4.2 Article

Is suboptimal prescribing a risk factor for poor health outcomes in community-dwelling elders? The ICARe Dicomano study

期刊

PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY
卷 19, 期 9, 页码 954-960

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pds.1997

关键词

suboptimal prescribing; health outcomes; elderly

资金

  1. University of Florence

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose Mostly because of comorbidity and drugs consumption, older persons are often exposed to an increased risk of sub-optimal prescribing (SP). At present, few studies investigated the association between SP and long-term health outcomes. We examined the relation between SP and the risk of mortality and hospitalization in Italian older community-dwellers. Methods Older (65+years) community-dwelling residents of a small town in Tuscany were enrolled in a longitudinal study. SP was defined as polypharmacy (use of 5 vertical bar drugs), prescription of inappropriate drugs (ID) according to Beers' criteria, and of potentially interacting drugs (PID), evaluated in 1995 and 1999. These three forms of SP were entered as time-dependent exposures into multivariable Cox regression analysis models, whose outcomes were mortality and hospitalizations through 2003. Results Of 1022 participants (mean age 73.0 +/- 6.8, 57% women), 220 were evaluated in 1995, 234 in 1999 and 568 in both waves. In univariate analysis, mortality was two-fold higher in participants with polypharmacy (73.4/1000 person/years, 95% CI 58.2-92.4 vs. 34.1, 95% CI 29.7-39.2; p< 0.001) or PID (72.7/1000 person/years, 95% CI 46.3-113.9 vs. 38.0, 95% CI 33.5-43.1; p< 0.001), whereas it was unrelated to the presence of ID. Hospitalization rates were independent of any form of SP. In multivariable models, polypharmacy, ID, and PID were no longer associated with an increased risk of death, and ID predicted a slightly increased risk of hospitalizations (HR 1.03, 95% CI 1.0-1.06, p =0.048). Conclusions In this cohort, SP was not associated with an excess risk of poor health outcomes. Copyright (C) 2010 JohnWiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据