Consequences of ignoring patient diagnoses when using the 2015 Updated Beers Criteria.
Clicks: 246
ID: 25861
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Popular Article
73.8
/100
246 views
198 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
PopularRanked #14 of 16 articles by views in international journal of clinical pharmacy
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Beers Criteria are one of the best known explicit criteria to identify inappropriate medication in elderly that can be used in medication review. The access to patients' medical records may be different among healthcare professionals and settings and, subsequently, the identification of patients' diagnoses may be compromised.To assess the consequences of ignoring patient diagnoses when applying 2015 Beers Criteria to identify potentially inappropriate medication (PIM).Three nursing homes in Central Portugal.Medical records of nursing home residents over 65 years old were appraised to identify medication profile and medical conditions. 2015 Beers Criteria were used with and without considering patients' diagnoses. To compare the number of PIM and PIM-qualifying criteria complied in these two judgements, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were performed.Number of PIMs and number of PIM-qualifying criteria.A total of 185 patients with a mean age of 86.7 years (SD = 7.8) with a majority of female (70.3%) were studied. When assessing the patients with full access to the diagnoses, median number of PIMs was 4 (IQR 0-10) and number of PIM-qualifying criteria was 5 (IQR 0-15). When evaluating only patient current medication, median number of PIMs was 4 (IQR 0-10) and PIM-qualifying criteria was 4 (IQR 0-12). Statistical difference was found in the number of PIM-qualifying criteria identified (p < 0.001), but not in the number of PIMs per patient (p = 0.090). In 171 patients (92.4%) PIMs identified were identical when using or ignoring their medical diagnoses. However, in 80 patients (43.2%) the PIM-qualifying criteria complied were different with and without access to patient diagnoses.Although restricted access to patients' diagnoses may limit the judgement of Beers PIM-qualifying criteria, this limitation had no effect on the number of PIM identified.
| Reference Key |
lavrador2019consequencesinternational
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Lavrador, Marta;Silva, Alice A;Cabral, Ana C;Caramona, M Margarida;Fernandez-Llimos, Fernando;Figueiredo, Isabel V;Castel-Branco, M Margarida; |
| Journal | international journal of clinical pharmacy |
| Year | 2019 |
| DOI |
10.1007/s11096-019-00828-0
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.