Prevalence and global trends of polypharmacy in patients with chronic kidney disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Polypharmacy in Patients with CKD: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Key Points

The prevalence of polypharmacy in patients with CKD was over 80%. Polypharmacy was highest in patients with a kidney transplant and those receiving dialysis. Polypharmacy is associated with worse clinical outcomes, lower quality of life, and medication-related problems in patients with CKD.

Background

Despite the high prevalence of polypharmacy in patients with CKD, the extent of polypharmacy across patients with (different stages of) CKD, as well as the association with clinical outcomes remains unknown. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the prevalence of polypharmacy in (different subgroups of) patients with CKD and assess the association between polypharmacy and patient-important outcomes.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception until July 2022. Studies that reported the prevalence of polypharmacy, medication use, or pill burden in patients with CKD (including patients receiving dialysis and kidney transplant recipients) and their association with patient-important outcomes (i.e ., mortality, kidney failure, quality of life [QoL], and medication nonadherence) were included. Two reviewers independently screened title and abstract and full texts, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Data were pooled in a random-effects single-arm meta-analysis.

Results

In total, 127 studies were included (CKD 3–5 n =39, dialysis: n =38, kidney transplant n =13, different CKD stages n =37). The pooled prevalence of polypharmacy, based on 63 studies with 484,915 patients, across all patients with CKD was 82% (95% confidence interval, 76% to 86%), and the pooled mean number of prescribed medications was 9.7 (95% confidence interval, 8.4 to 11.0). The prevalence of polypharmacy was higher in patients who received dialysis or a kidney transplant compared with patients with CKD 3–5 but did not differ between studies with regards to region or patients' mean age or sex. In patients with CKD, polypharmacy was associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality, kidney failure, faster eGFR decline, lower QoL, and higher medication nonadherence, adverse drug reactions, and potentially inappropriate medications.

Conclusions

The prevalence of polypharmacy in patients with CKD was over 80%, and highest in patients with a kidney transplant and those receiving dialysis. No causes of heterogeneity were identified, indicating that polypharmacy is an issue for all patients with CKD. Polypharmacy is associated with worse clinical outcomes, lower QoL, and medication-related problems in patients with CKD.

Clinical Trial registry name and registration number:

PROSPERO (CRD42022331941).

Clinical impact of medication review and deprescribing in older inpatients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy is a primary risk factor for the prescription of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), drug-drug interactions (DDIs), and ultimately, adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Medication review and deprescribing represent effective strategies to simplify therapeutic regimens, minimize risks, and reduce PIM prescriptions. This systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental and observational studies aimed to evaluate the impact of different medication review and deprescribing interventions in hospitalized older patients.

METHODS

Experimental and observational prospective cohort studies evaluating the clinical effects of medication review and deprescribing strategies in older hospitalized patients were searched in the bibliographic databases, PubMed, Embase, and Scopus, from inception until January 8, 2024. A narrative synthesis of the results was provided, along with a meta-analysis of dichotomous data (i.e., re-hospitalizations and mortality).

RESULTS

Overall, 21 randomized controlled trials, 7 non-randomized interventional studies, and 2 prospective cohort studies were included in the systematic review. Of these, 14 (46.7%) assessed medication appropriateness as the primary outcome, while the remaining evaluated clinical outcomes (e.g., length of hospital stay, hospital readmissions, emergency department visits, and incidence of ADRs) and/or quality of life. The meta-analysis revealed a slight but statistically significant 8% reduction in hospital readmissions (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.85-0.99) following medication review and deprescribing, but no significant impact on mortality (HR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.96-1.00). Of the 30 included studies, 21 were considered at high risk of bias, mostly due to potential deviations from intended interventions and randomization processes. The remaining nine studies had "some concerns" (eight studies) or were considered at "low" risk of bias (one study).

CONCLUSION

Medication review and deprescribing are associated with potential benefits in reducing hospital readmission rates among hospitalized older patients, particularly through the reduction of PIM prescriptions. The integration of thorough medication review and deprescribing protocols in hospital settings may improve post-discharge outcomes and reduce overall healthcare costs.