Go to:
Logótipo
Você está em: Start > Publications > View > Impact of ignoring patient diagnoses when using 2015 Updated Beers Criteria
Map of Premises
Principal
Publication

Impact of ignoring patient diagnoses when using 2015 Updated Beers Criteria

Title
Impact of ignoring patient diagnoses when using 2015 Updated Beers Criteria
Type
Other Publications
Year
2018
Authors
Lavrador, M
(Author)
Other
The person does not belong to the institution. The person does not belong to the institution. The person does not belong to the institution. Without AUTHENTICUS Without ORCID
Caramona, MM
(Author)
Other
The person does not belong to the institution. The person does not belong to the institution. The person does not belong to the institution. Without AUTHENTICUS Without ORCID
Figueiredo, IV
(Author)
Other
The person does not belong to the institution. The person does not belong to the institution. The person does not belong to the institution. Without AUTHENTICUS Without ORCID
Castel Branco, MM
(Author)
Other
The person does not belong to the institution. The person does not belong to the institution. The person does not belong to the institution. Without AUTHENTICUS Without ORCID
Other information
Authenticus ID: P-00N-REQ
Abstract (EN): Background: 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. Objective: To assess the consequences of ignoring patient diagnoses when applying 2015 Beers Criteria to identify potentially inappropriate medication (PIM). Setting: Three nursing homes in Central Portugal. Method: 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. Main outcome measure: Number of PIMs and number of PIM-qualifying criteria. Results: 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. Conclusion: 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. © 2019, Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
Language: English
Type (Professor's evaluation): Scientific
Documents
We could not find any documents associated to the publication.
Related Publications

Of the same authors

Pharmacist-led medication reconciliation on admission to an acute psychiatric hospital unit (2022)
Article in International Scientific Journal
Oliveira, J; Silva, TCE; Cabral, AC; Lavrador, M; Almeida, FF; Macedo, A; Saraiva, C; Fernandez Llimos, F; Caramona, MM; Figueiredo, IV; Castel Branco, MM
Recommend this page Top
Copyright 1996-2025 © Faculdade de Medicina Dentária da Universidade do Porto  I Terms and Conditions  I Acessibility  I Index A-Z
Page created on: 2025-07-17 at 14:18:52 | Privacy Policy | Personal Data Protection Policy | Whistleblowing | Electronic Yellow Book