SynthesisAge and ageing2025
Potentially inappropriate prescribing and falls-risk increasing drugs in people who have experienced a fall: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Age and ageing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAs certain medications increase risk of falls, it is important to review and optimise prescribing in those who have fallen to reduce risk of recurrent falls.
objectivesTo systematically review evidence on the prevalence and types of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP), including falls-risk increasing drug (FRID) use, in fallers.
methodsA systematic search was conducted in July 2024 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Google Scholar using keywords for fall events, inappropriate prescribing and FRIDs. Observational studies (cohort, case-control, cross-sectional, before-after) and randomised trials were included. Studies were eligible where participants had experienced a fall and PIP (including FRID use) was reported. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to pool prevalence of inappropriate prescribing and mean number of inappropriate prescriptions across studies, with stratified analysis to assess heterogeneity.
resultsFifty papers reporting 46 studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies assessed FRIDs, and 29 assessed other PIP. The prevalence of PIP at the time of the fall was reported in 43 studies, and the pooled estimate was 68.6% (95% CI 66.1%-71.2%). Amongst 23 studies reporting it, the mean number of inappropriate prescriptions per participant was 2.21 (95%CI 1.98-2.45). The most common FRIDs prescribed were sedatives/hypnotics, opioids, diuretics and antidepressants. Twenty-one studies assessed changes in PIP prevalence post-fall; nine reported decreasing prevalence, with others noting increases/no change/mixed results.
conclusionInappropriate prescribing is highly prevalent amongst fallers, with cardiovascular and psychotropic drugs being the most common. This suggests significant scope to optimise medicines use in these patients to potentially reduce falls risk and improve outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.