老年患者用药不当与3个月内再住院和死亡的关系:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析

IF 3.2 4区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Isabella Muzzarelli, Vera Isabel Neumeier, Michael Gagesch, Wiebke Rösler, Andrea Rahel Burch
{"title":"老年患者用药不当与3个月内再住院和死亡的关系:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Isabella Muzzarelli, Vera Isabel Neumeier, Michael Gagesch, Wiebke Rösler, Andrea Rahel Burch","doi":"10.1007/s11096-025-02013-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are medications with an unfavourable risk-benefit profile for patients aged ≥ 65 years. Currently, several screening tools are available and are used in clinical practice to identify PIMs.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>Our objective was to systematically synthesize the available evidence on the association between potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), as identified by various screening tools including STOPP/START and the Beers Criteria, and the outcomes of rehospitalization and mortality within three months in older patients.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Adhering to Cochrane standards, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the outcomes of patients aged 65 years and older, comparing those with at least one PIM identified by any explicit screening tool to those without PIMs. Primary outcomes were readmission and/or death within three months. The databases of Embase, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL were searched for retrospective as well as prospective observational studies published between 1991 and May 17 2024. The risk of bias was assessed for all included studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 1,642 studies were identified through the systematic search. Nine observational studies were included in this review. Our analysis revealed a statistically significant association between the overall presence of PIMs and rehospitalisation; odds ratio (OR) 1.47 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02 to 2.13, p = 0.045]. While stratification according to STOPP/START criteria yielded a statistically significant OR of 1.84 [CI 1.08 to 3.12, p = 0.024; n = 5], no statistically significant difference was seen according to Beers list [OR 1.25, CI 0.86 to 1.81, p = 0.235; n = 5]. Furthermore, no significant association was found between PIMs and mortality in either the overall analysis or the stratification according to the Beers and STOPP/START criteria. The risk of bias in the included studies was moderate to serious, and the certainty of evidence was very low.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of PIM screening tools during medication evaluations may reduce the risk of rehospitalisation and potentially lower mortality in older patients. However, further studies are warranted to confirm the association with adverse outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":13828,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Association of potentially inappropriate medications with rehospitalisation and death within three months in older patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Isabella Muzzarelli, Vera Isabel Neumeier, Michael Gagesch, Wiebke Rösler, Andrea Rahel Burch\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11096-025-02013-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are medications with an unfavourable risk-benefit profile for patients aged ≥ 65 years. Currently, several screening tools are available and are used in clinical practice to identify PIMs.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>Our objective was to systematically synthesize the available evidence on the association between potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), as identified by various screening tools including STOPP/START and the Beers Criteria, and the outcomes of rehospitalization and mortality within three months in older patients.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Adhering to Cochrane standards, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the outcomes of patients aged 65 years and older, comparing those with at least one PIM identified by any explicit screening tool to those without PIMs. Primary outcomes were readmission and/or death within three months. The databases of Embase, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL were searched for retrospective as well as prospective observational studies published between 1991 and May 17 2024. The risk of bias was assessed for all included studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 1,642 studies were identified through the systematic search. Nine observational studies were included in this review. Our analysis revealed a statistically significant association between the overall presence of PIMs and rehospitalisation; odds ratio (OR) 1.47 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02 to 2.13, p = 0.045]. While stratification according to STOPP/START criteria yielded a statistically significant OR of 1.84 [CI 1.08 to 3.12, p = 0.024; n = 5], no statistically significant difference was seen according to Beers list [OR 1.25, CI 0.86 to 1.81, p = 0.235; n = 5]. Furthermore, no significant association was found between PIMs and mortality in either the overall analysis or the stratification according to the Beers and STOPP/START criteria. The risk of bias in the included studies was moderate to serious, and the certainty of evidence was very low.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of PIM screening tools during medication evaluations may reduce the risk of rehospitalisation and potentially lower mortality in older patients. However, further studies are warranted to confirm the association with adverse outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13828,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-025-02013-y\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-025-02013-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

潜在不适当药物(PIMs)是对年龄≥65岁的患者具有不利风险-收益概况的药物。目前,有几种筛查工具可用,并在临床实践中用于识别pim。目的:我们的目标是系统地综合现有证据,通过各种筛查工具(包括STOPP/START和Beers标准)确定潜在不适当药物(PIMs)与老年患者再住院和3个月内死亡率的结果之间的关联。方法:遵循Cochrane标准,我们对65岁及以上的患者进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析,比较了至少有一种PIM的患者和没有PIM的患者的结果。主要结局是3个月内再入院和/或死亡。检索Embase、MEDLINE和CENTRAL数据库,检索1991年至2024年5月17日期间发表的回顾性和前瞻性观察性研究。对所有纳入的研究进行偏倚风险评估。结果:通过系统检索,共确定了1642项研究。本综述纳入了9项观察性研究。我们的分析显示pim的总体存在与再住院之间存在统计学上显著的关联;优势比(OR) 1.47[95%可信区间(CI) 1.02 ~ 2.13, p = 0.045]。而根据STOPP/START标准分层的OR为1.84,具有统计学意义[CI 1.08 ~ 3.12, p = 0.024;n = 5],根据Beers表,差异无统计学意义[OR 1.25, CI 0.86 ~ 1.81, p = 0.235;n = 5]。此外,在总体分析或根据Beers和STOPP/START标准分层中,均未发现pim与死亡率之间存在显著关联。纳入研究的偏倚风险为中度至重度,证据的确定性非常低。结论:在用药评估中使用PIM筛查工具可以降低老年患者再住院的风险,并可能降低死亡率。然而,需要进一步的研究来证实其与不良后果的关联。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Association of potentially inappropriate medications with rehospitalisation and death within three months in older patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Introduction: Potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) are medications with an unfavourable risk-benefit profile for patients aged ≥ 65 years. Currently, several screening tools are available and are used in clinical practice to identify PIMs.

Aim: Our objective was to systematically synthesize the available evidence on the association between potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), as identified by various screening tools including STOPP/START and the Beers Criteria, and the outcomes of rehospitalization and mortality within three months in older patients.

Method: Adhering to Cochrane standards, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the outcomes of patients aged 65 years and older, comparing those with at least one PIM identified by any explicit screening tool to those without PIMs. Primary outcomes were readmission and/or death within three months. The databases of Embase, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL were searched for retrospective as well as prospective observational studies published between 1991 and May 17 2024. The risk of bias was assessed for all included studies.

Results: In total, 1,642 studies were identified through the systematic search. Nine observational studies were included in this review. Our analysis revealed a statistically significant association between the overall presence of PIMs and rehospitalisation; odds ratio (OR) 1.47 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02 to 2.13, p = 0.045]. While stratification according to STOPP/START criteria yielded a statistically significant OR of 1.84 [CI 1.08 to 3.12, p = 0.024; n = 5], no statistically significant difference was seen according to Beers list [OR 1.25, CI 0.86 to 1.81, p = 0.235; n = 5]. Furthermore, no significant association was found between PIMs and mortality in either the overall analysis or the stratification according to the Beers and STOPP/START criteria. The risk of bias in the included studies was moderate to serious, and the certainty of evidence was very low.

Conclusion: The use of PIM screening tools during medication evaluations may reduce the risk of rehospitalisation and potentially lower mortality in older patients. However, further studies are warranted to confirm the association with adverse outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
131
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy (IJCP) offers a platform for articles on research in Clinical Pharmacy, Pharmaceutical Care and related practice-oriented subjects in the pharmaceutical sciences. IJCP is a bi-monthly, international, peer-reviewed journal that publishes original research data, new ideas and discussions on pharmacotherapy and outcome research, clinical pharmacy, pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacoeconomics, the clinical use of medicines, medical devices and laboratory tests, information on medicines and medical devices information, pharmacy services research, medication management, other clinical aspects of pharmacy. IJCP publishes original Research articles, Review articles , Short research reports, Commentaries, book reviews, and Letters to the Editor. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy is affiliated with the European Society of Clinical Pharmacy (ESCP). ESCP promotes practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy, especially in Europe. The general aim of the society is to advance education, practice and research in Clinical Pharmacy . Until 2010 the journal was called Pharmacy World & Science.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信