Interventions to enhance in-home taking medication among older adults with multimorbidity/polypharmacy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

改善患有多种疾病/多种药物的老年人居家服药情况的干预措施:系统评价和荟萃分析

阅读:3

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Global population ageing is linked to increasing multimorbidity and polypharmacy. This shift places pressure on caregivers, who often lack training and face challenges like medication mismanagement. Our objective was to collate scientific evidence on interventions to enhance medication management among multimorbid older adults living in the community. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42024513056) following PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched up to July 9, 2024. Eligible studies were RCTs or quasi-experimental designs involving home-dwelling adults aged ≥60 years with ≥2 chronic conditions or ≥5 medications, assessing adherence or health outcomes, and ≥30 days of follow-up. Screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed in duplicate. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted using R. ORs (95% CI) were calculated for binary outcomes and SMDs (95% CI) for continuous variables. RESULTS: Of 7,980 citations, 49 articles met the eligibility criteria, corresponding to 48 unique studies. Medication adherence measured with the MMAS-4 indicated a significant effect (OR = 1.55; 95% CI 1.08-2.28; I(2) = 32.4%), while continuous measures showed no effect (SMD = 0.00; 95% CI = -0.08-0.09; I(2) = 2%). Readmissions decreased at medium-term follow-up (OR = 0.41; 95% CI 0.25-0.69). Results for ED visits were inconclusive due to heterogeneity. Primary care contacts showed a weak, non-significant effect (SMD = 0.06; 95% CI = -0.04-0.16; I(2) = 42%). No effect was found for quality of life or mortality. DRPs and costs lacked conclusive evidence. Most studies had a moderate to high risk of bias. Certainty of evidence was very low. DISCUSSION: Interventions showed limited and variable effects. Adherence improvements were identified only for the MMAS-4, while other measures showed no benefit. A short-term reduction in readmissions was observed, but effects were not sustained, and the certainty of evidence was low. This review highlights evidence gaps, particularly the need for standardized outcomes, more sustained and multifactorial interventions, economic evaluation, and higher methodological quality, to support evidence-based policymaking and optimize future interventions. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: The systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024513056). The registration link is: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024513056.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。