↓ Skip to main content

Polypharmacy in multimorbid older adults: protocol for a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Polypharmacy in multimorbid older adults: protocol for a systematic review
Published in
Systematic Reviews, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13643-017-0492-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caroline Sirois, Marie-Laure Laroche, Line Guénette, Edeltraut Kröger, Dan Cooper, Valérie Émond

Abstract

Polypharmacy, the concurrent use of multiple medications, consistently evokes a negative connotation, notably because it is associated with a plethora of adverse events. Nonetheless, the number of individuals exposed to polypharmacy is increasing steeply, especially for older people with multiple diseases. There is a need to carefully study the phenomenon at the population scale to full assess the associated health outcomes. Yet, this reveals a complex task because there exists no consensus indicator of polypharmacy. In fact, the definitions of polypharmacy are heterogeneous and its predisposing factors and associated outcomes are not well defined. The goal of this systematic review is to summarize the literature on polypharmacy in multimorbid individuals aged 65 years and over, targeting three objectives: (1) to identify the definitions of polypharmacy that are used in the context of multimorbidity among older individuals (≥65 years); (2) to ascertain predisposing and concurrent factors associated with polypharmacy; and (3) to describe positive and negative outcomes of polypharmacy among older individuals, including hospitalizations, mortality and costs. We will include publications from 2004 to 2016 that target four concepts: polypharmacy, older individuals, multimorbidity and positive/negative outcomes. The search will be performed using EBM Reviews, Embase, Global Health, MEDLINE, AgeLine, CINAHL, Health Policy Reference Center, Public Affairs Index, SocINDEX and Google Scholar. Two independent reviewers will screen the articles, extract the information and evaluate the methodological quality of included studies. The results will be presented in tables and narrative summaries will be performed. We will perform meta-analyses (objective 3) if the heterogeneity is not important. This review will help describe the various ways of conceptualizing polypharmacy and how it is associated with health outcomes. We have selected outcomes most relevant for public surveillance performed with administrative databases. Other positive and negative outcomes have been associated with polypharmacy but may not be included in the review. PROSPERO CRD42014014989.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 90 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 18%
Student > Bachelor 11 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Researcher 8 9%
Other 6 7%
Other 18 20%
Unknown 22 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 28 31%