Defining, identifying and addressing problematic polypharmacy within multimorbidity in primary care: a scoping review.

adverse events chronic disease drug combinations medication adherence primary health care primary prevention

Journal

BMJ open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101552874

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
24 May 2024
Historique:
medline: 28 5 2024
pubmed: 28 5 2024
entrez: 28 5 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Polypharmacy and multimorbidity pose escalating challenges. Despite numerous attempts, interventions have yet to show consistent improvements in health outcomes. A key factor may be varied approaches to targeting patients for intervention. To explore how patients are targeted for intervention by examining the literature with respect to: understanding how polypharmacy is defined; identifying problematic polypharmacy in practice; and addressing problematic polypharmacy through interventions. We performed a scoping review as defined by the Joanna Briggs Institute. The focus was on primary care settings. Medline, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and Cochrane along with ClinicalTrials.gov, Science.gov and WorldCat.org were searched from January 2004 to February 2024. We included all articles that had a focus on problematic polypharmacy in multimorbidity and primary care, incorporating multiple types of evidence, such as reviews, quantitative trials, qualitative studies and policy documents. Articles focussing on a single index disease or not written in English were excluded. We performed a narrative synthesis, comparing themes and findings across the collective evidence to draw contextualised insights and conclusions. In total, 157 articles were included. Case-finding methods often rely on basic medication counts (often five or more) without considering medical history or whether individual medications are clinically appropriate. Other approaches highlight specific drug indicators and interactions as potentially inappropriate prescribing, failing to capture a proportion of patients not fitting criteria. Different potentially inappropriate prescribing criteria also show significant inconsistencies in determining the appropriateness of medications, often neglecting to consider multimorbidity and underprescribing. This may hinder the identification of the precise population requiring intervention. Improved strategies are needed to target patients with polypharmacy, which should consider patient perspectives, individual factors and clinical appropriateness. The development of a cross-cutting measure of problematic polypharmacy that consistently incorporates adjustment for multimorbidity may be a valuable next step to address frequent confounding.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38803265
pii: bmjopen-2023-081698
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-081698
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e081698

Informations de copyright

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Competing interests: DA reports research funding from Abbvie, Almirall, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Novartis, UCB and the Leo Foundation outside the submitted work. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Auteurs

Jung Yin Tsang (JY)

Centre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester Division of Population Health Health Services Research and Primary Care, Manchester, UK jungyin.tsang@manchester.ac.uk.
NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Research Collaboration (GMPSRC), Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre (MAHSC), The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Matthew Sperrin (M)

NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Research Collaboration (GMPSRC), Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre (MAHSC), The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Division of Informatics, Imaging and Data Sciences, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Thomas Blakeman (T)

Centre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester Division of Population Health Health Services Research and Primary Care, Manchester, UK.
NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Research Collaboration (GMPSRC), Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre (MAHSC), The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Rupert A Payne (RA)

Department of Health and Community Sciences, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK.

Darren Ashcroft (D)

NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Research Collaboration (GMPSRC), Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre (MAHSC), The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Division of Pharmacy and Optometry, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH