Potentially inappropriate prescriptions to Brazilian older people with Alzheimer disease: A cross-sectional study.

ABSTRACT: Older adults are the leading users of medications, where this can be associated with a high number of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) and consequent harm to health. No Brazilian study evaluating potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) was found. This study determined and analyzed the prevalence of PIP and PIM prescribed for older people with AD.A cross-sectional study was carried out at the Specialty Drugs Pharmacy in the city of Sorocaba, São Paulo State, Brazil. The MEDEX system provided the register in older people with AD and data were collected during interviews with patients and/or caregivers between June and September 2017. The PIMs were identified according to the 2019 Beers Criteria. The association between PIMs and independent variables was analyzed by Poisson regression.This study included 234 older patients with AD. The prevalence of PIP prescribed was 66.7% (n = 156). Of the 1073 medications prescribed, 30.5% (n = 327) were inappropriate with most affecting the central nervous system or cardiovascular, particularly quetiapine (12.8%) and acetylsalicylic acid (11.6%), respectively. Around 45.2% of the PIMs should be avoided in older people, especially sertraline (14.2%) and clonazepam (7.4%). After adjusted analysis, the PIMs were associated with the diagnosis of depression (P = 0.010) and the number of comorbidities (P = 0.005).There was a high number of PIMs among older people, a substantial number of which should have been avoided in this population. Health care professionals can apply these findings to improve safety in the use of medications for treating patients with AD.

Frequency and Severity of Adverse Drug Reactions to Medications Prescribed for Alzheimer's Disease in a Brazilian City: Cross-Sectional Study.

Background: There is lack of national studies that assess the risks associated with the drugs provided under the Brazilian public health system for treating Alzheimer's disease. Then, this study determined the prevalence and severity of self-reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs) prescribed to patients with Alzheimer's disease in the Brazilian public health system. Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out based on public data from the MEDEX system (information on dispensing data, known as exceptional dispensing medications) and interviews with patients and/or caregivers who get access to Alzheimer's drugs at a public pharmacy in a large Brazilian city, between July and September 2017, inquiring about ADRs and serious adverse events (SAEs). Results: The subjects were asked about ADRs and SAEs related to the use of donepezil, galantamine, rivastigmine and memantine. Out of 285 patients enrolled on the database, 250 participated in the study (87.7%). Among the participants, approximately 63.0% were female, 70.3% aged ≥75 years and 70.3% had comorbidities. Overall, 209 patients (83.6%) reported at least one ADR (total 1,149 ADRs) and rivastigmine was associated with the largest number of ADRs per patient (7.9 ADRs/patient). The predominant adverse effects were psychiatric disorders with common frequency (57.1%) and mild severity (89.0%). Six patients (2.4%) had SAEs that required hospitalization. The use of antipsychotics was the variable associated with ADR (OR = 4.95; 95% CI: 1.45-16.93; p = 0.011). Conclusion: There was a large number of reported ADRs and most of them were of common frequency and mild severity, being mainly related to psychiatric disorders. Considering the fragility of these patients, it is important to improve safety-related care in the use of drugs for treating this disease.

[Analgesics, antipyretics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in pediatric prescriptions]. / Analgésicos, antipiréticos e anti-inflamatórios não esteroides em prescrições pediátricas.

The use of analgesic, antipyretic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs by children more often than not neither have the approval of regulatory agencies nor the endorsement of scientific evidence. Pediatric prescriptions can be influenced by factors that do not promote the rational use of drugs by this category. The objective of this study was to evaluate the use of analgesic, antipyretic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in children, considering the public (SUS) and private (N-SUS) sectors. The sample comprised 150 prescriptions (101 SUS and 49 Non-SUS) followed by interviews with the caregivers in eighteen locations (nine private drugstores and nine units of the Unified Health System (SUS). The drugs were prescribed appropriately, by age group, only in 21.8% (SUS) and 29.6% (Non-SUS) prescriptions. Over 95% of prescription, regardless of source, did not meet the established criteria for evaluation of their rational use, with dosage, frequency and duration of treatment errors. The analysis of prescriptions for analgesic, antipyretic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for children revealed no significant differences between the public and private sectors.

Analgésicos, antipiréticos e anti-inflamatórios não esteroides em prescrições pediátricas / Analgesics, antipyretics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in pediatric prescriptions

O uso de analgésicos, antipiréticos e anti-inflamatórios não esteroides por crianças muitas vezes não tem aprovação das agências reguladoras, nem respaldo das evidências científicas. Prescrições pediátricas podem ser influenciadas por fatores que não favorecem o uso racional dos medicamentos desta classe. O objetivo deste trabalho foi avaliar a utilização de analgésicos, antipiréticos e anti-inflamatórios não esteroides em crianças, considerando os setores público (SUS) e privado (N-SUS). A amostra foi composta por 150 prescrições (101 SUS e 49 N-SUS) seguidas de entrevista aos cuidadores, em dezoito locais (nove drogarias privadas e nove Unidades de Saúde do SUS). Os medicamentos foram prescritos de forma apropriada, segundo faixa etária, somente em 21,8% (SUS) e 29,6% (N-SUS) das prescrições. Mais de 95% das receitas, independente da origem, não atenderam aos critérios estabelecidos para avaliação do uso racional, com erros de dose, frequência e duração do tratamento. A análise das prescrições de analgésicos, antipiréticos e anti-inflamatórios não esteroides para crianças não apresentou diferenças significantes nos setores público e privado.

The use of analgesic, antipyretic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs by children more often than not neither have the approval of regulatory agencies nor the endorsement of scientific evidence. Pediatric prescriptions can be influenced by factors that do not promote the rational use of drugs by this category. The objective of this study was to evaluate the use of analgesic, antipyretic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in children, considering the public (SUS) and private (N-SUS) sectors. The sample comprised 150 prescriptions (101 SUS and 49 Non-SUS) followed by interviews with the caregivers in eighteen locations (nine private drugstores and nine units of the Unified Health System (SUS). The drugs were prescribed appropriately, by age group, only in 21.8% (SUS) and 29.6% (Non-SUS) prescriptions. Over 95% of prescription, regardless of source, did not meet the established criteria for evaluation of their rational use, with dosage, frequency and duration of treatment errors. The analysis of prescriptions for analgesic, antipyretic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for children revealed no significant differences between the public and private sectors.