Abstract
BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use are common problems in older adults. Safe prescription practices are a necessity. The tools employed for the identification of PIM sometimes do not concur with each other. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients ≥60 years who visited the Geriatric Oncology Clinic of the Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India from 2018 to 2021 was performed. Beer's-2015, STOPP/START criteria v2, PRISCUS-2010, Fit fOR The Aged (FORTA)-2018, and the EU(7)-PIM list-2015 were the tools used to assess PIM. Every patient was assigned a standardized PIM value (SPV) for each scale, which represented the ratio of the number of PIMs identified by a given scale to the total number of medications taken. The median SPV of all five tools was considered the reference standard for each patient. Bland-Altman plots were utilized to determine agreement between each scale and the reference. Association between baseline variables and PIM use was determined using multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 467 patients included in this analysis, there were 372 (79.66%) males and 95 (20.34%) females with an average age of 70 ± 5.91 years. The EU(7)-PIM list was found to have the highest level of agreement given by a bias estimate of 0.010, the lowest compared to any other scale. The 95% CI of the bias was in the narrow range of -0.001 to 0.022, demonstrating the precision of the estimate. In comparison, the bias (95%) CI of Beer's criteria, STOPP/START criteria, PRISCUS list, and FORTA list were -0.039 (-0.053 to -0.025), 0.076 (0.060 to 0.092), 0.035 (0.021 to 0.049), and -0.148 (-0.165 to -0.130), respectively. Patients on polypharmacy had significantly higher PIM use compared to those without (OR = 1.47 (1.33-1.63), p = <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The EU(7)-PIM list was found to have the least bias and hence can be considered the most reliable among all other tools studied.