The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Polypharmacy: Misleading, but manageable
Open accessAbstract
The percentage of the population described as elderly is growing, and a higher prevalence of multiple, chronic disease states must be managed concurrently. Healthcare practitioners must appropriately use medication for multiple diseases and avoid risks often associated with multiple medication use such as adverse effects, drug/drug interactions, drug/disease interactions, and inappropriate dosing. The purpose of this study is to identify a consensus definition for polypharmacy and evaluate its prevalence among elderly outpatients. The authors also sought to identify or develop a clinical tool which would assist healthcare practitioners guard against inappropriate drug therapy in elderly patients. The most commonly cited definition was a medication not matching a diagnosis. Inappropriate was part of definitions used frequently. Some definitions placed a numeric value on concurrent medications. Two common definitions (ie, 6 or more medications or a potentially inappropriate medication) were used to evaluate polypharmacy in elderly South Carolinians (n = 1027). Data analysis demonstrates that a significant percentage of this population is prescribed six or more concomitant drugs and/or uses a potentially inappropriate medication. The findings are 29.4% are prescribed 6 or more concurrent drugs, 15.7% are prescribed one or more potentially inappropriate drugs, and 9.3% meet both definitions of polypharmacy used in this study. The authors recommend use of less ambiguous terminology such as hyperpharmacotherapy or multiple medication use. A structured approach to identify and manage inappropriate polypharmacy is suggested and a clinical tool is provided.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Roles and Responsibilities of Attending Physicians in Skilled Nursing Facilities
Dimant, J. (2003) · Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · doi:10.1016/s1525-8610(04)70355-2 · Cited by 40
Cited by
Facing up to the global challenges of ageing
Partridge, L., Deelen, J., & Slagboom, P. E. (2018) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0457-8 · Cited by 1,475
Association between polypharmacy and death: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Leelakanok, N., Holcombe, A. L., Lund, B. C., Gu, X., & Schweizer, M. L. (2017) · Journal of the American Pharmacists Association · doi:10.1016/j.japh.2017.06.002 · Cited by 355
Moriarty, F., Hardy, C., Bennett, K., Smith, S. M., & Fahey, T. (2015) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008656 · Cited by 266
Banerjee, A., Mbamalu, D., Ebrahimi, S., Khan, A. A., & Chan, T. F. (2011) · International Journal of Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1186/1865-1380-4-22 · Cited by 75
(2018) · doi:10.15620/cdc:82212 · Cited by 40
Metadata
- Authors
- Bushardt, R.
- Venue
- Clinical Interventions in Aging
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2008-06
- Volume
- Volume 3
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 383-389
- ISSN
- 1176-9092 (ISSN-L)
- 1178-1998
- OpenAlex
- W1616099694
- Cited by
- 489
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Polypharmacy: Misleading, but manageable. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2147/cia.s2468
- The paper
- Bushardt, R. (2008). Polypharmacy: Misleading, but manageable. Clinical Interventions in Aging. https://doi.org/10.2147/cia.s2468
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.