Definitions Of Polypharmacy Research Articles

Prevalence of Perceived Stress Among Polypharmacy Patients: A Cross-sectional Study

Background: The concurrent use of 5 or more medications is the most recognized definition of polypharmacy. Many physical and mental consequences could be associated with polypharmacy, and stress is no exception. The objective of the current study is to investigate the prevalence of perceived stress among polypharmacy individuals and its association with sociodemographic factors. Method: A cross-sectional study was carried out between September and December at 6 major hospitals and several private clinics in Iraq. Study participants were required to have at least 2 chronic diseases and be using 5 or more drugs for at least 90 days, aged 50 years or older. Sociodemographic data and the Perceived Stress Scale 10 (PSS-10) were completed by participants. The Mann-Whitney test was used to compare the median PSS-10 scores for different sociodemographic factors. Results: Among the 235 polypharmacy participants, the median PSS-10 score was 20. Moreover, the median PSS-10 score was significantly higher among female participants, those with an increased number of chronic diseases, the presence of adverse effects, and participants with financial issues related to healthcare (P <0.05). Conclusion: The present findings indicate a moderate perceived stress score among polypharmacy participants, highlighting the need for strategies to alleviate stress alongside personalized medication management.

A Review of Risk Factors for Polypharmacy: Age, Level of Education, and Physician's Attitude.

Polypharmacy, a growing public health and economic concern, is particularly common among the elderly due to the high prevalence of multimorbidity, such as dementia and stroke, which necessitates complex treatment regimens. While commonly understood as taking five or more medications, definitions of polypharmacy are varied and may be misleading in clinical practice. This research examines factors such as a country's expenditure on health and education, age, and clinicians' holistic approaches to compare the prevalence of polypharmacy across different groups. The review included documentary research through PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases and search engines, resulting in seven selected sources. The average year of publication was 2020 (median: 2020; standard deviation: 1.63; range: 2018 to 2023). The level of polypharmacy was found to be significantly dependent on per capita expenditure on education (R2 = -0.79; F(6) = -3.11; p = 0.02) and health (R2 = -0.76; F(6) = -2.88; p = 0.03). Countries with higher spending in these areas had a lower proportion of participants with polypharmacy. Additionally, patients' quality of life (QoL)is closely tied to the amount of medication they consume, highlighting the need for physicians to avoid unnecessary prescriptions. Patientsimpacted by polypharmacy often lack knowledge about their diseases and medications, negatively affecting their QoL and compliance. To develop effective treatment plans and improve clinical practice, doctors should consider these risk factors, prioritize patient education, and utilize innovative technologies to support patients. While polypharmacy is sometimes unavoidable and necessary, this approach could in some cases help mitigate the challenges and risks posed by inappropriate polypharmacy and enhance patients' QoL. Furthermore, policymakers should consider increasing spending on education and healthcare, as this may resolve clinical and economic problems related to the issue.

Polypharmacy as Formal Training and a Model of Practice.

Traditional definitions of polypharmacy may largely not account for the market proliferation of herbal and dietary supplements, cannabis products, or incorporate the new science of pharmacogenomics (PGx). Polypharmacy is encountered by most pharmacists providing patient care in many settings. The "polypharmacist" can assist patients and providers with solving medication-related problems (MRPs) in this new and challenging environment of supplements and cannabis products by utilizing traditional pharmacology and pharmacokinetic principles, including PGx, broadly across many medical disciplines. One may encounter polypharmacy more in the geriatric population, though in an age of supplements and cannabis proliferation, polypharmacy is increasingly being encountered at younger ages. Not only is polypharmacy training at best fragmented in pharmacy curricula, but it may also not account for the above-mentioned products that may use the same metabolic pathways to increase drug interactions and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) regarding prescription medications. Polypharmacy being more formally prioritized in pharmacist training may better prepare pharmacists for commonly encountered polypharmacy and can be a viable model of practice.

Effect modification of polypharmacy on incident frailty by chronic kidney disease in older adults

BackgroundFrailty and polypharmacy are common conditions in older adults, especially in those with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Therefore, we analyzed the association of polypharmacy and incident frailty and the effect modification by CKD in very old adults.MethodsIn non-frail individuals within the Berlin Initiative (cohort) Study, polypharmacy (≥ 5 medications) was assessed according to multiple definitions based on the number of regular and on demand prescription and over the counter drugs, as well as vitamins and supplements. CKD was defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate < 60 mL/min/1.73m2 and/or an albumin-creatinine ratio ≥ 30 mg/g. Incident frailty was assessed at follow-up using Fried criteria. Logistic regression was applied to assess (1) the association of different polypharmacy definitions with incident frailty and (2) effect modification by CKD.ResultsIn this cohort study, out of 757 non-frail participants (mean age 82.9 years, 52% female, 74% CKD), 298 (39%) participants reported polypharmacy. Over the observation period of 2.1 years, 105 became frail. Individuals with polypharmacy had 1.96 adjusted odds (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.20–3.19) of becoming frail compared to participants without polypharmacy. The effect of polypharmacy on incident frailty was modified by CKD on the additive scale (relative excess risk due to interaction: 1.56; 95% CI 0.01–3.12).ConclusionsThis study demonstrates an association of polypharmacy and incident frailty and suggests strong evidence for an effect modification of CKD on polypharmacy and incident frailty. Revision of prescriptions could be a target strategy to prevent frailty occurrence, especially in older adults with CKD.

Definition of Polypharmacy in Heart Failure: A Scoping Review of the Literature.

Patients with heart failure (HF) have a high prevalence of polypharmacy, which can lead to drug interactions, cognitive impairment, and medication non-compliance. However, the definition of polypharmacy in these patients is still inconsistent. The aim of this scoping review was to find the most common definition of polypharmacy in HF patients. We conducted a scoping review searching Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane using terms including polypharmacy, HF and deprescribing, which resulted in 7,949 articles. Articles without a definition of polypharmacy in HF patients and articles which included patients < 18 years of age were excluded; only 59 articles were included. Of the 59 articles, 49% (n = 29) were retrospective, 20% (n = 12) were prospective, 10% (n = 6) were cross-sectional, and 27% (n = 16) were review articles. Twenty percent (n = 12) of the articles focused on HF with reduced ejection fraction, 10% (n = 6) focused on HF with preserved ejection fraction and 69% (n = 41) articles either focused on both diagnoses or did not clarify the specific type of HF. The most common cutoff for polypharmacy in HF was five medications (59%, n = 35). There was no consensus regarding the inclusion or exclusion of over-the-counter medications, supplements, or vitamins. Some newer studies used a cutoff of 10 medications (14%, n = 8), and this may be a more practical and meaningful definition for HF patients.

Drug therapy for arterial hypertension and atrial fibrillation in frail patients : Are there any new insights and recommendations?

The frail and elderly are considered to be at particular risk of suffering an adverse drug reaction. Empirical studies confirm the increased rate of adverse drug reactions. Whether frailty perse impairs drug metabolism or the underlying organ ageing processes and multimorbidity cannot be answered with certainty based on current data. Cardiovascular diseases exhibit aconsiderable interdependence with frailty. For example, there is adisproportionate syndromal interdependence between heart failure and frailty, and the typical ageing processes of the sinus node can be interpreted as heartbeat frailty. Multimorbidity in the elderly often includes acluster of chronic cardiovascular diseases, often leading to the use of several cardiovascular medications as required. More recent definitions of polypharmacy assess the appropriateness of drugs rather than their number. The Fit-fOR-The-Aged (FORTA) list, the PRISCUS 2.0 list and the "Cochrane Library Special Collection on deprescribing", for example, offer apractice-oriented assessment aid. In the treatment of arterial hypertension, the target values for older people have also been set ever lower in recent years. In the case of frail elderly people, on the other hand, the guidelines do not specify astrict blood pressure target corridor; tolerability is the crucial factor here. When initiating antihypertensive therapy in frail individuals, one can consider monotherapy-in adeparture from the standard case of dual combination therapy. The OPTIMISE study showed that discontinuation of one blood pressure medication did not lead to better tolerability of the drug therapy. Current studies come to differing conclusions regarding the risk-benefit assessment of new oral anticoagulants compared to vitaminK antagonists in the anticoagulation of frail elderly people with atrial fibrillation. Shared decision-making, which could improve adherence particularly in older people, is recommended.

Different operational definitions of polypharmacy and their association with the risk of all-cause hospitalization: A conceptual framework using administrative databases

Background: As in all pharmacoepidemiology studies, also in the cardiovascular field it is essential to take into account the clinical complexity of patients, which is very frequently estimated with polypharmacy. We aimed at describing the current heterogeneity of polypharmacy definition, and assessing the association of polypharmacy with clinical outcomes. Methods: Using administrative databases of the local health unit of Bergamo (Lombardy), all subjects aged ≥40 years with at least one reimbursed drug prescription during the year 2017 were identified. We selected from literature relevant operational definitions of polypharmacy. First, we applied World Health Organization (WHO) definition (at least ≥5 different medications, ATC 4th level code). Second, we excluded drug prescriptions associated with short-term treatment. Third, we considered only the prescriptions of drugs with a total annual defined daily doses (DDDs) ≥60. All the approaches were evaluated within one year, one quarter, and one month. A multivariate logistic regression model was performed to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals [95% CI] for the association between polypharmacy and the risk of hospitalization for all-causes. Results: Overall, 431,620 subjects were included in our cohort. The DDD-based definition led to estimates with little variability depending on the time windows (range 20.47%-21.16%), while the WHO definition determined the greatest variability (range 39.98%-31.24%). The DDD-based definition identified an older (mean age [SD], 72.6 [10.9]) and more complex cohort of patients (average number [SD] of previous hospitalizations 1.2 [1.7], average number of dispensed drugs 9.7 [3.5]). A dose-dependent increase in risk was observed as the number of the dispensed drugs increases regardless of definitions. Conclusions: Different definitions of polypharmacy led to different prevalence estimates. All definitions showed a dose-dependent association with hospitalization risk, with the definition based on DDDs being the least heterogeneous. However, only a patient-by-patient approach can determine whether or not polypharmacy is appropriate.

What is Polypharmacy in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease? A Systematic Review

PurposePolypharmacy presents an increasing therapeutic challenge for physicians managing patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, there is a lack of consensus regarding the specific medication count threshold that defines polypharmacy in this population. The objective of this review is to establish a unified definition of polypharmacy in the CKD population by examining the diverse definitions used in previously published studies. MethodsA comprehensive search was conducted in relevant databases (PubMed, SCOPUS, Cochrane, and disease-specific databases) from 2000 to May 2022 to identify studies with polypharmacy threshold definitions in patients with CKD. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were included in this review, and their methodologic quality was assessed. FindingsFollowing the screening of the search results, duplicate records and studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria were removed, resulting in a total of 18 studies included in this review. Among these, 61.1% specified the polypharmacy definition to be a threshold of ≥5 medications. In addition, 22.2% specified a high polypharmacy definition at a threshold of ≥10 medications. However, none of the studies reported on the dichotomy between kidney-related and non-kidney-related polypharmacy. ImplicationsThis review indicates that a numerical threshold of ≥5 medications is commonly used to define polypharmacy in patients with CKD. Nevertheless, it remains uncertain whether a kidney-related polypharmacy definition or a high polypharmacy definition would better identify patients with CKD at risk for polypharmacy-related complications.

Classifying Polypharmacy According to Pharmacotherapeutic and Clinical Risks in Older Adults: A Latent Class Analysis in Quebec, Canada.

The simplistic definition of polypharmacy, often designated as the concomitant use of five medications or more, does not distinguish appropriate from inappropriate polypharmacy. Classifying polypharmacy according to varying levels of health risk would help optimise medication use. We aimed to characterise different types of polypharmacy among older adults and evaluate their association with mortality and institutionalisation. Using healthcare databases from the Quebec Integrated Chronic Disease Surveillance System, we selected a community-based random sample of the population ≥ 66 years old covered by the public drug plan. Categorical indicators used to describe polypharmacy included number of medications, potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), drug-drug interactions, enhanced surveillance medications, complex route of administration medications, anticholinergic cognitive burden (ACB) score and use of blister cards. We used a latent class analysis to subdivide participants into distinct groups of polypharmacy. Their association with 3-year mortality and institutionalisation was assessed with adjusted Cox models. In total, 93,516 individuals were included. A four-class model was selected with groups described as (1) no polypharmacy (46% of our sample), (2) high-medium number of medications, low risk (33%), (3) medium number of medications, PIM use with or without high ACB score (8%) and (4) hyperpolypharmacy, complex use, high risk (13%). Using the class without polypharmacy as the reference, all polypharmacy classes were associated with 3-year mortality and institutionalisation, with the most complex/inappropriate classes denoting the highest risk (hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval]: class 3, 70-year-old point estimate for mortality 1.52 [1.30-1.78] and institutionalisation 1.86 [1.52-2.29]; class 4, 70-year-old point estimate for mortality 2.74 [2.44-3.08] and institutionalisation 3.11 [2.60-3.70]). We distinguished three types of polypharmacy with varying pharmacotherapeutic and clinical appropriateness. Our results highlight the value of looking beyond the number of medications to assess polypharmacy.

Prevalence and Associated Predictors of Inappropriate and Omitted Medications Prescribing in Older Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Cross-Sectional Study.

This study aimed to identify the prevalence and significant predictors of both potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and potentially omitted medications (POMs) events among geriatric patients with advanced cancer using the STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Persons' Prescriptions) and START (Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment) criteria. This retrospective cross-sectional study included patients aged ≥65 years who were diagnosed and treated for advanced stage of cancer. Patients' medical charts were evaluated to identify polypharmacy (≥5 medications) prevalence as well as potential PIMs and POMs incidents and their associated predictors. SPSS software was used to perform the analysis. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to identify factors associated with dependent variables including PIMs use and POMs. Electronic medication charts of 510 patients were evaluated. The average age of the patients was 73.25 years, and 264 (51.8%) patients were males. The average number of medications prescribed per patient was 10.3 (range-2-26). Polypharmacy was present in 85.9% of patients, while excessive polypharmacy prevalence was 52.2%. At least one PIM was encountered in 253 patients (49.6%), while at least one POM was encountered in all patients owing to the omission of pneumococcal vaccines. The most common PIMs were opioid analgesics, followed by benzodiazepines, and hypnotics. Additionally, the most omitted medications, excluding vaccinations, were cardiovascular agents and laxatives in patients on regular opioid analgesics. Polypharmacy and diagnosis with solid cancer compared to hematological cancer were associated with increased odds for PIMs occurrence (ORs = 1.293 (p < 0.001) and 3.022 (p = 0.03), respectively), while coexistence of hypertension diagnosis in cancer patients was associated with increased the odds for POMs events (OR = 2.286 (p = 0.007)). Polypharmacy, PIMs, and POMs were highly prevalent among older cancer patients based on the polypharmacy definition and STOPP/START Criteria.

Evaluating the iatrogenic effects of polypharmacy and drug interactions in HIV-positive patients admitted to the intensive care unit: a single-center retrospective study

Background. Polypharmacy and drug interactions are of particular concern in people living with HIV/AIDS, especially those who receive antiretroviral therapy (ARVs). Polypharmacy and drug-drug interactions (DDIs) can impact the efficacy and toxicity of HIV treatment. ARVs used in HIV treatment are often prone to drug interactions if administered with other non-ARV drugs because many of them are metabolized through the cytochrome P450 system. The pharmacological management of HIV patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) is usually complex and typically involves the administration of several classes of drugs. This patient group may be at higher risk for potential DDIs due to polypharmacy in the ICU. The main objective of this study was to assess the iatrogenic effects of polypharmacy in HIV patients treated in the ICU and to describe the DDI profile between ARVs and other non-ARV medications prescribed in the ICU. Methods and materials. Between 2018 and 2020, we conducted a single-center, retrospective study evaluating the medical records of 59 HIV patients admitted to the ICU for more than 24 hours at the Infectious Disease Clinical Hospital No. 2, Moscow, Russia. We evaluated the impact of polypharmacy on renal, hepatic and haemopoietic function. The Liverpool HIV Drug Interaction database was used to identify DDIs in ART-treated HIV patients. Results. All patients received more than 5 different medications matching the definition of polypharmacy. The average number of concurrent medications prescribed was 156.713 (maximum 40, minimum 6). All drug interactions recorded were between ARVs and antibiotics: 30 cases of potential interactions in 65.5% patients who received ARV. Of such patients, 94% were exposed to at least two potential interactions. Tenofovir (TDF) and the antibiotic vancomycin underlaid the most common potential interaction (49.2%), followed by lopinavir ritonavir (LPV/RTV) and ciprofloxacin (30.3%). A significant difference in average creatinine levels was found in patients with TDF/vancomycin potential interactions (p 0.05). Conclusion. This study demonstrated that potential DDIs frequently occur in ICU patients in line with previous investigations. It is necessary to implement collaborations among clinical pharmacologists and infectious disease/HIV specialists, as well as frequent clinical and laboratory monitoring, aimed at developing effective and actionable strategies that could reduce potential DDIs in HIV patients in the ICU.

Polypharmacy in the Elderly

Polypharmacy is the regular use of multiple medications and is often seen in older adults and individuals with multiple comorbidities. The commonly accepted definition of polypharmacy is the use of five or more medications by any individual. As patients become more multimorbid, the use of medication therapy increases and in turn raises the risk of polypharmacy. Polypharmacy is often associated with adverse outcomes, including increased mortality, falls, drug interactions, drug reactions, increased length of stay in the hospital, and increased readmission to the hospital after discharge. Patients over the age of 65 are often not included or well represented in drug trials, which can make medical decision-making challenging for evaluation of risk versus benefit in this patient population. There are several important factors to take note of when evaluating patients with polypharmacy.

An age-friendly population health dashboard geolocating by clinical and social determinant needs.

An age-friendly population health dashboard geolocating by clinical and social determinant needs.

33843 Atopic dermatitis polypharmacy and out-of-pocket health care expenses in the United States

Background: Atopic dermatitis (AD) out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses are substantial and impact household finances. Prescription polypharmacy and its association with out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses in AD is poorly understood. Objective: To characterize prescription polypharmacy and its association with OOP health care expenses among individuals with AD. Methods: An online survey was administered to National Eczema Association members (N = 113,502). Inclusion criteria (U.S. resident, age ≥18, self-reported or caregiver of individual with AD) was met by 77.3% (1118/1447) of respondents. Results: Polypharmacy (≥5 prescription treatments for AD in the past year) was associated with increased AD severity, poorer control, increased flares, increased healthcare provider visits (HCP), and comorbid asthma, allergic rhinitis, food allergy, and skin infections (P ≤ .01). Polypharmacy was also associated with biologic (dupilumab), oral immunosuppressant (azathioprine, cyclosporine, methotrexate, corticosteroids), oral antimicrobial, and topical calcineurin inhibitor use (P ≤ .0005). Respondents with polypharmacy had increased OOP expenditures across numerous categories including office visit co-pays, prescription medications both covered and not covered by insurance, hospitalization, emergency room visits, mental health services, non-prescription health products such as sleep aids, analgesics, and supplements, and alternative medications (P < .005). Individuals with polypharmacy had elevated yearly OOP expenses (median [range]: $1200 [$0-$200,000]), higher monthly OOP costs, and more harmful household financial impact (P < .0001 for all). Similar results were observed with a less stringent definition of polypharmacy (≥3 prescription treatments). Conclusion: Individuals with AD report considerable polypharmacy, which is associated with increased OOP expenses and significant financial impact. Strategies are needed to reduce polypharmacy, minimize OOP costs, and optimize clinical outcomes.

Polifarmacia

Polypharmacy is a current problem in the field of healthcare. The increase in people's life expectancy, thanks to advances in research and a better quality of life, has made it so the population is characterized by a predominance of elderly individuals with multiple comorbidities that require medical treatment. There is no consensus in the literature for defining what polypharmacy is. Discrepancies are found in both quantitative and qualitative aspects, though the most accepted definition of polypharmacy is based on the use of five or more medications. Polypharmacy leads to various complications for both patients and the healthcare system, in many cases requiring hospitalizations which in large part could have been avoided. Therefore, it is very important to know the main risk factors, make the correct diagnosis, and detect inappropriate prescribing. All these aspects will be described in this article, which will also review the strategies for reducing polypharmacy by means of a prescription review, a medication conciliation, and deprescribing tools.

Polypharmacy in Children and Young People With Life-limiting Conditions From 2000 to 2015: A Repeated Cross-sectional Study in England.

Polypharmacy is often appropriate for children with life-limiting conditions but is associated with an increase in hospitalizations and inappropriate prescribing, and can affect the quality of life of children and their families as they manage complex medication schedules. Despite this, little is known about polypharmacy in this population. To describe the prevalence and patterns of polypharmacy in children with a life-limiting condition in a nationally representative cohort in England. Observational study of children (age 0-19 years) with a life-limiting condition in a national database from 2000 to 2015. Common definitions of polypharmacy were used to determine polypharmacy prevalence in each year based on unique medications and regular medications. Hierarchical regression analyses were used to explore factors associated with polypharmacy. Data on 15,829 individuals were included. Each year 27%-39% of children were prescribed ≥5 unique medications and 8%-12% were prescribed ≥10. Children with a respiratory (OR 7.6, 95%CI 6.4-9.0), neurological (OR 2.8, 95%CI 2.4-3.2), or metabolic (OR 2.2, 95%CI 1.7-2.8) condition were more likely than those with a congenital condition to experience polypharmacy. Increasing age, being diagnosed with a LLC under one year of age, having >1 life-limiting or chronic condition or living in areas of higher deprivation were also associated with higher prevalence of polypharmacy. Children with life-limiting conditions have a high prevalence of polypharmacy and some children are at greater risk than others. More research is needed to understand and address the factors that lead to problematic polypharmacy in this population.

Global prevalence of polypharmacy among the COVID-19 patients: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

BackgroundPolypharmacy has traditionally been defined in various texts as the use of 5 or more chronic drugs, the use of inappropriate drugs, or drugs that are not clinically authorized. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of polypharmacy among the COVID-19 patients, and the side effects, by systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsThis study was performed by systematic review method and in accordance with PRISMA 2020 criteria. The protocol in this work is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021281552). Particular databases and repositories have been searched to identify and select relevant studies. The quality of articles was assessed based on the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale checklist. Heterogeneity of the studies was measured using the I2 test.ResultsThe results of meta-analysis showed that the prevalence of polypharmacy in 14 studies with a sample size of 189,870 patients with COVID-19 is 34.6% (95% CI: 29.6–40). Studies have shown that polypharmacy is associated with side effects, increased morbidity and mortality among patients with COVID-19. The results of meta-regression analysis reported that with increasing age of COVID-19 patients, the prevalence of polypharmacy increases (p < 0.05).DiscussionThe most important strength of this study is the updated search to June 2022 and the use of all databases to increase the accuracy and sensitivity of the study. The most important limitation of this study is the lack of proper definition of polypharmacy in some studies and not mentioning the number of drugs used for patients in these studies.ConclusionPolypharmacy is seen in many patients with COVID-19. Since there is no definitive cure for COVID-19, the multiplicity of drugs used to treat this disease can affect the severity of the disease and its side effects as a result of drug interactions. This highlights the importance of controlling and managing prescription drugs for patients with COVID-19.

What is polypharmacy in people living with HIV/AIDS? A systematic review

Polypharmacy in people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) is a rising morbidity that exacts hefty economic burden on health budgets in addition to other adverse clinical outcomes. Despite recent advances, uncertainty remains around its exact definition in PLWHA. In this systematic review and Meta-analysis, we explored relevant databases (PUBMED, EMBASE, CROI) for studies evaluating polypharmacy in PLWHA from January 2000 to August 2021 to ascertain the exact numerical threshold that defines this morbidity. Two independent reviewers extracted and reviewed relevant variables for analyses. The review included a total of 31 studies involving n = 53,347 participants with a mean age of 49.5 (SD ± 17.0) years. There was a total of 36 definitions, with 93.5% defining polypharmacy as the concomitant use of 5 or more medications. We found significant variation in the numerical definition of polypharmacy, with studies reporting it as “minor” (N = 3); “major” (N = 29); “severe” (N = 2); “excessive” (N = 1); and “higher” (N = 1). Most studies did not incorporate a duration (84%) in their definition and excluded ART medications (67.7%). A plurality of studies in PLWHA have established that polypharmacy in this cohort of patients is the intake of ≥ 5 medications (including both ART and non-ART). To standardize the approach to addressing this rising morbidity, we recommend incorporation of this definition into national and international PLWHA treatment guidelines.

Prevalence and factors associated with polypharmacy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

IntroductionPolypharmacy is commonly associated with adverse health outcomes. There are currently no meta-analyses of the prevalence of polypharmacy or factors associated with polypharmacy. We aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of polypharmacy and factors associated with polypharmacy in a systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched for studies with no restrictions on date. We included observational studies that reported on the prevalence of polypharmacy among individuals over age 19. Two reviewers extracted study characteristics including polypharmacy definitions, study design, setting, geography, and participant demographics. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scales. The main outcome was the prevalence of polypharmacy and factors associated with polypharmacy prevalence. The pooled prevalence estimates of polypharmacy with 95% confidence intervals were determined using random effects meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were undertaken to evaluate factors associated with polypharmacy such as polypharmacy definitions, study setting, study design and geography. Meta-regression was conducted to assess the associations between polypharmacy prevalence and study year.Results106 full-text articles were identified. The pooled estimated prevalence of polypharmacy in the 54 studies reporting on polypharmacy in all medication classes was 37% (95% CI: 31-43%). Differences in polypharmacy prevalence were reported for studies using different numerical thresholds, study setting, and publication year. Sex, study geography, study design and geographical location were not associated with differences in polypharmacy prevalence.DiscussionOur review highlights that polypharmacy is common particularly among older adults and those in inpatient settings. Clinicians should be aware of populations who have an increased likelihood of experiencing polypharmacy and efforts should be made to review the appropriateness of prescribed medications and occurrence of adverse effects potentially associated with polypharmacy.Conclusions and implicationsClinicians should be aware of the common occurrence of polypharmacy and undertake efforts to minimize inappropriate polypharmacy whenever possible.

Polypharmacy in Older Heart Failure Patients: a Multidisciplinary Approach.

We provide a review of considerations when applying principles of optimal pharmacotherapy to older adults with heart failure (HF), an analysis on the pivotal clinical trials focusing on applicability to older adults, and multi-disciplinary strategies to optimize the health of HF patients with polypharmacy. Polypharmacy is very common among patients with HF, due to medications for both HF and non-HF comorbidities. Definitions of polypharmacy were not developed specifically for older adults with HF and may need to be modified in order to meaningfully describe medication burden and promote appropriate medical therapy. This is because clinical practice guidelines for multi-drug HF regimens have unique considerations, given that they improve outcomes and symptoms of HF. Adults older than 65years are well represented in contemporary clinical trials for HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and guideline directed medical therapy (GDMT) for HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). While these trials did not have significant heterogeneity in safety or efficacy across a broad age spectrum, some may have limited representation of adults ≥ 80years old, the sickest older adults, or those with decreased functional status. There is also a lack of data on the safety and efficacy of deprescribing HF medications, and deprescription in otherwise stable patients may lead to clinical destabilization or disease progression. There is therefore innate tension between the well-studied benefits of optimized HF therapy for older adults that must be weighed against the risks of polypharmacy and many unknowns that still exist. Given the strong evidence that optimized HF therapies confer symptomatic and mortality benefits for older adults, it is clear that polypharmacy in this context can be appropriate. A shift in paradigm is therefore needed when evaluating polypharmacy in patients with HF. Instead of assuming all polypharmacy is "good" or "bad," we propose a concerted move, using a multidisciplinary approach, to focus on the "appropriateness" of specific medications, in order to optimize HF medical therapy. Clinicians of all specialties caring for complex older adults with HF must consider goals of care, functional status, and new evidence-based therapies, in order to optimize this polypharmacy for older adults.