Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33269485›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2021

Trends in polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) in older and middle-aged people treated for diabetes.

Monika Pury Oktora, Sofa Dewi Alfian, H Jens Bos, Catharina Carolina Maria Schuiling-Veninga, Katja Taxis, Eelko Hak, Petra Denig

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Monika Pury OktoraDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG), Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3116-787X
Sofa Dewi AlfianGroningen Research Institute of Pharmacy, Unit of PharmacoTherapy, -Epidemiology and -Economics, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
H Jens BosGroningen Research Institute of Pharmacy, Unit of PharmacoTherapy, -Epidemiology and -Economics, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Catharina Carolina Maria Schuiling-VeningaGroningen Research Institute of Pharmacy, Unit of PharmacoTherapy, -Epidemiology and -Economics, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Katja TaxisGroningen Research Institute of Pharmacy, Unit of PharmacoTherapy, -Epidemiology and -Economics, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Eelko HakGroningen Research Institute of Pharmacy, Unit of PharmacoTherapy, -Epidemiology and -Economics, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Petra DenigDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG), Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7929-4739
University of Groningen · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsPolypharmacy is common in people with diabetes and is associated with the use of potentially inappropriate medication (PIM). This study aimed to assess trends in the prevalence of polypharmacy and PIM in older and middle-aged people with diabetes.

methodsA repeated cross-sectional study using the University Groningen IADB.nl prescription database was conducted. All people aged 45 years and over who were treated for diabetes registered in the period 2012-2016 were included. Polypharmacy was assessed for three age groups. PIMs were assessed using Beers criteria for people ≥65 years old, and PRescribing Optimally in Middle-aged People's Treatments (PROMPT) criteria for 45-64 years old. Chi-square tests and regression analysis were applied.

resultsThe prevalence of polypharmacy increased significantly in all age groups in the study period. In 2016, the prevalence of polypharmacy was 36.9% in patients aged 45-54 years, 50.3% in those aged 55-64 years, and 66.2% in those aged ≥65 years. The prevalence of older people with at least one PIM decreased by 3.1%, while in the middle-aged group this prevalence increased by 0.9% from 2012 to 2016. The most common PIMs in both age groups were the use of long-term high-dose proton pump inhibitors, benzodiazepines and strong opioids without laxatives. Of those, only benzodiazepines showed a decreasing trend.

conclusionsPolypharmacy increased in older and middle-aged people with diabetes. While the prevalence of PIM decreased over time in older age, this trend was not observed in middle-aged people with diabetes. Efforts are needed to decrease the use of PIMs in populations already burdened with many drugs, notably at middle age.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusPotentially Inappropriate Medication ListAgedCross-Sectional StudiesHumansInappropriate PrescribingMiddle AgedPolypharmacyPrevalencediabetespolypharmacypotentially inappropriate medication (PIM)prevalence

Identifiers

PMID33269485
PMCPMC8359203
OpenAlexW3106573920

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.