Impact of Number of Drug Types on Clinical Outcome in Patients with Acute Hip Fracture
This study aims to investigate the impact of the number of drug types on clinical outcomes for patients with acute hip fracture.
This is a retrospective cross-sectional study.
A hospital-based database constructed by the Japan Medical Data Center.
Consecutive patients exhibiting acute hip fractures on admission between April 2014 and November 2017 were included.
Relationships among the numbers of varying drug types of ≥6 and ≤5 as well as clinical outcomes were analyzed in 11,073 patients aged ≥65 years. The primary outcome was defined as the Barthel Index efficiency, with the secondary outcome being the length of hospital stay.
Median Barthel Index scores at admission and discharge were 5 (interquartile range: 5–20) and 50 (interquartile range: 20–85). The Barthel Index efficiency was significantly higher in the group having received 5 or fewer drug variations taken (1.45 ± 1.77) than in the group receiving 6 or more drug types taken (0.94 ± 1.18) during hospital stays (p < 0.001). The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the group receiving 5 or fewer drug types taken (29.9 ± 23.8) than in the group having 6 or more drug types taken (44.3 ± 30.3) during hospital stays (p < 0.001), with the latter number being independently associated with the Barthel Index efficiency and length of hospital stay.
Number of drug types of 6 or more were associated with lower Barthel Index efficiency and longer lengths of hospital stays.
Key wordsBarthel Index efficiency hip fracture number of drug types polypharmacy rehabilitation
Funding: This study was supported by Research Grant (18K10690) from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.
Ethical Standards: This study was carried out in accordance with the ethical standards of the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki. Study approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of Teikyo University.
- 2.Kose E, Maruyama R, Okazoe S, Hayashi H. Impact of polypharmacy on the rehabilitation outcome of japanese stroke patients in the convalescent rehabilitation ward. J Aging Res 2016;7957825. doi: https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/7957825..
- 5.Kojima T, Akishita M, Kameyama Y, Yamaguchi K, Yamamoto H, Eto M, Ouchi Y. High risk of adverse drug reactions in elderly patients taking six or more drugs: analysis of inpatient database. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2012;12, 761–762. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1447-0594.2012.00868.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Gnjidic D, Hilmer SN, Blyth FM, Naganathan V, Waite L, Seibel MJ, McLachlan AJ, Cumming RG, Handelsman DJ, Le Couteur DG. Polypharmacy cutoff and outcomes: five or more medicines were used to identify community-dwelling older men at risk of different adverse outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 2012;65, 989–995. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.02.018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Momosaki R, Yasunaga H, Matsui H, Fushimi K, Abo M. Proton pump inhibitors versus histamine-2 receptor antagonists and risk of pneumonia in patients with acute stroke. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2016;25, 1035–1040. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2016.01.018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Yasunaga H, Hashimoto H, Horiguchi H, Miyata H, Matsuda S. Variation in cancer surgical outcomes associated with physician and nurse staffing: a retrospective observational study using the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination Database. BMC Health Serv Res 2012;12, 129. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-12-129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: The Barthel Index. Md State Med J 1965;14, 61–65.Google Scholar
- 18.Quan H, Li B, Couris CM, Fushimi K, Graham P, Hider P, Januel JM, Sundararajan V. Updating and validating the Charlson comorbidity index and score for risk adjustment in hospital discharge abstracts using data from 6 countries. Am J Epidemiol 2011;173, 676–682. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwq433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Sánchez-Rodríguez D, Miralles R, Muniesa JM, Mojal S, Abadía-Escartín A, Vázquez-Ibar O. Three measures of physical rehabilitation effectiveness in elderly patients: a prospective, longitudinal, comparative analysis. BMC Geriatr 2015;15, 142. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-015-0138-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar