Next Article in Journal
Acceleration of Skin Wound-Healing Reactions by Autologous Micrograft Tissue Suspension
Previous Article in Journal
Close Correlation between Frailty and Depressive State in Chronic Liver Diseases
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Medicina
Volume 56
Issue 7
10.3390/medicina56070320
medicina-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Pharmacological Interactions in the Elderly

by
Emilia Błeszyńska
1,*,
Łukasz Wierucki
2,
Tomasz Zdrojewski
2 and
Marcin Renke
1
1
Department of Occupational, Metabolic and Internal Diseases, Medical University of Gdańsk, 81-519 Gdynia, Poland
2
Department of Preventive Medicine & Education, Medical University of Gdańsk, 80-210 Gdańsk, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Medicina 2020, 56(7), 320; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina56070320
Submission received: 17 May 2020 / Revised: 22 June 2020 / Accepted: 25 June 2020 / Published: 28 June 2020
(This article belongs to the Section Geriatrics/Aging)
Browse Figure
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Pharmacological therapy in the elderly is particularly complicated and challenging. Due to coexistence of three main predisposing factors (advanced age, multiple morbidity and polypharmacotherapy), this group of patients is prone to occurrence of drug interactions and adverse effects of incorrect drug combinations. Since many years patient safety during the treatment process has been one of key elements for proper functioning of healthcare systems around the world, thus different preventive measures have been undertaken in order to counteract factors adversely affecting the therapeutic effect. One of the avoidable medical errors is pharmacological interactions. According to estimates, one in six elderly patients may be at risk of a significant drug interaction. Hence the knowledge about mechanisms and causes of drug interactions in the elderly, as well as consequences of their occurrence are crucial for planning the process of pharmacotherapy. For the purpose of pharmacovigilance, a review of available methods and tools gives an insight into possible ways of preventing drug interactions. Additionally, recognizing the actual scale of this phenomenon in geriatric population around the world emphasizes the importance of a joint effort among medical community to improve quality of pharmacotherapy.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Patient safety during the treatment process is one of key elements for proper functioning of healthcare systems around the world. An increasing emphasis is being placed on preventive measures to counteract the occurrence of events adversely affecting the therapeutic effect. One of the avoidable medical errors is pharmacological interactions, defined as an interaction of two drugs that can lead to a quantitative and/or qualitative change in the action of one of them [1]. Undesirable pharmacological interactions may increase toxicity of a drug or reduce its effectiveness.
Predisposing factors for the occurrence of adverse effects of incorrect drug combinations are primarily advanced age, multiple morbidity and polypharmacotherapy [2]. It is estimated that in developed countries about 30–40% of people over 65 years old take 5 or more drugs, while 12% of patients in this age group use 10 or more different medicines [2]. Patients burdened with the coexistence of several chronic diseases have a greater risk of drug interactions due to complexity of the treatment process and more frequent contacts with various representatives of the healthcare system [3]. Pharmacological therapy in the elderly is particularly complicated due to age-related changes in pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic metabolism of drugs that increase or decrease sensitivity of these patients to chemical substances [4].
A significant increase in life expectancy in the 20th century is considered to be one of the greatest social achievements. In combination with a decreasing fertility rate, it leads to a progressive aging of the population. The population over 65 years old is expected to increase from 524 million in 2010 (8 percent of the world population) to 1.5 billion (16 percent of the world population) in 2050. This increase will be mostly pronounced in developing countries [5].
Understanding the basis of drug interactions in the elderly and the consequences of their occurrence, as well as knowledge of the actual scale of this phenomenon in the population and available methods of side effects prevention, can help optimize the process of pharmacotherapy, and thus increase safety of elderly patients.

2. Metabolism in the Old Age

The aging process is characterized by significant changes in body composition and physiological decline in the function of most organs. With age, total body fat mass increases, water content decreases, which in combination with a reduction in muscle mass can lead to sarcopenia and changes in distribution of drugs [6]. It is estimated that body fat content over the age of 70 is about 25% in men and 40% in women, which is 1.5 times more than in young people aged 20–29 [7]. As a result, distribution volume of lipophilic drugs increases in elderly patients. Aging is also associated with a progressive decrease in body water content, which causes a decrease in distribution volume of hydrophilic compounds [8]. From early adulthood up to the age of 79–80 men present a gradual decline in total body water of 0.3 kg per year, while in women total body water remains relatively constant from youth up to the age of 70, when there is a decrease of 0.7 kg per year [9].
The most important pharmacokinetic changes include decreased renal secretory capacity and impaired hepatic metabolism. Due to the decrease in the secretory capacity of kidneys, removal of hydrophilic substances through kidneys may be significantly impaired and requires adjustment of drug dose to renal parameters [10]. Changes in liver during its aging may affect drug metabolism in many ways. Size of liver decreases with age by 20–40%, while blood flow through this organ decreases by 40–60%. In people over 70 years old, cytochrome P450 (CYP450) oxidase activity may decrease by up to 30% compared to young adults [11].
In addition, plasma protein concentration changes with age, including albumin and alpha-1 acid glycoprotein, the main roles of which are transport and storage of most exogenous and endogenous substances in bloodstream [12]. The level of albumin in the elderly is on average 19% lower than in young population. An increased free drug concentration of substances strongly bound to albumin may be a potential cause of toxicity, even if a total drug concentration is within a therapeutic range [13]. A slight increase in alpha-1 acid glycoprotein, observed in healthy elderly, but less pronounced in the presence of a disease, may cause an increase in the concentration of some substances, e.g., propranolol [14].
Studies have also shown lower levels of p-glycoprotein concentration in brain and intestinal tissue of elderly people, especially in the presence of dementia [15,16]. This membrane protein transports various substrates across the cell membrane including drugs, such as steroids or cardiac glycosides like digoxin.
Another important change observed in elderly is a decrease in cellular metabolism, which can significantly reduce the activity of substances administered in the form of prodrugs [17].
Pharmacodynamic changes are also common and are associated with changes in drug sensitivity, regardless of chemical compounds distribution in tissues [10,11]. This is illustrated by a decrease in cardiovascular sensitivity of the elderly to agonists and antagonists of beta-adrenoreceptors and an increase in frequency of orthostatic hypotension episodes after antihypertensive drugs.
Moreover, central nervous system of elderly patients is becoming more susceptible to agents affecting brain function, e.g., opioids, benzodiazepines and psychotropic drugs [6].

3. Multimorbidity

Multimorbidity is a co-occurrence of at least two chronic diseases that cannot be cured at the current state of knowledge, but it is possible to control them by means of pharmacology or other therapeutic methods. According to estimates, the incidence of this phenomenon in older people is 65–98% [18,19,20] and is gradually increasing due to a better quality of healthcare and aging of the population [21,22]. Nearly half of people over 65 years old have at least three chronic diseases, while one in five people is affected by five or more chronic diseases [23,24]. The most common are hypertension, osteoarthritis, ischemic heart disease and diabetes [25].
By 2035, it is prognosed that the number of people living with two or more chronic conditions will increase by 86.4%—with the biggest rises observed for cancer (increase by 179.4%) and diabetes (increase by 118.1%) [26].
Multimorbidity in the elderly can impair drugs handling and administration. This concerns especially chronic conditions like dementia, Parkinson’s disease, stroke, esophageal diseases (e.g., gastro-esophageal reflux disease), the presence of visual or cognitive impairments and swallowing difficulties [27].
Compared with people burdened with one chronic disease, patients with multiple diseases have an increased risk of functional impairment [28,29], deterioration in quality of life [30,31] and increased mortality [32,33]. Due to the coexistence of many chronic diseases, the elderly are the main consumers of both prescription and OTC (over-the-counter) drugs, buying 15% more than they did about 10 years ago [24].

4. Polypharmacotherapy

Polypharmacotherapy is traditionally defined as a long-term use of five or more drugs. It is estimated that in developed countries about 30–40% of people over 65 years old take 5 or more drugs, while 12% of patients in this age group use 10 or more different medicines [2]. The report of the World Health Organization in 2019 confirms that polypharmacotherapy is a common problem, but diverse structures of healthcare provision and different information collection systems make it difficult to compare data from individual countries [34].
In addition, in recent years there has been a growing interest among older people in dietary supplements, which are widely available on the pharmaceutical market. It is estimated that over 40% of people over 60 years old declare to consume products from this group, and the value of dietary supplements market in the European Union is estimated at five billion euros. The most commonly used supplements are vitamin and mineral products, fish oils, probiotics and some herbal products [35].
It is worth emphasizing the role of excipients, which are generally considered to be biologically inert or inactive. Recent research has proven they can influence a drug effect by contributing synergistically (e.g., antitumor activity and cardiovascular benefits of gamma-linolenic acid and omega-3 fatty acids) or by reducing drug effectiveness through different mechanism (e.g., degradation of neomycine by sodium carboxymethylcellulose or absorption of nitrazepam in tablet dosage form by colloidal silicon) [36]. Excipients can also alternate (decrease or increase) the permeability of intestinal membrane, and therefore affect bioavailability of the drug [37]. Due to age-related changes in metabolism, accumulation of excipients may occur in older patients, leading to toxicity and adverse effects. A list of such excipients are summarized in a review [38].
The literature provides a broad and accurate description of negative medical, economic and social consequences of polypharmacotherapy. The most dangerous are drug interactions, cognitive impairment [23], weight loss and malnutrition [39], falls and bone fractures [40], rehospitalization [41], reduced quality of life [42] and death [42].
Poor nutritional status and malnutrition in the elderly population are important areas of concern, associated with an increased financial cost burden [43] and reduced quality of life [44]. Drug classes with potentially significant drug–nutrient interactions include: antihypertensives by causing zinc deficiency (thiazide diuretics, angiotensin receptor blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and potassium-sparing diuretics); acetylcholinesterase inhibitors; proton pump inhibitors and metformin by causing vitamin B12 deficiency; HMG-Co reductase inhibitors (statins) by causing reductions in CoQ10, a-tocopherol, b-carotene and lycopene and long-term, high-dose aspirin by causing vitamin C deficiency [45]. Additionally, polypharmacy may negatively affect the therapeutic success of vitamin D supplementation by reduced compliance and adherence to treatment, and interference with drug adsorption, revealing the need for a higher amount of vitamin D supplements [46].
Drugs frequently consumed by the elderly (including antihypertensives, hypolipemic, hypoglycemics or drugs for acid- or nervous-related disorders) may trigger hypohydration by means of increased water elimination (through diarrhea, urine or sweat); decreased thirst sensation or appetite or alteration of central thermoregulation. On the other hand, excipients induce alterations in hydration status by decreasing gastrointestinal transit time or increasing the gastrointestinal tract rate or intestinal permeability [47].
Studies show that, on average, 1 in 5 commonly used drugs by the elderly should not be recommended [48], while for people in nursing homes and other institutions this problem may affect up to 30–50% of patients [49]. According to estimates, one in six elderly patients may be at risk of a significant pharmacological interaction [24].

5. Prevalence of Drug Interactions

The phenomena of polypharmacotherapy and pharmacological interactions have been intensively analyzed in Western Europe and the United States, while data from Central and Eastern European countries are still limited. Most of the analyses were based on screening tool of older persons’ potentially inappropriate prescriptions (STOPP)/screening tool to alert doctors to the right treatment (START) or Beers criteria and concerned outpatient patients.
A research conducted in 2009 on nearly 1300 Northern Ireland citizens over the age of 65 showed that 18.3% of them used dangerous drug combinations [50]. A comprehensive study conducted in the United Kingdom in 2003 included 131 primary care outpatient clinics with approximately 162,000 patients over 65 years old annually—24.8% of them were shown to use abnormal drug combinations, while 20.5% of patients took high-risk drugs [51]. A nationwide survey conducted in Lithuania in 2017 on over 400,000 citizens over the age of 65 years old showed a higher percentage of incorrect drug combinations, of around 25% [52]. A similar result was obtained in 2005 in Portugal, where more than 25% of 213 examined patients over 65 years old used at least one drug not indicated for use in the elderly [53]. In some countries lower values of incorrect drug connections have been reported in the elderly, e.g., 9.8% in Turkey [54] or 12.5% among Finnish citizens [55].
So far, a study was conducted in Poland in 2007 on 1000 seniors from Poznań and Głogów, finding the percentage of incorrect drug combinations of 28.6% [56]. This relatively high rate may be due to consumption of OTC drugs that accounted for 5.5% of incorrect connections. Unfortunately, there is a lack of national data determining the incidence of pharmacological interactions in Polish elderly patients.
The percentage of incorrect drug combinations in European studies ranges between 9.8 and 38.5% and is relatively higher than in the United States (21.3–28.8%) [57,58,59,60]. The reasons for the observed discrepancies are unclear and may be due to differences in the availability of drugs in individual countries, different practices of prescribing drugs or verifying prescriptions by pharmacists.

6. Consequences of Pharmacological Interactions

6.1. Impact of Pharmacological Interactions on Life Expectancy

The most serious effect of adverse reactions due to pharmacological interactions is death [61]. Studies in the United States have shown a 1.6-fold increase in mortality in people taking abnormal drug combinations [62]. Importantly, inclusion of another maladjusted drug is associated with a relative increase in mortality by 39%, regardless of the number of medicines [63]. Particularly strong association was observed between an increase in mortality and incorrect combinations with drugs rising the risk of falls in elderly (STOPP criteria version 2, category K), e.g., benzodiazepines, neuroleptics, hypnotics from the Z group [64].

6.2. Impact of Pharmacological Interactions on Quality of Life

Definition of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) includes a subjective perception of the ability to perform activities that are important to a person and are affected by current health [65]. In previous studies, association between a large number of drugs taken, potential pharmacological interactions and reduced quality of life has been observed [66]. These patients had significantly reduced health-related quality of life self-assessment scores on the EQ-VAS scale (mean 63.12 ± 17.37 points) [67]. This effect was intensified by an accompanying deterioration of mobility, functional fitness and cognitive functions [67,68].

6.3. Impact of Pharmacological Interactions on the Frequency of Rehospitalization

Adverse reactions due to pharmacological interactions are among the most common causes of hospitalization in the elderly [69]. In a nationwide observational study in the United States, the incidence of sudden hospitalizations due to adverse drug reactions was 99,628 cases per year [70]. For the same reason, in 2005 the number of visits to various health care institutions was around 4.3 million [71]. It is estimated that in two out of three cases rehospitalization could be avoided [69].

6.4. Impact of Pharmacological Interactions on Financial Costs

In the United States the cost of medical treatment due to medical errors and side effects in the elderly population is estimated at over $200 billion a year [72]. In European countries this phenomenon is also a significant problem [73,74,75]. Frequent visits to emergency departments and outpatient facilities, rehospitalizations, as well as purchase of many pharmacological products are a financial burden for individual patients and the entire healthcare system [2].

7. Prevention of Drug Interactions

Due to the research carried out by specialists in the field of gerontology and geriatrics, the knowledge about mechanisms of the aging process is growing. Through further analyses, the main factors predisposing to the occurrence of pharmacological interactions have been recognized and it is more probable to identify patients who are particularly at risk of drug side effects. In addition, there is an awareness of the consequences of pharmacological interactions, which not only affect health and quality of life of patients, but also disrupt the therapeutic process and constitute a financial burden on health care systems.
Previous studies show that 80% of serious drug side effects are caused by an incorrect prescription. Moreover, on average 87.9% of these events are potentially predictable and avoidable [61].
A variety of standardized tools are available to assist in the planning of pharmacotherapy according to individual needs and capabilities of older people. Some of them contain concise guidelines for recommended and contraindicated drugs in geriatric patients, e.g., Beers criteria, STOPP criteria (screening tool of older persons’ potentially inappropriate prescriptions) and START (screening tool to alert doctors to the right treatment). Their effectiveness has been extensively studied in many countries [76], indicating the predominance of STOPP/START criteria in identifying inadvisable drugs [77]. In addition, unlike Beers’ criteria, STOPP/START criteria were created for usage as a checklist, which means that they are often applied in clinical work and as a part of research protocols [2]. Some countries have developed tools adapted to specifics of its geriatric population and availability of drugs on a given market, such as the Norwegian NORGEP criteria (The Norwegian General Practice) [78].
The role of a clinical pharmacist is also emphasized, whose actions can identify and minimize problems associated with incorrect pharmacotherapy. This solution has been successfully implemented many years ago in the United States and Great Britain, as well as in many European countries, leading to improved therapeutic effects and bringing economic benefits [79].
Automated interaction analysis systems are a solution that has a potential to increase recognition of drug interactions. Along with computerization of healthcare systems, various forms of dedicated programs are available around the world: on-line tools, applications for mobile devices, software modules or even as part of a medical information network—the SureScripts network in the United States [80]. Unfortunately, a reported low alert specificity can be a serious obstacle to an effective use of information and actual increase of patient safety during pharmacotherapy [81].
Despite extensive research and many years of experience, data from an overwhelming number of countries around the world still indicate an alarmingly high percentage of incorrect drug combinations in the elderly. What could be the reasons for this phenomenon?
Some researchers emphasize the imperfection of specific criteria for drugs not indicated in geriatric patients, assessing them as inflexible and not taking into account all factors determining a high quality individualized healthcare [59]. Older people are often excluded from randomized clinical trials that provide information on adverse effects associated with specific drugs [59]. Therefore, there is a lack of accurate data on relative risk and benefits of therapeutic measures in this group of patients [57].
Some specialists note a significant heterogeneity of the elderly population, which means that the risk–benefit ratio will vary depending on the patient’s clinical condition [57]. Multimorbidity among seniors results in the use of complex treatment regimens. Doctors may be reluctant to change a scheme that works because there is no evidence of a harmful effect of therapy [59]. In addition, drugs identified as not recommended in geriatric patients may be suitable as second-line medicines for a person who has not responded or does not tolerate the preferred agent [57]. Moreover, the cost of therapy is often an important factor in choosing a specific drug [57]. In some circumstances, the use of a medicine may be clinically justified, if the benefits outweigh the risks to the patient [57].
Most experts agree that all available support tools for identifying pharmacological interactions and abnormal drug combinations can best be used as a screening tool to identify elderly people at high risk of suboptimal pharmacotherapy, and to recognize and prioritize problem areas rather than as a final measure of quality or efficiency of healthcare [57].

8. Concluding Remarks

In the face of reported data on the high incidence of abnormal drug combinations and undeniable negative consequences of pharmacological interactions, it is necessary to draw attention of the medical community to the existing problem and to make a joint effort to improve quality of pharmacotherapy, thereby increasing safety of patients. So far, surveys conducted among physicians indicate their limited ability to recognize potential drug interactions, which creates a need to find solutions supporting the work of clinicians [82]. In the face of computerization of medicine, automatic interaction analysis systems are becoming an increasingly common source of information about potential drug interactions, however, they still meet with skepticism of part of the medical community [83]. Therefore, there is a need to improve and disseminate electronic sources of information on drug interactions, in order to create a better auxiliary tool in conducting a safe pharmacotherapy.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, E.B. and Ł.W.; methodology, E.B. and Ł.W.; validation, T.Z. and M.R.; formal analysis, T.Z. and M.R.; investigation, E.B.; resources, E.B., Ł.W., M.R.; data curation, E.B.; writing—original draft preparation, E.B.; writing—review and editing, E.B., Ł.W., T.Z. and M.R.; visualization, E.B.; supervision, Ł.W., M.R. and T.Z.; project administration, T.Z. and M.R.; All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Mallet, L.; Spinewine, A.; Huang, A. The challenge of managing drug interactions in elderly people. Lancet 2007, 370, 185–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Kim, J.; Parish, A.L. Polypharmacy and Medication Management in Older Adults. Nurs. Clin. N. Am. 2017, 52, 457–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Panagioti, M.; Stokes, J.; Esmail, A.; Coventry, P.; Cheraghi-Sohi, S.; Alam, R.; Bower, P. Multimorbidity and patient safety incidents in primary care: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0135947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Zamboni, M.; Rossi, A.P.; Fantin, F.; Zamboni, G.; Chirumbolo, S.; Zoico, E.; Mazzali, G. Adipose tissue, diet and aging. Mech. Ageing Dev. 2014, 136–137, 129–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. World Health Organization. Preface Overview Humanity’s Aging Living Longer New Disease Patterns Longer Lives and Disability New Data on Aging and Health Assessing the Cost of Aging and Health Care Changing Role of the Family Suggested Resources; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  6. Eldesoky, E.S. Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic crisis in the elderly. Am. J. Ther. 2007, 14, 488–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Meeuwsen, S.; Horgan, G.W.; Elia, M. The relationship between BMI and percent body fat, measured by bioelectrical impedance, in a large adult sample is curvilinear and influenced by age and sex. Clin. Nutr. 2010, 29, 560–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Pea, F. Pharmacokinetics and drug metabolism of antibiotics in the elderly. Expert Opin. Drug Metab. Toxicol. 2018, 14, 1087–1100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Schoeller, D.A. Changes in total body water with age. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1989, 50, 1176–1181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Bolignano, D.; Mattace-Raso, F.; Sijbrands, E.J.G.; Zoccali, C. The aging kidney revisited: A systematic review. Ageing Res. Rev. 2014, 14, 65–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Tan, J.L.; Eastment, J.G.; Poudel, A.; Hubbard, R.E. Age-Related Changes in Hepatic Function: An Update on Implications for Drug Therapy. Drugs Aging 2015, 32, 999–1008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Bteich, M. An overview of albumin and alpha-1-acid glycoprotein main characteristics: Highlighting the roles of amino acids in binding kinetics and molecular interactions. Heliyon 2019, 5, e02879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  13. Valerio, C.; Theocharidou, E.; Davenport, A.; Agarwal, B. Human albumin solution for patients with cirrhosis and acute on chronic liver failure: Beyond simple volume expansion. World J. Hepatol. 2016, 8, 345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Woo, J.; Chan, H.S.; Or, K.H.; Arumanayagam, M. Effect of age and disease on two drug binding proteins: Albumin and α-1-acid glycoprotein. Clin. Biochem. 1994, 27, 289–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Haran, J.P.; Bhattarai, S.K.; Foley, S.E.; Dutta, P.; Ward, D.V.; Bucci, V.; McCormick, B.A.; Gilbert, J.; Faith, J. Alzheimer’s Disease Microbiome Is Associated with Dysregulation of the Anti-Inflammatory P-Glycoprotein Pathway. mBio 2019, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Chiu, C.; Miller, M.C.; Monahan, R.; Osgood, D.P.; Stopa, E.G.; Silverberg, G.D. P-glycoprotein expression and amyloid accumulation in human aging and Alzheimer’s disease: Preliminary observations. Neurobiol. Aging 2015, 36, 2475–2482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Huttunen, K.M.; Raunio, H.; Rautio, J. Prodrugs—From Serendipity to Rational Design. Pharmacol. Rev. 2011, 63, 750–771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Fortin, M.; Stewart, M.; Poitras, M.E.; Almirall, J.; Maddocks, H. A systematic review of prevalence studies on multimorbidity: Toward a more uniform methodology. Ann. Fam. Med. 2012, 10, 142–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Gontijo Guerra, S.; Berbiche, D.; Vasiliadis, H.M. Measuring multimorbidity in older adults: Comparing different data sources. BMC Geriatr. 2019, 19, 166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Glynn, L.G.; Valderas, J.M.; Healy, P.; Burke, E.; Newell, J.; Gillespie, P.; Murphy, A.W. The prevalence of multimorbidity in primary care and its effect on health care utilization and cost. Fam. Pr. 2011, 28, 516–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Yarnall, A.J.; Sayer, A.A.; Clegg, A.; Rockwood, K.; Parker, S.; Hindle, J.V. New horizons in multimorbidity in older adults. Age Ageing 2017, 46, 882–888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Goodman, R.A.; Posner, S.F.; Huang, E.S.; Parekh, A.K.; Koh, H.K. Defining and measuring chronic conditions: Imperatives for research, policy, program, and practice. Prev. Chronic Dis. 2013, 10, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Shinohara, M.; Yamada, M. Drug-induced Cognitive Impairment. Brain Nerve 2016, 68, 421–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Qato, D.M.; Wilder, J.; Schumm, L.P.; Gillet, V.; Alexander, G.C. Changes in prescription and over-the-counter medication and dietary supplement use among older adults in the United States, 2005 vs. 2011. JAMA Intern. Med. 2016, 176, 473–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Jenkins, S. A Profile of Older Americans. Fla. Nurse 1986, 34, 21. [Google Scholar]
  26. Kingston, A.; Robinson, L.; Booth, H.; Knapp, M.; Jagger, C. Projections of multi-morbidity in the older population in England to 2035: Estimates from the Population Ageing and Care Simulation (PACSim) model. Age Ageing 2018, 47, 374–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Gnjidic, D.; Husband, A.; Todd, A. Challenges and innovations of delivering medicines to older adults. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2018, 135, 97–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  28. Marengoni, A.; Angleman, S.; Melis, R.; Mangialasche, F.; Karp, A.; Garmen, A.; Meinow, B.; Fratiglioni, L. Aging with multimorbidity: A systematic review of the literature. Ageing Res. Rev. 2011, 10, 430–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Marengoni, A.; Von Strauss, E.; Rizzuto, D.; Winblad, B.; Fratiglioni, L. The impact of chronic multimorbidity and disability on functional decline and survival in elderly persons. A community-based, longitudinal study. J. Intern. Med. 2009, 265, 288–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Klompstra, L.; Ekdahl, A.W.; Krevers, B.; Milberg, A.; Eckerblad, J. Factors related to health-related quality of life in older people with multimorbidity and high health care consumption over a two-year period. BMC Geriatr. 2019, 19, 187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Tyack, Z.; Frakes, K.-A.; Barnett, A.; Cornwell, P.; Kuys, S.; McPhail, S. Predictors of health-related quality of life in people with a complex chronic disease including multimorbidity: A longitudinal cohort study. Qual. Life Res. 2016, 25, 2579–2592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Gijsen, R.; Hoeymans, N.; Schellevis, F.G.; Ruwaard, D.; Satariano, W.A.; Van Den Bos, G.A.M. Causes and consequences of comorbidity: A review. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2001, 54, 661–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Nunes, B.P.; Flores, T.R.; Mielke, G.I.; Thumé, E.; Facchini, L.A. Multimorbidity and mortality in older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch. Gerontol. Geriatr. 2016, 67, 130–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. World Health Organization. Medication Safety in Polypharmacy; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  35. Commission of the European Communities. Characteristics and Perspectives of the Market for Food Supplements Containings Substances Other Than Vitamins Minerals; European Commission Staff Working Document: Brussels, Belgium, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  36. Roy, J. An Introduction to Pharmaceutical Sciences; Woodhead Publishing Limited: Cambridge, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Takizawa, Y.; Kishimoto, H.; Nakagawa, M.; Sakamoto, N.; Tobe, Y.; Furuya, T.; Tomita, M.; Hayashi, M. Effects of pharmaceutical excipients on membrane permeability in rat small intestine. Int. J. Pharm. 2013, 453, 363–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Breitkreutz, J.; Boos, J. Paediatric and geriatric drug delivery. Expert Opin. Drug Deliv. 2007, 4, 37–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Jyrkkä, J.; Enlund, H.; Lavikainen, P.; Sulkava, R.; Hartikainen, S. Association of polypharmacy with nutritional status, functional ability and cognitive capacity over a three-year period in an elderly population. Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf. 2011, 20, 514–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Lai, S.W.; Liao, K.F.; Liao, C.C.; Muo, C.H.; Liu, C.S.; Sung, F.C. Polypharmacy correlates with increased risk for hip fracture in the elderly: A population-based study. Medicine 2010, 89, 295–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Onder, G.; Pedone, C.; Landi, F.; Cesari, M.; Della Vedova, C.; Bernabei, R.; Gambassi, G. Adverse drug reactions as cause of hospital admissions: Results from the Italian group of pharmacoepidemiology in the elderly (GIFA). J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2002, 50, 1962–1968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Jyrkkä, J.; Enlund, H.; Korhonen, M.J.; Sulkava, R.; Hartikainen, S. Patterns of drug use and factors associated with polypharmacy and excessive polypharmacy in elderly persons: Results of the kuopio 75 study: A cross-sectional analysis. Drugs Aging 2009, 26, 493–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Burgos, R.; Joaquin, C.; Blay, C.; Ledesma, A.; Figueiras, G.; Pérez-Portabella, C.; Granados, A.; Gómez, M.D.; González, A.; Sarquella, E.; et al. Strategy to fight against malnutrition in chronic patients with complex health needs. Int. J. Integr. Care 2016, 16, 161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Guyonnet, S.; Rolland, Y. Screening for Malnutrition in Older People. Clin. Geriatr. Med. 2015, 31, 429–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Little, M.O. Updates in nutrition and polypharmacy. Curr. Opin. Clin. Nutr. Metab. Care 2018, 21, 4–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Ruggiero, C.; Baroni, M.; Bini, V.; Brozzetti, A.; Parretti, L.; Zengarini, E.; Lapenna, M.; Antinolfi, P.; Falorni, A.; Mecocci, P.; et al. Effects of Weekly Supplementation of Cholecalciferol and Calcifediol Among the Oldest-Old People: Findings From a Randomized Pragmatic Clinical Trial. Nutrients 2019, 11, 2778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  47. Puga, A.M.; Lopez-Oliva, S.; Trives, C.; Partearroyo, T.; Varela-Moreiras, G. Effects of drugs and excipients on hydration status. Nutrients 2019, 11, 669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  48. Roughead, E.E.; Anderson, B.; Gilbert, A.L. Potentially inappropriate prescribing among Australian veterans and war widows/widowers. Intern. Med. J. 2007, 37, 402–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Gallagher, P.; Barry, P.; O’Mahony, D. Inappropriate prescribing in the elderly. J. Clin. Pharm. Ther. 2007, 32, 113–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Ryan, C.; O’Mahony, D.; Kennedy, J.; Weedle, P.; Byrne, S. Potentially inappropriate prescribing in an Irish elderly population in primary care. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2009, 68, 936–947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. De Wilde, S.; Carey, I.M.; Harris, T.; Richards, N.; Victor, C.; Hilton, S.R.; Cook, D. Trends in potentially inappropriate prescribing amongst older UK primary care patients. Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf. 2007, 16, 658–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Grina, D.; Briedis, V. The use of potentially inappropriate medications among the Lithuanian elderly according to Beers and EU(7)-PIM list—A nationwide cross-sectional study on reimbursement claims data. J. Clin. Pharm. Ther. 2017, 42, 195–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. De Oliveira Martins, S.; Soares, M.A.; Van Mil, J.W.F.; Cabrita, J. Inappropriate drug use by Portuguese elderly outpatients—Effect of the Beers criteria update. Pharm. World Sci. 2006, 28, 296–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Ay, P.; Akici, A.; Harmanci, H. Drug utilization and potentially inappropriate drug use in elderly residents of a community in Istanbul, Turkey. Int. J. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 2005, 43, 195–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Pitkala, K.H.; Strandberg, T.E.; Tilvis, R.S. Inappropriate drug prescribing in home-dwelling, elderly patients: A population-based survey. Arch. Intern. Med. 2002, 162, 1707–1712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Rajska-Neumann, A.; Wieczorowska-Tobis, K. Polypharmacy and potential inappropriateness of pharmaco-logical treatment among commuinity-dwellling elderly patients. Arch. Gerontol. Geriatr. 2007, 44, 303–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Zhan, C.; Sangl, J.; Bierman, A.S.; Miller, M.R.; Friedman, B.; Wickizer, S.W.; Meyer, G.S. Potentially inappropriate medication use in the community-dwelling elderly: Findings from the 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. JAMA 2001, 286, 2823–2829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  58. Simon, S.R.; Chan, K.A.; Soumerai, S.B.; Wagner, A.K.; Andrade, S.E.; Feldstein, A.C.; Lafata, J.E.; Davis, R.L.; Gurwitz, J.H. Potentially inappropriate medication use by elderly persons in U.S. Health Maintenance Organizations, 2000–2001. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2005, 53, 227–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Curtis, L.H.; Østbye, T.; Sendersky, V.; Hutchison, S.; Dans, P.E.; Wright, A.; Woosley, R.L.; Schulman, K.A. Inappropriate prescribing for elderly Americans in a large outpatient population. Arch. Intern. Med. 2004, 164, 1621–1625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Hoehn, J.B. Inappropriate drug prescribing. JAMA 1995, 273, 455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Buajordet, I.; Ebbesen, J.; Erikssen, J.; Brørs, O.; Hilberg, T. Fatal adverse drug events: The paradox of drug treatment. J. Intern. Med. 2001, 250, 327–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Muhlack, D.C.; Hoppe, L.K.; Weberpals, J.; Brenner, H.; Schöttker, B. The Association of Potentially Inappropriate Medication at Older Age with Cardiovascular Events and Overall Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies. J. Am. Med. Dir. Assoc. 2017, 18, 211–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Wauters, M.; Elseviers, M.; Vaes, B.; Degryse, J.; Dalleur, O.; Vander Stichele, R.; Christiaens, T.; Azermai, M. Too many, too few, or too unsafe? Impact of inappropriate prescribing on mortality, and hospitalization in a cohort of community-dwelling oldest old. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2016, 82, 1382–1392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  64. Counter, D.; Millar, J.W.T.; McLay, J.S. Hospital readmissions, mortality and potentially inappropriate prescribing: A retrospective study of older adults discharged from hospital. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2018, 84, 1757–1763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Fitzpatrick, R. The International Assessment of Health-related Quality of Life: Theory, Translation, Measurement and Analysis. J. Med. Ethics 1996, 22, 248–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Montiel-Luque, A.; Núñez-Montenegro, A.J.; Martín-Aurioles, E.; Canca-Sánchez, J.C.; Toro-Toro, M.C.; González-Correa, J.A. Medication-related factors associated with health-related quality of life in patients older than 65 years with polypharmacy. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0171320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  67. Verde, Z.; De Diego, L.G.; Chicharro, L.M.; Bandrés, F.; Velasco, V.; Mingo, T.; Fernández-Araque, A.; De Diego, G.; Araque, F. Physical performance and quality of life in older adults: Is there any association between them and potential drug interactions in polymedicated octogenarians. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 4190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  68. Maher, R.L.; Hanlon, J.; Hajjar, E.R. Clinical consequences of polypharmacy in elderly. Expert Opin. Drug Saf. 2014, 13, 57–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  69. Patel, N.S.; Patel, T.K.; Patel, P.B.; Naik, V.N.; Tripathi, C. Hospitalizations due to preventable adverse reactions—A systematic review. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2017, 73, 385–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Budnitz, D.S.; Lovegrove, M.C.; Shehab, N.; Richards, C.L. Emergency hospitalizations for adverse drug events in older Americans. N. Engl. J. Med. 2011, 365, 2002–2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Bourgeois, F.T.; Shannon, M.W.; Valim, C.; Mandl, K.D. Adverse drug events in the outpatient setting: An 11-year national analysis. Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf. 2010, 19, 901–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  72. Informatics II for H. IMS Health Study Identifies $200+ Billion Annual Opportunity from Using Medicines More Responsibly 2013. Available online: www.theimsinstitute.org (accessed on 19 April 2020).
  73. Veeren, J.C.; Weiss, M. Trends in emergency hospital admissions in England due to adverse drug reactions: 2008–2015. J. Pharm. Heal. Serv. Res. 2016, 8, 5–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Hartholt, K.A.; Van Der Velde, N.; Looman, C.W.N.; Panneman, M.J.M.; Van Beeck, E.F.; Patka, P.; Van Der Cammen, T.J. Adverse drug reactions related hospital admissions in persons aged 60 years and over, the Netherlands, 1981–2007: Less rapid increase, different drugs. PLoS ONE 2010, 5, e13977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  75. Scripcaru, G.; Mateus, C.; Nunes, C. Adverse drug events—Analysis of a decade. A Portuguese case-study, from 2004 to 2013 using hospital database. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0178626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  76. Hill-Taylor, B.; Walsh, K.A.; Stewart, S.A.; Hayden, J.; Byrne, S.; Sketris, I.S. Effectiveness of the STOPP/START (Screening Tool of Older Persons’ potentially inappropriate Prescriptions/Screening Tool to Alert doctors to the Right Treatment) criteria: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies. J. Clin. Pharm. Ther. 2016, 41, 158–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Rodrigues, M.C.S.; De Oliveira, C. Drug-drug interactions and adverse drug reactions in polypharmacy among older adults: An integrative review. Rev. Lat. Am. Enferm. 2016, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Rognstad, S.; Brekke, M.; Fetveit, A.; Spigset, O.; Wyller, T.B.; Straand, J. The Norwegian General Practice (NORGEP) criteria for assessing potentially inappropriate prescriptions to elderly patients. Scand. J. Prim. Health Care 2009, 27, 153–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Somers, A.; Robays, H.; De Paepe, P.; Van Maele, G.; Perehudoff, K.; Petrovic, M. Evaluation of clinical pharmacist recommendations in the geriatric ward of a Belgian university hospital. Clin. Interv. Aging 2013, 8, 703–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  80. Skelton, T. Surescripts CEO sees “a much more interconnected and digitized healthcare system” ahead. Mod. Heal. 2016, 46, 30–31. [Google Scholar]
  81. Glassman, P.A.; Simon, B.; Belperio, P.; Lanto, A. Improving recognition of drug interactions: Benefits and barriers to using automated drug alerts. Med. Care 2002, 40, 1161–1171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Nabovati, E.; Vakili-Arki, H.; Taherzadeh, Z.; Saberi, M.R.; Abu-Hanna, A.; Eslami, S. A survey of attitudes, practices, and knowledge regarding drug–drug interactions among medical residents in Iran. Int. J. Clin. Pharm. 2017, 39, 560–568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Ko, Y.; Malone, D.C.; Skrepnek, G.H.; Armstrong, E.P.; Murphy, J.E.; Abarca, J.; Rehfeld, R.A.; Reel, S.J.; Woosley, R.L.; Malone, D.C. Prescribers’ Knowledge of and Sources of Information for Potential Drug-Drug Interactions. Drug Saf. 2008, 31, 525–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Błeszyńska, E.; Wierucki, Ł.; Zdrojewski, T.; Renke, M. Pharmacological Interactions in the Elderly. Medicina 2020, 56, 320. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina56070320

AMA Style

Błeszyńska E, Wierucki Ł, Zdrojewski T, Renke M. Pharmacological Interactions in the Elderly. Medicina. 2020; 56(7):320. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina56070320

Chicago/Turabian Style

Błeszyńska, Emilia, Łukasz Wierucki, Tomasz Zdrojewski, and Marcin Renke. 2020. "Pharmacological Interactions in the Elderly" Medicina 56, no. 7: 320. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina56070320

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop