Patient safety in primary health care and polypharmacy: cross-sectional survey among patients with chronic diseases
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.3123.3217Keywords:
Pharmacoepidemiology; Polypharmacy; Potentially Inappropriate Medication List; Primary Health Care; Patient Safety; Chronic DiseaseAbstract
Objective:
to characterize and determine the polypharmacy prevalence in patients with chronic diseases and to identify the factors associated, in order to improvement of pharmaceutical care focused on patient safety.
Method:
cross-sectional study included 558 patients, covered by primary health care, using a household and structured questionnaire. We analyzed the data on polypharmacy and its clinical and socioeconomic factors. Poisson regression analysis with robust variance was applied, with results expressed in prevalence ratio.
Results:
the results showed that polypharmacy (consumption of four or more drugs) was of 37.6%. The prevalence ratio analyses identified independent variables associated with polypharmacy: age (3.05), economic strata (0.33), way of medication acquisition through a combination of out-of-pocket and Brazilian public health system (1.44), diabetes and hypertension (2.11), comorbidities (coronary artery disease 2.26) and hospital admission (1.73). In the analyses, inappropriate medication use of the 278 patients (≥ 65 years) was associated with polypharmacy (prevalence ratio 4.04).
Conclusion:
polypharmacy study becomes an opportunity to guide the strategies for the patient safety to promote the medication without harm in chronic diseases.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.
