Medication appropriateness criteria for older adults: a narrative review of criteria and supporting studies.

Abstract

Polypharmacy is common among older adults and is associated with adverse outcomes. Polypharmacy increases the likelihood of receiving a potentially inappropriate medication (PIM). PIMs have traditionally been defined as medications that have either no benefit (e.g. therapeutic duplication) or increased risk (e.g. altered pharmacodynamics/kinetics with aging). A growing literature supports the notion that these represent only a subset of the potential risks of medications prescribed to older adults. Different authors have proposed new sets of criteria for evaluating medication appropriateness. This narrative review had two objectives: 1) to summarize the contents of these criteria in order to obtain preliminary information about where clinical consensus exists regarding appropriateness; 2) The second was to describe studies examining the risks and benefits of medications identified by the criteria to determine the strength of the evidence supporting the derivation of these criteria. We identified 13 articles sharing overlapping criteria for evaluating appropriateness including: (1) delayed time to benefit; (2) altered benefit–harm ratios in the face of competing risks; (3) effects that do not match patients’ goals; and (4) nonadherence. The similarities across the articles suggested strong clinical consensus; however, the articles presented little data directly supporting these criteria. Additional studies provide evidence for the proof of concept that average estimates of benefit and harm derived from randomized controlled trials may differ from the benefits and harms experienced by older persons. However, more data are required to characterize the benefits and harms of medications in the context of the regimen as a whole and the individual’s health status.