Are there socioeconomic inequalities in polypharmacy among older people? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in older people and its association with socioeconomic deprivation-a systematic review and narrative synthesis

BACKGROUND

Potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) refers to the prescription of medications that carry a higher risk of adverse outcomes, such as drug interactions, falls, and cognitive impairment. PIP is of particular concern in older adults, and is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. Socioeconomic deprivation has been identified as a potential risk factor for PIP. However, the extent of this relationship remains unclear. This review aimed to synthesize the current literature on the association between PIP and socioeconomic status (SES) in older adults.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using the databases Medline, Embase and CINAHL. A search strategy was developed to capture papers examining three key concepts: PIP, socioeconomic deprivation and older/elderly populations. Peer-reviewed quantitative research published between 1/1/2000 and 31/12/2022 was eligible for inclusion.

RESULTS

Twenty articles from 3,966 hits met the inclusion criteria. The sample size of included studies ranged from 668 to 16.5million individuals, with the majority from Europe (n = 8) and North America (n = 8). Most defined older patients as being 65 or over (n = 12) and used income (n = 7) or subsidy eligibility (n = 5) to assess SES. In all, twelve studies reported a statistically significant association between socioeconomic deprivation and an increased likelihood of experiencing PIP. Several of these reported some association after adjusting for number of drugs taken, or the presence of polypharmacy. The underlying reasons for the association are unclear, although one study found that the association between deprivation and higher PIP prevalence could not be explained by poorer access to healthcare facilities or practitioners.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest some association between an older person's SES and their likelihood of being exposed to PIP. SES appears to be one of several factors that act independently and in concert to influence an older person's likelihood of experiencing PIP. This review highlights that prioritising older people living in socioeconomically-deprived circumstances may be an efficient strategy when carrying out medication reviews.

Polypharmacy Is Associated With Slow Gait Speed and Recurrent Falls in Older People With HIV

BACKGROUND

Older people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV, PWH) are prone to using multiple medications due to higher rates of medical comorbidities and the use of antiretroviral therapy (ART). We assessed the prevalence and clinical impact of polypharmacy among PWH.

METHODS

We leveraged clinical data from the AIDS Clinical Trials Group A5322 study "Long-Term Follow-up of Older HIV-infected Adults: Addressing Issues of Aging, HIV Infection and Inflammation" (HAILO). We included PWH aged ≥40 years with plasma HIV RNA levels <200 copies/µL. We assessed the relationship between polypharmacy (defined as the use of 5 or more prescription medications, excluding ART) and hyperpolypharmacy (defined as the use of 10 or more prescription medications, excluding ART) with slow gait speed (less than 1 meter/second) and falls, including recurrent falls.

RESULTS

Excluding ART, 24% of study participants had polypharmacy and 4% had hyperpolypharmacy. Polypharmacy was more common in women (30%) than men (23%). Participants with polypharmacy had a higher risk of slow gait speed (odds ratio [OR] = 1.78; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.27-2.50) and increased risk of recurrent falls (OR = 2.12; 95% CI = 1.06-4.23). The risk for recurrent falls was further increased in those with hyperpolypharmacy compared with those without polypharmacy (OR = 3.46; 95% CI = 1.32-9.12).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large, mixed-sex cohort of PWH aged ≥40 years, polypharmacy was associated with slow gait speed and recurrent falls, even after accounting for medical comorbidities, alcohol use, substance use, and other factors. These results highlight the need for increased focus on identifying and managing polypharmacy and hyperpolypharmacy in PWH.

Polypharmacy Is Associated with Sociodemographic Factors and Socioeconomic Status in United States Adults

A thorough understanding of polypharmacy is required to create public health initiatives that minimize the potential for adverse outcomes. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between sociodemographic factors, socioeconomic status (SES), and polypharmacy risk in United States (US) individuals between 1999-2000 and 2017-2018. The cross-sectional National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey dataset covered ten cycles between 1999-2000 and 2017-2018. All individuals aged ≥18 years were included. The simultaneous use of at least five medications by one person is known as polypharmacy. Multivariable logistic regression showed that there was a statistically significant association between polypharmacy sociodemographic factors (such as age between 45 and 64 (odds ratio [OR] = 3.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.60-3.92; p < 0.0001) and age of 65 years or above (OR = 3.96; 95% CI = 3.79-4.13; p < 0.0001), especially women (OR = 1.09; 95% CI = 1.06-1.13; p < 0.0001), non-Hispanic blacks (OR = 1.66; 95% CI = 1.51-1.83; p < 0.0001), and veterans (OR = 1.27; 95% CI = 1.22-1.31; p < 0.0001)) and SES (such as being married (OR = 1.14; 95% CI = 1.08-1.19; p = 0.031), widowed, divorced, or separated (OR = 1.21; 95% CI = 1.15-1.26; p < 0.0001), a college graduate or above (OR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.15-1.27, p < 0.0001), and earning > USD 55,000 per year (OR = 1.86; 95% CI = 1.79-1.93; p < 0.0001)). Individuals aged 45 years and above, women, and non-Hispanic blacks with higher educational levels and yearly incomes were more likely to experience polypharmacy in the US between 1999-2000 and 2017-2018.

Living with polypharmacy: a narrative interview study with older Pakistanis in East London

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy is a growing and major public health issue. It can be burdensome and risky for patients and costly to healthcare systems. Older adults and those from ethnic minority backgrounds are disproportionately affected by polypharmacy. This study focuses on medication practices among Urdu-speaking Pakistani patients, a significant ethnic group in the UK. Most existing research on medication practices within South-Asian communities centres on adherence, leaving the social and moral dimensions of polypharmacy unpacked. Understanding how British Pakistani patients understand and manage polypharmacy in the context of their daily lives is crucial to avoiding harmful polypharmacy.

METHODS

In-depth narrative interviews were conducted with 15 first-generation Pakistani patients using the Biographical Narrative Interview Method. Participants were recruited from GP practices in East London. All participants were prescribed ten or more regular medications (a pragmatic marker of 'higher risk' polypharmacy) and were aged over 50. Interviews were conducted with a bilingual researcher at home and were designed to elicit narratives of patients' experiences of polypharmacy in the context of their biographies and daily lives.

RESULTS

Polypharmacy is enacted through networks of interpersonal and socio-material relationships. The doctor-patient relationship and the family network held particular significance to study participants. In addition, participants described emotional bonds between themselves and their medicines, identifying them as 'forces for good'-substances which allowed them to maintain their health through the intercession of God. Meanings attributed to medicines and enacted through these social, emotional, and spiritual relationships contributed to emerging and sustaining polypharmacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients make sense of and manage treatments in culturally specific ways. Developing an understanding of how medication practices in different communities are enacted is important for informing meaningful and effective conversations with patients about their medicines. Our findings contribute to enabling the integration of culturally sensitive approaches to prescribing.

Lifestyle medicine: a cultural shift in medicine that can drive integration of care

Our traditional medical mindset and healthcare culture are being severely challenged. In the face of novel infectious diseases, such as Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), along with rising levels of chronic diseases, such as obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus, psychiatric illness, cardiovascular disease and cancer, many argue that current healthcare practices are failing to meet our needs. Energy and vision for a new way of practicing medicine are colliding, from both top-down, driven by policy, and bottom-up, driven by clinicians and patients. Policy makers have laid out the need for integration of healthcare delivery to address the complex chronic disease burden; creating integrated care partnerships, health and wellbeing boards and primary care networks to bring together 'at the place level' primary and secondary care, mental and public health services, social care and the voluntary sector. In practice, this is starting to build lasting working relationships between previously siloed services, to address the complex environmental, social, cultural, lifestyle and biopsychosocial drivers of ill health rather than simply providing access to hospitals, doctors and medication. Similarly, out of frustration with our traditional pharmaceutically driven medical model, grass-roots clinicians have built a new vision for their role in this better integrated health system, with the discipline of lifestyle medicine.