Suppr超能文献

用于预测和识别老年患者药物不良反应的检测工具:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Detection tools for prediction and identification of adverse drug reactions in older patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Doctoral Program of Pharmaceutical Science, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia.

Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health, Universitas Sari Mulia, Banjarmasin, Indonesia.

出版信息

Sci Rep. 2022 Aug 1;12(1):13189. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-17410-w.

Abstract

Tools to accurately predict and detect adverse drug reactions (ADR) in elderly patients have not been developed. We aimed to identify and evaluate reports on tools that predict and detect ADR in elderly patients (≥ 60 years). In this review, we followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Databases were searched until January 2022 using key terms "elderly," "adverse drug reaction," and "detection instruments." Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria, and they examined assorted interventions: STOPP/START version 1/2 (n = 10), Beers Criteria 2012 or 2015 (n = 4), Systematic Tool to Reduce Inappropriate Prescribing (STRIP) (n = 2), Tool to Reduce Inappropriate Medications (TRIM) (n = 1), Medication Risk Score (MERIS) (n = 1), Computerized alert systems (n = 1), and Norwegian General Practice-Nursing Home criteria (n = 1). The interventions affected the number of potential prescription omissions (OR, 0.50 [0.37-0.69]; p < 0.0001; four studies). No apparent reduction in the number of drug interactions within 2 months (OR, 0.84 [0.70-1.02]; p = 0.08; two studies) and mortality (OR, 0.92 [0.76-1.12]; p = 0.41; three studies) was observed. In conclusion, there is no definitive and validated assessment tool for detecting and predicting ADR in elderly patients. Thus, more research on refining existing tools or developing new ones is warranted.

摘要

用于准确预测和检测老年患者药物不良反应(ADR)的工具尚未开发。我们旨在确定和评估用于预测和检测老年患者(≥60 岁)ADR 的工具的报告。在本综述中,我们遵循了系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南。使用“老年人”、“药物不良反应”和“检测仪器”等关键词,直到 2022 年 1 月在数据库中进行了搜索。有 18 项研究符合纳入标准,它们检查了各种干预措施:STOPP/START 版本 1/2(n=10)、2012 年或 2015 年 Beers 标准(n=4)、系统减少不适当处方工具(STRIP)(n=2)、减少不适当药物工具(TRIM)(n=1)、药物风险评分(MERIS)(n=1)、计算机警报系统(n=1)和挪威全科医生-养老院标准(n=1)。这些干预措施影响了潜在处方遗漏的数量(OR,0.50 [0.37-0.69];p<0.0001;四项研究)。在 2 个月内药物相互作用的数量没有明显减少(OR,0.84 [0.70-1.02];p=0.08;两项研究)和死亡率(OR,0.92 [0.76-1.12];p=0.41;三项研究)。总之,目前尚无用于检测和预测老年患者 ADR 的明确和经过验证的评估工具。因此,有必要对改进现有工具或开发新工具进行更多研究。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5f75/9343443/f66ba9d42a5a/41598_2022_17410_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验