Cited by 17Schizophrenia research and treatmentPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesPharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions

Adverse effects associated with antipsychotic use in older adults

Khalid, Javeria, Aparasu, Rajender R.·2024·Expert Opinion on Drug Safety

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Antipsychotic (AP) medications are extensively utilized for diverse psychiatric and non-psychiatric conditions, but they are associated with significant adverse effects in older adults. This expert opinion review provides an updated profile of adverse effects associated with AP medications in older adults. AREAS COVERED: This review specifically examines real-world evidence for adverse events associated with AP use, including all-cause mortality, falls and fractures, diabetes, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, acute kidney injury, venous thromboembolism/pulmonary embolism, extrapyramidal symptoms, and infections based on real-world evidence. EXPERT OPINION: This comprehensive safety review of AP revealed multiple adverse events in older adults. All-cause mortality, more associated with typical APs than atypicals, underscores a dose-dependent risk, urging cautious prescribing practices and avoidance of typical APs. Falls/fractures associated with atypical APs highlight the importance of judicious dosing and -close monitoring, especially after initiation. Cardiovascular risks, particularly stroke, with AP use emphasize the need for vigilant monitoring. Extrapyramidal symptoms, more linked to typical APs, also pose a significant risk in older adults. Pneumonia and pulmonary embolism/venous thromboembolism demand cautious consideration of APs, prompting the need for additional real-world studies to inform clinical practice. Conflicting evidence on diabetes and acute kidney injury necessitates ongoing studies and further research in older adults.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14740338.2024.2386377

Cites

84 of 84 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Khalid, J., & Aparasu, R. R.
Affiliations
University of Houston (US)
Corresponding author
Aparasu, Rajender R.
Venue
Expert Opinion on Drug Safety
Published
2024-08-12
Volume
23
Issue
9
Pages
1157-1171
ISSN
  • 1474-0338 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-764X
OpenAlex
W4401143015
Cited by
17
References
84
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 1
FWCI
1.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Expert Opinion on Drug Safety (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions
Keywords
antipsychotic adverse effects, older adults, all-cause mortality, falls and fractures, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular events, cerebrovascular events, acute kidney injury, venous thromboembolism, pulmonary embolism, extrapyramidal symptoms, pneumonia, drug safety
MeSH terms
Accidental Falls, Age Factors, Aged, Mental Disorders, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Humans, Antipsychotic Agents, Drug Monitoring

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