Cited by 455Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesPharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug ReactionsPatient Safety and Medication Errors

Predicting risk of adverse drug reactions in older adults

Open access
Lavan, Amanda Hanora, Gallagher, Paul·2016·Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety

Abstract

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are common in older adults, with falls, orthostatic hypotension, delirium, renal failure, gastrointestinal and intracranial bleeding being amongst the most common clinical manifestations. ADR risk increases with age-related changes in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, increasing burden of comorbidity, polypharmacy, inappropriate prescribing and suboptimal monitoring of drugs. ADRs are a preventable cause of harm to patients and an unnecessary waste of healthcare resources. Several ADR risk tools exist but none has sufficient predictive value for clinical practice. Good clinical practice for detecting and predicting ADRs in vulnerable patients includes detailed documentation and regular review of prescribed and over-the-counter medications through standardized medication reconciliation. New medications should be prescribed cautiously with clear therapeutic goals and recognition of the impact a drug can have on multiple organ systems. Prescribers should regularly review medication efficacy and be vigilant for ADRs and their contributory risk factors. Deprescribing should occur at an individual level when drugs are no longer efficacious or beneficial or when safer alternatives exist. Inappropriate prescribing and unnecessary polypharmacy should be minimized. Comprehensive geriatric assessment and the use of explicit prescribing criteria can be useful in this regard.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/2042098615615472

Cites

85 of 85 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Lavan, A. H., & Gallagher, P.
Affiliations
Cork University Hospital (IE)
Corresponding author
Gallagher, Paul
Venue
Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety
Published
2015-11-16
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
11-22
ISSN
  • 2042-0986 (ISSN-L)
  • 2042-0994
OpenAlex
W2284826680
Cited by
455
References
85
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 52 · 2024: 57 · 2023: 75 · 2022: 59 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 6
FWCI
1.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
Keywords
adverse drug reactions, older adults, polypharmacy, inappropriate prescribing, deprescribing, medication reconciliation, comprehensive geriatric assessment, falls, orthostatic hypotension, delirium, renal failure, gastrointestinal bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage, comorbidities, prescribing criteria

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