Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 103520

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2024 | Month : January | Volume : 18 | Issue : 1 | Page : FC14 - FC17 Full Version

Patterns and Outcomes of Polypharmacy and Effect of Potentially Inappropriate Medications in Elderly Patients undergoing Orthopaedic Surgeries: A Retrospective Observational Study


Published: January 1, 2024 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2024/66774.18962
Sara Yohannan, Serah Johny, Sara Korula Vergis, Celine Thalappillil Mathew

1. Intern, Department of Anaesthesiology, MOSC Medical College, Kolenchery, Ernakulam, Kerala, India. 2. Associate Professor, Department of Pharmacology, MOSC Medical College, Kolenchery, Ernakulam, Kerala, India. 3. Professor, Department of Anaesthesiology, MOSC Medical College, Kolenchery, Ernakulam, Kerala, India. 4. Statistician, Department of Community Medicine, MOSC Medical College, Kolenchery, Ernakulam, Kerala, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Serah Johny,
Associate Professor, Department of Pharmacology, MOSC Medical College, Kolenchery, Ernakulam-682311, Kerala, India.
E-mail: serahjohny@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Prescription of Potentially Inappropriate Medication (PIM) among elderly patients is becoming a global concern. There has been an increase in the number of elderly patients coming for operative procedures, especially in orthopaedic surgery, due to the association of advanced age with chronic musculoskeletal conditions, such as osteoarthritis, and an increased incidence of fragility fractures.

Aim: To determine the prevalence of polypharmacy and PIMs among elderly patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery.

Materials and Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted from February 2022 to April 2022 in the Orthopaedic Department of Anaesthesiology, MOSC Medical College, Kolenchery, Ernakulam, Kerala, India. Hospital records of 130 patients aged 65 years and above, who underwent orthopaedic surgeries from January 2016 to December 2021, were included. The prescriptions during the perioperative period were analysed for polypharmacy, defined as the use of five or more drugs. The American Geriatric Society (AGS) 2019 Beers criteria were used to identify PIMs, drug interactions, and drug-syndrome interactions. Chi-square tests were performed on clinically significant variables to assess their effect on hospital stay, with a p-value of <0.05 considered significant.

Results: Polypharmacy was highest on postoperative day 1, with 119 patients (91.5%) experiencing it. The study observed a high prevalence of PIMs, with 106 patients (81.53%) affected. The most commonly used PIMs were Pantoprazole, followed by Piroxicam, Regular human Insulin, and Glimepride. A significant association was observed between hospital stay ≥10 days, postoperative Intensive Care Unit (ICU) stay, and preoperative polypharmacy (p-value=0.002).

Conclusion: Polypharmacy and PIMs in patients above 65 years of age admitted for surgeries remain major concerns. Further exploration of current pharmacologic practices in the perioperative period and interventions, such as physician education programs regarding PIMs, are needed.

Keywords

Beers criteria, Drug interactions, Geriatric, Orthopaedics, Prevalence

The World Health Organisation (WHO) predicts that between 2015 and 2050, the proportion of the world’s population over 65 years will be nearly 22%, outnumbering children younger than five years (1). Healthcare and social systems must be prepared to address this demographic shift. There has been an increase in the number of elderly patients undergoing operative procedures, particularly in orthopaedic surgery, due to the association of advanced age with chronic musculoskeletal conditions such as osteoarthritis and an increased incidence of fragility fractures (2),(3). Additionally, advancing age is associated with multiple co-morbidities like Diabetes Mellitus (DM), Hypertension (HTN), coronary artery disease, chronic renal and pulmonary diseases, arthritis, etc., which make polypharmacy inevitable (3).

Polypharmacy, defined as the use of five or more medications and/ or the administration of more medications than clinically indicated, represents unnecessary drug use and is a concern for this population. Aging can significantly alter pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic qualities, such as changes in body composition and reductions in kidney and liver function. This often leads to drug-drug interactions and a disproportionately high rate of Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) (4). Polypharmacy increases the risk of drug-related events such as falls, confusion, and functional decline in the elderly. Therefore, the appropriateness of polypharmacy needs to be analysed using different criteria, including Potentially Inappropriate Medications (PIMs), medication underuse, and medication duplication (4).

The PIMs are medications that should be avoided or used with caution, or their dose should be optimised in the elderly, as the risks outweigh the benefits due to the physiology of old age, drug-drug interactions, or drug-disease interactions. Inappropriate prescribing in elderly patients has become a public health concern due to its high prevalence and associated adverse effects, such as ADRs, morbidity, hospitalisation, healthcare utilisation, and increased costs (5). The search for PIMs was based on the 2019 updated AGS Beers criteria, developed as a tool to improve medication safety in elderly patients (5).

Literature has shown a high prevalence of polypharmacy in the elderly population of India (6). However, there is limited knowledge about how polypharmacy affects outcomes after orthopaedic surgery. Therefore, the present study aimed to determine the prevalence of polypharmacy and PIMs among elderly patients (>65 years) undergoing orthopaedic surgery in a tertiary teaching hospital using the 2019 updated AGS Beers criteria. This study is aimed to assess the effect of preoperative polypharmacy on postoperative complications and hospital stay in these patients (5).

Material and Methods

The present retrospective observational study was conducted in the Orthopaedic Department of Anaesthesiology, MOSC Medical College, Kolenchery, Ernakulam, Kerala, India from February 2022 to April 2022. Ethical approval, numbered MOSC/IEC/620/2022, with a waiver of written informed consent, was obtained from the Institutional Review Board/Ethics Committees.

Inclusion criteria: The study included hospital records of 130 patients aged 65 years and above who underwent orthopaedic surgeries from January 2016 to December 2021.

Exclusion criteria: Patients with incomplete information about their drugs in medical records and patients with concomitant surgeries other than orthopaedic surgery in the same admission were excluded from the study.

Sample size calculation: The sample size was calculated based on the primary objective of finding the prevalence of polypharmacy. A pilot study was conducted using 20 case records, and the sample size was estimated to be 126 patients using the formula:

n=Z21-α/2 pq/(pε)2

Where,
p- Anticipated proportion of event
q=1-p
ε-Precision
Z1-α/2- statistical table values
p=0.761 (from pilot study)
q=1-p
ε=10%
Z1-α/2=0.7696 (at 5%α)
Then, n=125.6
Minimum sample size, n=126

Study Procedure

A manual review of patients’ medical records with a structured data extraction form was conducted. The medications prescribed were analysed according to the 2019 Beers criteria. The data were de-identified by coding to maintain confidentiality. The variables included in the form were age, gender, associated chronic co-morbidities, medications prescribed with dose during the perioperative period, type of surgery (elective/emergency), site of surgery (upper limb/lower limb), American Society of Anaesthesiologists classification (ASA class) (7), and type of anaesthesia (general or local anaesthesia).

The perioperative period was defined as the day of admission to the day of discharge for the study group and was classified into:

?D1- Preoperative day
?D2- First postoperative day
?D3- Date of discharge/deceased

The prescriptions were analysed on D1, D2, and D3 for polypharmacy, which was defined as the use of five or more drugs. The 2019 AGS Beers criteria, an explicit list of Potentially Inappropriate Medications (PIMs) typically best avoided by older adults in most circumstances or under specific situations, was used to identify PIMs, drug-syndrome interactions, and drug-drug interactions. Postoperative outcomes, including hospital stay and ICU days, were recorded.

Statistical Analysis

All data analysis was performed using Microsoft excel and SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 18.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Categorical data were summarised using frequency and percentage. Continuous variables that followed a normal distribution were summarised using mean and Standard Deviation (SD). To identify the association between polypharmacy and hospital stay, the data was divided into two groups based on a hospital stay of more than or equal to 10 days, and a Chi-square test was performed. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant for all tests.

Results

The study included 130 participants above the age of 65 years who underwent orthopaedic surgeries from 2016 to 2021. The mean age of the population was 72.63±7.87 years. Of the participants, 59 (45.4%) were males and 71 (54.6%) were females (Table/Fig 1).

Out of the total surgeries, 38 (29.2%) were Upper Limb (UL) surgeries and 92 (70.7%) were Lower Limb (LL) surgeries. Among the upper limb surgeries, 19 (50%) were major surgeries, while among the lower limb surgeries, 87 (94.5%) were major surgeries. Among the participants, 106 (81.5%) underwent major surgeries and 24 (18.5%) underwent minor surgeries. Additionally, 102 (78.5%) participants underwent elective surgeries, while 28 (21.5%) underwent emergency surgeries. General Anaesthesia (GA) was administered to 31 (23.8%) participants, while Regional Anaesthesia (RA) was given to 99 (76.1%) participants. The most commonly observed co-morbidities among the participants were hypertension in 78 (60%) patients, Diabetes Mellitus (DM) in 59 (45.3%) patients, and Ischaemic Heart Disease (IHD) in 36 (27.6%) patients. A total of 8 (6.1%) patients had Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD), with two of them undergoing regular haemodialysis.

The prevalence of polypharmacy was highest on the first postoperative day, with 119 (91.5%) participants experiencing polypharmacy (Table/Fig 2). A total of 9 patients (6.9%) had major polypharmacy, defined as taking more than 10 medications, while 58 patients (44.6%) were taking 5 to 10 medications on the preoperative day (Table/Fig 3). The prevalence of Potentially Inappropriate Medications (PIMs) in the present study was alarmingly high, with 106 (81.53%) participants using PIMs (Table/Fig 4).

The most commonly used PIMs were pantoprazole (a proton pump inhibitor), followed by piroxicam (a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug), regular human insulin, and glimepiride (a sulfonylurea). Drug-drug interactions were noted with the use of amiodarone and warfarin in a patient with chronic atrial fibrillation, as well as warfarin and etodolac in another patient. Tramadol was used as an analgesic in 80% of patients, along with paracetamol. Non Steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drug (NSAIDs), including piroxicam, etodolac, aceclofenac, and diclofenac, were used in 23 (17.69%) patients on the first postoperative day (Table/Fig 5).

A statistically significant association was found between preoperative polypharmacy and hospital stay of 10 days or more, as well as postoperative ICU stay (Table/Fig 6). No significant association was found between various variables such as emergency surgeries, diabetes, hypertension, and hospital stay duration (Table/Fig 7).

Discussion

The present study examined the prevalence of polypharmacy and Potentially Inappropriate Medications (PIMs) among older adults undergoing orthopaedic surgeries. The study included 130 patients above the age of 65 years, with 54.6% being females. The prevalence of polypharmacy was found to be 91.5%, while the prevalence of PIMs was 81.53%, which were both alarmingly high. Polypharmacy is common among older adults due to their chronic co-morbidities (8),(9). However, the prevalence of polypharmacy and its association with orthopaedic surgeries and outcomes are underreported.

The study found that the frequency of polypharmacy increased from preoperative to postoperative and discharge stages of hospital stay. On the first postoperative day, 91.5% of patients were on more than five drugs, which could be attributed to the addition of standard antibiotics, analgesics, antiemetics, and Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPIs).

Polypharmacy has been associated with negative consequences such as postoperative complications, functional decline, repeated hospitalisation, and increased mortality (10). The higher incidence of polypharmacy observed in the present study on the first postoperative day could potentially contribute to these negative outcomes.

The study also identified PIMs using the Beers criteria 2019. The prevalence of PIMs in the present study (81.53%) was higher than in previous studies. In a 201 6 retrospective study of a colorectal cancer surgery population, in patients aged more than 75, the prevalence of PIMs was 26.7% (11). In the present study, the most commonly prescribed PIMs were PPIs, followed by piroxicam (a non steroidal anti-inflammatory drug), regular human insulin, and Glimepride (Sulfonyurea). [The Beer’s criteria advice is to avoid using insulin sliding scale with short- or rapid-acting insulin without concurrent use of basal or long-acting insulin to minimise the risk of hypoglycaemia] (5). In a similar study done by Sharma R et al., the prevalence of PIM as identified by 201 9 Beers criteria was 61.9% and the most commonly prescribed PIMs were PPI, short acting insulin according to sliding scale, clonazepam and glimepiride (12). Bhatt A et al., in their study from two teaching hospitals in Southern India, found that the prevalence of polypharmacy was 45.8% and PIMs prescription was 34.0% by 2015 Beers criteria. The most common PIMs in their study are being PPIs followed by benzodiazepines, peripheral alpha-1 blockers, and first-generation antihistamines (13). According to 2019 Beers criteria PPIs like omeprazole, pantoprazole and rabeprazoles are to be avoided in elderly, as they are associated with the risk of Clostridium difficile infections and increased probability of bone loss and fractures (14),(15),(16). But PPIs are one of the most commonly prescribed drugs for reducing gastric acid secretion, especially in the perioperative period.

The high prevalence of Potentially Inappropriate Medications (PIMs) in the present study (81.53%) was primarily due to the routine use of pantoprazole on the first postoperative day. Pantoprazole is given to reduce gastric acid secretion in patients who are Nil Per Os (NPO) for surgery and to prevent stress-related gastric mucosal damage (17).

Perioperative complications, including gastrointestinal bleeding, can lead to increased morbidity and mortality in elderly patients with hip fractures. The use of PPIs has been shown to significantly reduce Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and decrease 90-day mortality in these patients (18),(19). However, it is important to be mindful of drug interactions with benzodiazepines and the potential for electrolyte disturbances when prescribing PPIs to the elderly. PPIs should only be prescribed for appropriate indications, at the lowest effective dose, and for the shortest duration. The need for long-term treatment should be periodically reviewed.

Other inappropriate medications prescribed in the present study included NSAIDs for pain relief. While the majority of patients received tramadol and paracetamol as analgesics, 17.6% were given NSAIDs on the first postoperative day, with a few receiving them preoperatively. Benzodiazepines, regular insulin, and glimepiride were also identified as PIMs in the study group.

Four patients in the study had drug-drug interactions according to the 2019 Beers criteria. One patient was prescribed amiodarone along with warfarin, which can potentially lead to excessive anticoagulation and increased bleeding risk. Other drug interactions included pantoprazole with benzodiazepines, amiodarone with glimepiride, and tramadol with quetiapine.

The study found a significant association between longer hospital stays and preoperative polypharmacy. This is consistent with a study by Abe N et al., which found that polypharmacy at admission was an independent predictor for prolonged hospitalisation in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgeries (20). These results suggest that prescriptions for geriatric patients should take into account their medical history and current medications.

There are multiple criteria available for prescribing drugs in the elderly, such as the Beers criteria and STOPP-START criteria (21). However, the prevalence of polypharmacy and PIMs in the present study suggests that awareness of these criteria in clinical practice is limited. A comprehensive geriatric assessment should be conducted, evaluating both the individual’s functional and medical status. The use of automated warnings may help address inappropriate drugs and drug interactions.

Limitation(s)

One limitation of the present study was that the Beers criteria does not take into consideration a person’s overall health, underlying medical conditions, or other specific circumstances that may guide a healthcare provider’s choice of medication. Therefore, some of the drugs identified as potentially inappropriate in the present study may not actually be inappropriate in certain cases. Additionally, relying solely on the Beers criteria may not provide accurate results, and the use of additional tools could have potentially reduced the percentage of potentially inappropriate medications.

Conclusion

The present study reveals a concerning prevalence of polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications in elderly patients (above 65 years of age) admitted for orthopaedic surgeries. The current practices of clinicians in the pharmacological management of elderly patients in the perioperative period should be further investigated, and interventions such as physician education programs should be planned to increase awareness regarding potentially inappropriate medications. The present study aimed to improve clinicians’ awareness of the Beers criteria as a tool to enhance medication safety and emphasises the need to establish drug policies regarding the use of potentially inappropriate medications. Strategies for the safe use of medication in the elderly population include setting prescribing limits, using safer alternatives, and discontinuing harmful medications.

References

1.
He W, Goodkind D, Kowal PR. An aging world: 2015. https://www.researchgate. net/publication/299528572_An_Aging_World_2015.
2.
Leme LE, do Carmo Sitta M, Toledo M, da Silva Henriques S. Orthopedic surgery among the elderly: Clinical characteristics. Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (English Edition). 2011;46(3):238-46. [crossref]
3.
Christensen K, Doblhammer G, Rau R, Vaupel JW. Ageing populations: The challenges ahead. Lancet. 2009;374(9696):1196-208. [crossref][PubMed]
4.
Hajjar ER, Cafiero AC, Hanlon JT. Polypharmacy in elderly patients. Am J Geriatr Pharmacother. 2007;5(4):345-51. [crossref][PubMed]
5.
By the 2019 American Geriatrics Society Beers Criteria® Update Expert Panel. American Geriatrics Society 2019 Updated AGS Beers Criteria® for potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2019;67(4):674-94. [crossref][PubMed]
6.
Bhagavathula AS, Vidyasagar K, Chhabra M, Rashid M, Sharma R, Bandari DK, et al. Prevalence of polypharmacy, hyperpolypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults in India: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Pharmacol. 2021;12:685518. [crossref][PubMed]
7.
Doyle DJ, Hendrix JM, Garmon EH. American Society of Anesthesiologists classification (ASA class).In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023 Jan. 2023 Aug 17.
8.
Mizokami F, Koide Y, Noro T, Furuta K. Polypharmacy with common diseases in hospitalised elderly patients. Am J Geriatr Pharmacother. 2012;10(2):123-28. [crossref][PubMed]
9.
Tan EC, Sluggett JK, Johnell K, Onder G, Elseviers M, Morin L, et al. Research priorities for optimising geriatric pharmacotherapy: An international consensus. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018;19(3):193-99. [crossref][PubMed]
10.
McIsaac DI, Wong CA, Bryson GL, van Walraven C. Association of polypharmacy with survival, complications, and healthcare resource use after elective noncardiac surgery: A population-based cohort study. Anesthesiology. 2018;128(6):1140-50. [crossref][PubMed]
11.
Jeong YM, Lee E, Kim KI, Chung JE, In Park H, Lee BK, et al. Association of preoperative medication use with post-operative delirium in surgical oncology patients receiving comprehensive geriatric assessment. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research. 2018;30(10):1177-85. [crossref][PubMed]
12.
Sharma R, Bansal P, Garg R, Ranjan R, Kumar R, Arora M. Prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication and its correlates in elderly hospitalised patients: A cross-sectional study based on Beers criteria. J Family Community Med. 2020;27(3):200-07. [crossref][PubMed]
13.
Bhatt AN, Paul SS, Krishnamoorthy S, Baby BT, Mathew A, Nair BR. Potentially inappropriate medications prescribed for older persons: A study from two teaching hospitals in Southern India. J Family Community Med. 2019;26(3):187-92. [crossref][PubMed]
14.
Freedberg DE, Salmasian H, Friedman C, Abrams JA. Proton pump inhibitors and risk for recurrent Clostridium difficile infection among inpatients. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013;108(11):1794-801. [crossref][PubMed]
15.
Dial S, Alrasadi K, Manoukian C, Huang A, Menzies D. Risk of Clostridium difficile diarrhea among hospital inpatients prescribed proton pump inhibitors: Cohort and case-control studies. CMAJ. 2004;171(1):33-38. [crossref][PubMed]
16.
Yang YX, Lewis JD, Epstein S, Metz DC. Long-term proton pump inhibitor therapy and risk of hip fracture. JAMA. 2006;296(24):2947-53. [crossref][PubMed]
17.
Pisegna JR, Karlstadt RG, Norton JA, Fogel R, Oh DS, Jay Graepel G, et al. Effect of preoperative intravenous pantoprazole in elective-surgery patients: A pilot study. Dig Dis Sci. 2009;54(5):1041-49. [crossref][PubMed]
18.
Chuene MA, Pietrzak JR, Sekeitto AR, Mokete L. Should we routinely prescribe proton pump inhibitors perioperatively in elderly patients with hip fractures? A review of the literature. EFORT Open Reviews. 2021;6(8):686-91. [crossref][PubMed]
19.
Singh R, Trickett R, Meyer CE, Lewthwaite S, Ford D. Prophylactic proton pump inhibitors in femoral neck fracture patients-A life-and cost-saving intervention. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2016;98(6):371-75. [crossref][PubMed]
20.
Abe N, Kakamu T, Kumagai T, Hidaka T, Masuishi Y, Endo S, et al. Polypharmacy at admission prolongs length of hospitalisation in gastrointestinal surgery patients. Geriatrics and Gerontology International. 2020;20(11):1085-90. [crossref][PubMed]
21.
Ubeda A, Ferrándiz L, Maicas N, Gómez C, Bonet M, Peris JE. Potentially inappropriate prescribing in institutionalised older patients in Spain: The STOPP-START criteria compared with the Beers criteria. Pharm Pract (Granada). 2012;10(2):83-91.?[crossref][PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2024/66774.18962

Date of Submission: Jul 28, 2023
Date of Peer Review: Oct 22, 2023
Date of Acceptance: Dec 07, 2023
Date of Publishing: Jan 01, 2024

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? No
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Jul 28, 2023
• Manual Googling: Nov 15, 2023
• iThenticate Software: Dec 05, 2023 (23%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

EMENDATIONS: 6

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com