The The Prevalence of Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing in the Elderly at the Primary Care Level in Kazakhstan

Ainash Ibysheva; Gulmira Muldaeva; Leila I. Arystan; Almagul B. Kuzgibekova; Bibigul A. Abeuova; Leila S. Haydargalieva

doi:10.3889/oamjms.2021.6216

Authors

Ainash Ibysheva Department of Family Medicine, Karaganda Medical University NJSC, Karaganda, Kazakhstan https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9345-8130
Gulmira Muldaeva Department of Family Medicine, Karaganda Medical University NJSC, Karaganda, Kazakhstan https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1289-8503
Leila I. Arystan Department of Family Medicine, Karaganda Medical University NJSC, Karaganda, Kazakhstan
Almagul B. Kuzgibekova Department of Family Medicine, Karaganda Medical University NJSC, Karaganda, Kazakhstan
Bibigul A. Abeuova Department of Family Medicine, Karaganda Medical University NJSC, Karaganda, Kazakhstan
Leila S. Haydargalieva Department of Family Medicine, Karaganda Medical University NJSC, Karaganda, Kazakhstan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2021.6216

Keywords:

Potentially inappropriate prescribing, Criteria STOPP START, Adverse drug reaction

Abstract

BACKGROUND: These potentially inappropriate prescribing is associated with the development of undesired medical reactions in elderly patients, and increase the frequency of hospitalizations, the number of aggravations and the cost of treatment. All of these adverse events are preventable. For detection of PIP and to prevent the adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in elderly patients, it is necessary to screen for potentially inappropriate prescribing.

AIM: The aim of the study is to study the prevalence of PIP and the factors associated with these prescriptions at the level primary link in Kazakhstan.

METHODS: A prospective descriptive study was carried out at the primary care level, in five clinics in Kazakhstan. The study involved 205 patients over 65 years old who received regular outpatient treatment for chronic diseases. Patients’ current diagnoses and prescription medicines were reviewed and the STOPP and START tools applied.

RESULT: The prevalence of PIP in terms of STOPP criteria was 54% (114 patients). In general, we have identified 181 cases of PIP. The most commonly prescribed PIP were moxonidine (20%), glimeperide (16.5%), and PPI (20%). The prevalence of prescribing omissions in terms of START criteria was 22% (48 patients). Overall 66 cases of prescribing omissions were identified. The most commonly prescribed omissions were statins (6%) and ACE inhibitors (4%). Comparative analysis revealed a statistically significant effect of polymorbidity on the prevalence of PIP (p < 0.001) and number of prescribed medicines on the prevalence of PIP (p < 0.05). We have found a statistically significant effect of age on the presence of prescribing omissions of patients. (p < 0.001)

CONCLUSION: Our results showed a high prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing at the primary care level in Kazakhstan. Screening tools should be incorporated into the everyday practice of primary care doctors.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block

References

Barnett K, Mercer SW, Norbury M. Epidemiology of multimorbidity and implications for health care, research, and medical education: a cross-sectional study. Lancet. 2012;380(9836):37-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(12)60240-2 PMid:22579043 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60240-2

Guthrie B, Thompson A, Dumbreck S, Flynn A, Alderson P, Nairn M, et al. Better guidelines for better care: Accounting for multimorbidity in clinical guidelines-structured examination of exemplar guidelines and health economic modelling. Southampton (UK): NIHR J Lib. 2017;5:16. https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr05160 PMid:28459515 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr05160

Taché SV, Sönnichsen A, Ashcroft DM. Prevalence of adverse drug events in ambulatory care: A systematic review. Ann Pharmacother. 2011;45(7-8):977-89. https://doi.org/10.1345/ aph.1p627 PMid:21693697 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1345/aph.1P627

Magro L, Moretti U, Leone R. Epidemiology and characteristics of adverse drug reactions caused by drug-drug interactions. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2012;11(1):83-94. https://doi.org/10.1517/14740338.2012.631910 PMid:22022824 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1517/14740338.2012.631910

Bushardt RL, Massey EB, Simpson TW, Ariail JC, Simpson KN. Polypharmacy: Misleading, but manageable. Clin Interv Aging. 2008;3(2):383-9. https://doi.org/10.2147/cia.s2468 PMid:18686760 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S2468

Corsonello A, Pedone C, AntonelliIncalzi R. Age-related pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic changes and related risk of adverse drug reactions. Curr Med Chem. 2010;17(6):571. https://doi.org/10.2174/092986710790416326 PMid:20015034 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2174/092986710790416326

O’Mahony D, O’Sullivan D, Byrne S, O’Connor MN, Ryan C, Gallagher P. STOPP/START criteria for potentially inappropriate prescribing in older people: Version 2. Age Ageing. 2015;44(2):213-8. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afu145 PMid:25324330 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afu145

Beers MH. Explicit criteria for determining potentially inappropriate medication use by the elderly. An update. Arch Intern Med. 1997;157(14):1531-6. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.1997.00440350031003 PMid:9236554 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.157.14.1531

Gallagher P, Lang PO, Cherubini A, Topinková E, Cruz-Jentoft A, Errasquín BM, et al. Prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing in an acutely ill population of older patients admitted to six European hospitals. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2011;67(11):1175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-011-1061-0 PMid:21584788 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-011-1061-0

Gallagher P, O’Connor M, O’Mahony D. Prevention of potentially inappropriate prescribing for elderly patients: A randomized controlled trial using STOPP/START criteria. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2011;89(6):845-54. https://doi.org/10.1038/clpt.2011.44 PMid:21508941 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/clpt.2011.44

Thomas R, Thomas B. A systematic review of studies of the STOPP/START 2015 and American geriatric society beers 2015 criteria in Patients≥65 Years. Curr Aging Sci. 2019;12(2):121-54. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874609812666190516093742 PMid:31096900 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2174/1874609812666190516093742

Hill-Taylor B, Sketris I, Hayden J, Byrne S, O’Sullivan D, Christie R. Application of the STOPP/START criteria: A systematic review of the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing in older adults, and evidence of clinical, humanistic and economic impact. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2013;38:360-72. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpt.12059 PMid:23550814 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpt.12059

Tommelein E, Mehuys E, Petrovic M, Somers A, Colin P, Boussery K. Potentially inappropriate prescribing in community-dwelling older people across Europe: A systematic literature review. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2015;71(12):1415-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-015-1954-4 PMid:26407687 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-015-1954-4

Panova EA, Serov VA, Shutov AM, Bakumtseva NN, Kuzovenkova MY. Polypharmacy in elderly outpatients. Ulyanovskij Med Biol Zhurnal. 2019;2:16-22. https://doi.org/10.34014/2227-1848-2019-2-16-22 DOI: https://doi.org/10.34014/2227-1848-2019-2-16-22

Mussina AZ, Grjibovski AM, Zhamalieva LM. Prevalence of Polypharmacy and Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing in Emergency Hospitals. United States: The World of Science and Youth: Achievements and Prospects; 2015. p. 137-8.

Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: Development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(5):373-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9681(87)90171-8 PMid:3558716 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9681(87)90171-8

Gnjidic D, Hilmer S, Blyth F, Naganathan V, Waite L, Seibel M, McLachlan A, et al. Polypharmacy cutoff and outcomes: Five or more medicines were used to identify community-dwelling older men at risk of different adverse outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012;65(9):989-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.02.018 PMid:22742913 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.02.018

Masnoon N, Shakib S, Kalisch-Ellett L, Caughey GE. What is polypharmacy? A systematic review of definitions. BMC Geriatr. 2017;17:230. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-017-0621-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-017-0621-2

Rakesh R, Richa S. Chi-square test and its application in hypothesis testing. J Pract Cardiovasc Sci. 2015;1(1):69-71. https://doi.org/10.4103/2395-5414.157577 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/2395-5414.157577

Barros AJ, Hirakata VN. Alternatives for logistic regression in cross-sectional studies: an empirical comparison of models that directly estimate the prevalence ratio. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003;3:21. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-3-21 PMid:14567763 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-3-21

Al-Rajavi A, Zyryanov SK, Ushkalova EA. Prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications among elderly patients in clinical practice. Kachestvennaya Klinicheskaya Praktika. 2019;1:65-73.

Guthrie B, Makubate B, Hernandez-Santiago V, Dreischulte T. The rising tide of polypharmacy and drug-drug interactions: population database analysis 1995-2010. BMC Med. 2015;13:74. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0322-7 PMid:25889849 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0322-7