TY - JOUR
T1 - Medication reviews and deprescribing as a single intervention in falls prevention
T2 - a systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Task Force on Global Guidelines for Falls in Older Adults
AU - Seppala, Lotta J.
AU - Kamkar, Nellie
AU - van Poelgeest, Eveline P.
AU - Thomsen, Katja
AU - Daams, Joost G.
AU - Ryg, Jesper
AU - Masud, Tahir
AU - Montero-Odasso, Manuel
AU - Hartikainen, Sirpa
AU - Petrovic, Mirko
AU - van der Velde, Nathalie
AU - Nieuwboer, Alice
AU - Vlaeyen, Ellen
AU - Milisen, Koen
AU - Kenny, Rose Anne
AU - Bourke, Robert
AU - Van der Cammen, Tischa
AU - Poelgeest, Eveline
AU - Jellema, Anton
AU - Seppala, Lotta J.
AU - Todd, Chris
AU - Martin, Finbarr C.
AU - Marsh, David R.
AU - Lamb, Sallie
AU - Frith, James
AU - Logan, Pip
AU - Skelton, Dawn
AU - Blain, Hubert
AU - Anweiller, Cedric
AU - Freiberger, Ellen
AU - Becker, Clemens
AU - Chiari, Lorenzo
AU - Cesari, Matteo
AU - Casas-Herrero, Alvaro
AU - Jara, Javier Perez
AU - Bouzòn, Christina Alonzo
AU - Welmer, Ana Karim
AU - Birnghebuam, Stephanie
AU - Kressig, Reto
AU - Speechley, Mark
AU - McIlroy, Bill
AU - Faria, Frederico
AU - Sultana, Munira
AU - Muir-Hunter, Susan
AU - Camicioli, Richard
AU - Madden, Kenneth
AU - Norris, Mireille
AU - Watt, Jennifer
AU - Mallet, Louise
AU - Cano-Gutierrez, Carlos Alberto
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society. All rights reserved.
PY - 2022/9/1
Y1 - 2022/9/1
N2 - Background: our aim was to assess the effectiveness of medication review and deprescribing interventions as a single intervention in falls prevention. Methods: Design: systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources: Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, PsycINFO until 28 March 2022. Eligibility criteria: randomised controlled trials of older participants comparing any medication review or deprescribing intervention with usual care and reporting falls as an outcome. Study records: title/abstract and full-text screening by two reviewers. Risk of bias: Cochrane Collaboration revised tool. Data synthesis: results reported separately for different settings and sufficiently comparable studies meta-analysed. Results: forty-nine heterogeneous studies were included. Community: meta-analyses of medication reviews resulted in a risk ratio (RR) of 1.05 (95% confidence interval, 0.85-1.29, I2 = 0%, 3 studies(s)) for number of fallers, in an RR = 0.95 (0.70-1.27, I2 = 37%, 3 s) for number of injurious fallers and in a rate ratio (RaR) of 0.89 (0.69-1.14, I2 = 0%, 2 s) for injurious falls. Hospital: meta-analyses assessing medication reviews resulted in an RR = 0.97 (0.74-1.28, I2 = 15%, 2 s) and in an RR = 0.50 (0.07-3.50, I2 = 72% %, 2 s) for number of fallers after and during admission, respectively. Long-term care: meta-analyses investigating medication reviews or deprescribing plans resulted in an RR = 0.86 (0.72-1.02, I2 = 0%, 5 s) for number of fallers and in an RaR = 0.93 (0.64-1.35, I2 = 92%, 7 s) for number of falls. Conclusions: the heterogeneity of the interventions precluded us to estimate the exact effect of medication review and deprescribing as a single intervention. For future studies, more comparability is warranted. These interventions should not be implemented as a stand-alone strategy in falls prevention but included in multimodal strategies due to the multifactorial nature of falls.
AB - Background: our aim was to assess the effectiveness of medication review and deprescribing interventions as a single intervention in falls prevention. Methods: Design: systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources: Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, PsycINFO until 28 March 2022. Eligibility criteria: randomised controlled trials of older participants comparing any medication review or deprescribing intervention with usual care and reporting falls as an outcome. Study records: title/abstract and full-text screening by two reviewers. Risk of bias: Cochrane Collaboration revised tool. Data synthesis: results reported separately for different settings and sufficiently comparable studies meta-analysed. Results: forty-nine heterogeneous studies were included. Community: meta-analyses of medication reviews resulted in a risk ratio (RR) of 1.05 (95% confidence interval, 0.85-1.29, I2 = 0%, 3 studies(s)) for number of fallers, in an RR = 0.95 (0.70-1.27, I2 = 37%, 3 s) for number of injurious fallers and in a rate ratio (RaR) of 0.89 (0.69-1.14, I2 = 0%, 2 s) for injurious falls. Hospital: meta-analyses assessing medication reviews resulted in an RR = 0.97 (0.74-1.28, I2 = 15%, 2 s) and in an RR = 0.50 (0.07-3.50, I2 = 72% %, 2 s) for number of fallers after and during admission, respectively. Long-term care: meta-analyses investigating medication reviews or deprescribing plans resulted in an RR = 0.86 (0.72-1.02, I2 = 0%, 5 s) for number of fallers and in an RaR = 0.93 (0.64-1.35, I2 = 92%, 7 s) for number of falls. Conclusions: the heterogeneity of the interventions precluded us to estimate the exact effect of medication review and deprescribing as a single intervention. For future studies, more comparability is warranted. These interventions should not be implemented as a stand-alone strategy in falls prevention but included in multimodal strategies due to the multifactorial nature of falls.
KW - accidental falls
KW - deprescribing
KW - fall-risk-increasing drugs
KW - medication review
KW - older people
KW - systematic review
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85153116481
U2 - 10.1093/ageing/afac191
DO - 10.1093/ageing/afac191
M3 - Review article
C2 - 36153749
AN - SCOPUS:85153116481
SN - 0002-0729
VL - 51
JO - Age and Ageing
JF - Age and Ageing
IS - 9
M1 - afac191
ER -