A Community-Based Cross-Sectional Study to Assess the Prevalence of Polypharmacy and Potentially Inappropriate Medications among Elderly Patients in Urban Areas of Western Rajasthan

Le résumé fourni par la source

Abstract Background: The elderly population is increasing worldwide, including India. This population has multiple chronic conditions, leading to the prescription of multiple drugs called polypharmacy. This increases the risk of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). This study aimed to assess the prevalence of polypharmacy and PIM use among elderly individuals in urban western Rajasthan and identify associated factors. Methods: A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted from April to June 2024 in Jodhpur, Rajasthan. A total of 265 elderly individuals (aged 60 and above) were selected through convenience sampling. Data on demographics, comorbidities, and medication use were collected using a semi-structured, pre-validated questionnaire. Polypharmacy was defined as the use of five or more medications. PIMs were identified using the 2023 American Geriatrics Society Beers Criteria. Data were analyzed using SPSS v23.0 with logistic regression to identify predictors. Results: The prevalence of polypharmacy was 64.5% (95% CI 58.6–70.04). Diabetes (OR: 4.34), hypertension (OR: 2.24), and heart disease (OR: 4.42) were significantly associated with polypharmacy. PIMs were used by 65.3% of participants and were significantly linked to depression ( P = 0.003), anxiety ( P = 0.007), and heart disease ( P < 0.001). Polypharmacy was strongly associated with PIM use ( P < 0.001). Conclusion: Polypharmacy and PIM use are highly prevalent among the elderly in urban western Rajasthan. Chronic diseases, such as diabetes and heart conditions, significantly increase medication usage and patient risk. These findings emphasize the need for regular medication reviews, elderly-focused prescribing guidelines, and enhanced provider awareness to ensure safe drug use in geriatric care.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.