Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36972012›Full record

SynthesisDrugs & aging2023

The Relationship of Continuity of Care, Polypharmacy and Medication Appropriateness: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies.

David Lampe, John Grosser, Daniel Gensorowsky, Julian Witte, Christiane Muth, Marjan van den Akker, Truc Sophia Dinh, Wolfgang Greiner

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Drugs & aging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.5field-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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. What makes general practice work: the role of continuity in efficient and sustainable primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

David LampeAG 5 - Department of Health Economics and Health Care Management, School of Public Health, Bielefeld University, Universitätsstraße 25, 33615, Bielefeld, Germany. d.lampe@uni-bielefeld.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3400-0861
John GrosserAG 5 - Department of Health Economics and Health Care Management, School of Public Health, Bielefeld University, Universitätsstraße 25, 33615, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3890-5596
Daniel GensorowskyVandage GmbH, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9326-2963
Julian WitteVandage GmbH, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2075-323X
Christiane MuthDepartment of General Practice and Family Medicine, Medical Faculty OWL, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8987-182X
Marjan van den AkkerInstitute of General Practice, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1022-8637
Truc Sophia DinhInstitute of General Practice, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9774-6751
Wolfgang GreinerAG 5 - Department of Health Economics and Health Care Management, School of Public Health, Bielefeld University, Universitätsstraße 25, 33615, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9552-6969
Bielefeld University · DEGoethe University Frankfurt · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWorldwide, polypharmacy and medication appropriateness-related outcomes (MARO) are growing public health concerns associated with potentially inappropriate prescribing, adverse health effects, and avoidable costs to health systems. Continuity of care (COC) is a cornerstone of high-quality care that has been shown to improve patient-relevant outcomes. However, the relationship between COC and polypharmacy/MARO has not been systematically explored.

objectiveThe aim of this systematic review was to investigate the operationalization of COC, polypharmacy, and MARO as well as the relationship between COC and polypharmacy/MARO.

methodsWe performed a systematic literature search in PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL. Quantitative observational studies investigating the associations between COC and polypharmacy and/or COC and MARO by applying multivariate regression analysis techniques were eligible. Qualitative or experimental studies were not included. Information on the definition and operationalization of COC, polypharmacy, and MARO and reported associations was extracted. COC measures were assigned to the relational, informational, or management dimension of COC and further classified as objective standard, objective non-standard, or subjective. Risk of bias was assessed by using the NIH Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies.

resultsTwenty-seven studies were included. Overall, substantial differences existed in terms of the COC dimensions and related COC measures. Relational COC was investigated in each study, while informational and management COC were only covered among three studies. The most frequent type of COC measure was objective non-standard (n = 16), followed by objective standard (n = 11) and subjective measures (n = 3). The majority of studies indicated that COC is strongly associated with both polypharmacy and MARO, such as potentially inappropriate medication (PIM), potentially inappropriate drug combination (PIDC), drug-drug interaction (DDI), adverse drug events (ADE), unnecessary drug use, duplicated medication, and overdose. More than half of the included studies (n = 15) had a low risk of bias, while five studies had an intermediate and seven studies a high risk of bias.

conclusionsDifferences regarding the methodological quality of included studies as well as the heterogeneity in terms of the operationalization and measurement of COC, polypharmacy, and MARO need to be considered when interpreting the results. Yet, our findings suggest that optimizing COC may be helpful in reducing polypharmacy and MARO. Therefore, COC should be acknowledged as an important risk factor for polypharmacy and MARO, and the importance of COC should be considered when designing future interventions targeting these outcomes.

Indexed as

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsPolypharmacyContinuity of Patient CareCross-Sectional StudiesHumansInappropriate PrescribingObservational Studies as TopicPotentially Inappropriate Medication List

Identifiers

PMID36972012
PMCPMC10232587
OpenAlexW4361010231

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.