 95% C.I. 1.3, 10.5, p = 0.02) and frailty index scores of 5 to 6 (PR = 10.6, 95% C.I. 1.4, 78, p = 0.02), and 7 or more (PR = 17.4, 95% C. I. 2.4, 126.5, p = 0.005). Polypharmacy was not associated with frequency and severity of possible medication related side effects and falls. Conclusion: Polypharmacy is common among older HIV infected patients in sub-Saharan Africa. It's more prevalent among frail people, who have been in hospital in the last year and who have been seen by an internist. We found no evidence that polypharmacy results in any harm but this is worth exploring further.

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