Association of polypharmacy with nutritional status, functional ability and cognitive capacity over a three‐year period in an elderly population
Abstract
Purpose To determine the association of polypharmacy with nutritional status, functional ability and cognitive capacity among elderly persons. Methods This was a prospective cohort study of 294 survivors from the population-based Geriatric Multidisciplinary Strategy for the Good Care of the Elderly (GeMS) Study, with yearly follow-ups during 2004 to 2007. Participants were the citizens of Kuopio, Finland, aged 75 years and older at baseline. Polypharmacy status was categorized as non-polypharmacy (0-5 drugs), polypharmacy (6-9 drugs) and excessive polypharmacy (10+ drugs). A linear mixed model approach was used for analysis the impact of polypharmacy on short form of mini nutritional assessment (MNA-SF), instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) and mini-mental status examination (MMSE) scores. Results Excessive polypharmacy was associated with declined nutritional status (p = 0.001), functional ability (p Conclusions Excessive polypharmacy is associated with decline in nutritional status, functional ability and cognitive capacity in elderly persons. However, the changes in nutrition, physical functionality and cognition over a three-year period cannot be predicted by polypharmacy status.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Polypharmacy defined as >10 medicines was associated with an increased risk of malnutrition after three years in those >75 years.
“For example, a systematic review of polypharmacy defined as !5 medicines in subjects !65 years of age was significantly associated with malnutrition [172], and polypharmacy when defined as >10 medicines was associated with an increased risk of malnutrition after three years in those >75 years [173].”
From ESPEN guideline on nutritional support for polymorbid medical inpatients (2023) · cites this paper as [173]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 45 · Cited by 417
- Authors
- Jyrkkä, J., Enlund, H., Lavikainen, P., Sulkava, R., & Hartikainen, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Eastern Finland (FI)
- Kuwait University (KW)
- Corresponding author
- Jyrkkä, Johanna
- Venue
- Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-02-09
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 514-522
- ISSN
- 1053-8569 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1557
- OpenAlex
- W2084734925
- Cited by
- 417
- References
- 45
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 39 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 8.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Kela
- Suomen Kulttuurirahasto
- Jenny ja Antti Wihurin Rahasto
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Chronic Disease Management Strategies
- Keywords
- polypharmacy, excessive polypharmacy, older adults, nutritional status, malnutrition, functional capacity, instrumental activities of daily living, cognitive decline, cognitive ability
- MeSH terms
- Activities of Daily Living, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cognition, Finland, Humans, Nutritional Status, Prospective Studies, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Socioeconomic Factors, Cohort Studies, Geriatric Assessment, Nutrition Assessment, Drug Utilization Review, Polypharmacy, Malnutrition
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
