Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Predicting the Risk of Adverse Drug Reactions in Older Inpatients: External Validation of the GerontoNet ADR Risk Score Using the CRIME Cohort

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
Drugs & Aging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in older people are often preventable, indicating that screening and prevention programs aimed at reducing their rate are needed in this population.

Objective

The aim of this study was to externally validate the GerontoNet ADR risk score and to assess its validity in specific subpopulations of older inpatients.

Methods

Data from the prospective CRIteria to assess appropriate Medication use among Elderly complex patients (CRIME) cohort were used. Dose-dependent and predictable ADRs were classified as type A, probable or definite ADRs were defined according to the Naranjo algorithm, and diagnostic accuracy was tested using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for a cut-off point of 4.

Results

The mean age of the 1075 patients was 81.4 years (standard deviation 7.4) and the median number of drugs was 10 (range 7–13). At least one ADR was observed in 70 patients (6.5%); ADRs were classified as type A in 50 patients (4.7%) and defined as probable or definite in 41 patients (3.8%). Fair diagnostic accuracy to predict both type A and probable or definite ADRs was found in subpopulations aged <70 or ≥80 years with heart failure, diabetes, or a previous ADR. Good accuracy to predict type A ADRs was found in patients with a low body mass index (BMI; >18.5 kg/m2) and a Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score of >24/30 points, as well as in patients with osteoarthritis. The cut-off point of 4 points yielded very good sensitivity but poor specificity results in these subpopulations.

Conclusion

This study suggests that the GerontoNet ADR risk score might represent a pragmatic approach to identifying specific subpopulations of older inpatients at increased risk of an ADR with a fair to good diagnostic accuracy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lazarou J, Pomeranz B, Corey P. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. JAMA. 1998;279:1200–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Chan M, Nicklason F, Vial J. Adverse drug events as a cause of hospital admission in the elderly. Intern Med J. 2001;31:199–205.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Khan L. Comparative epidemiology of hospital-acquired adverse drug reactions in adults and children and their impact on cost and hospital stay: a systematic review. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2013;69:1985–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Stevenson J, Williams J, Burnham T, et al. Predicting adverse drug reactions in older adults: a systematic review of the risk prediction models. Clin Interv Aging. 2014;9:1581–93.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Lavan A, Gallagher P. Predicting risk of adverse drug reactions in older adults. Ther Adv Drug Saf. 2016;7:11–22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Onder G, Petrovic M, Tangiisuran B, et al. Development and validation of a score to assess risk of adverse drug reactions among in-hospital patients 65 years or older. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170:1142–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. O’Connor M, Gallagher P, Byrne S, et al. Adverse drug reactions in older patients during hospitalisation: are they predictable? Age Ageing. 2012;41:771–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Tosato M, Landi F, Martone A, et al. Potentially inappropriate drug use among hospitalised older adults: results from the CRIME study. Age Ageing. 2014;43:767–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology. Structure and principles. http://www.whocc.no/atc/structure_and_principles/. Accessed 19 Nov 2016.

  10. Folstein M, Folstein S, McHugh P. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12:189–98.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. World Health Organization. International drug monitoring: the role of the hospital. WHO Technical Report Series No. 425. Geneva: WHO; 1986.

  12. Naranjo C, Busto U, Sellers E, et al. A method for estimating the probability of adverse drug reactions. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1981;30:239–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. National Kidney Foundation. K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: evaluation, classification, and stratification. Am J Kidney Dis. 2002;39:S1–266.

    Google Scholar 

  14. McElnay J, McCallion C, Al-Deagi F, et al. Development of a risk model for adverse drug events in the elderly. Clin Drug Invest. 1997;13:47–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Trivalle C, Burlaud A, Ducimetière P. Risk factors for adverse drug events in hospitalized elderly patients: a geriatric score. Eur Geriatr Med. 2011;2:284–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Tangiisuran B, Scutt G, Stevenson J, et al. Development and validation of a risk model for predicting adverse drug reactions in older people during hospital stay: Brighton Adverse Drug Reactions Risk (BADRI) model. PLoS One. 2014;9:1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Petrovic M, van der Cammen T, Onder G. Adverse drug reaction in older people: detection and prevention. Drugs Aging. 2012;29:453–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hutchinson L, O’Brien C. Changes in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in the elderly patient. J Pharm Pract. 2007;20:4–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Mangoni A. Predicting and detecting adverse drug reactions in old age: challenges and opportunities. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2012;8:527–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Routledge P, O’Mahony M, Woodhouse K. Adverse drug reactions in elderly patients. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2004;57:121–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Zhang M, Holman C, Preen D, et al. Repeat adverse drug reactions causing hospitalisations in older Australians: a population based longitudinal study 1980-2003. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;63:163–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Davies E, Green C, Taylor S, et al. Adverse drug reactions in hospital in-patients: a prospective analysis of 3695 patient-episodes. PLoS One. 2009;4:e4439.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. O’Mahony D, Cherubini A, Petrovic M. Optimizing pharmacotherapy in older patients: a European perspective. Drugs Aging. 2012;29:423–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, US Department of Health and Human Services. Global health and aging. http://www.who.int/ageing/publications/global_health.pdf. Accessed 19 Nov 2016.

  25. Lu Y, Hernandez P, Abegunde D, Edejer T. The world medicines situation 2011: Medicine expenditures. http://www.who.int/health-accounts/documentation/world_medicine_situation.pdf. Accessed 19 Nov 2016.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are indebted to Dr. Stefanie De Buyser for her skilful assistance with data analysis.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Internal Medicine, Section of Geriatrics, Ghent University, De Pintelaan 185, 9000, Ghent, Belgium

    Mirko Petrovic

  2. School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia

    Balamurugan Tangiisuran

  3. Department of Medicine, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, England, UK

    Chakravarthi Rajkumar

  4. Department of Internal Medicine (Geriatrics), Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Tischa van der Cammen

  5. Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands

    Tischa van der Cammen

  6. Department of Geriatrics (Policlinico A. Gemelli), Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy

    Graziano Onder

Authors
  1. Mirko Petrovic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Balamurugan Tangiisuran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chakravarthi Rajkumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tischa van der Cammen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Graziano Onder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mirko Petrovic.

Ethics declarations

Funding

This work was supported by the Ministry of Labour, Health and Social Policy, who funded the CRIME project (Bando Giovani Ricercatori 2007, convenzione no. 4).

Conflicts of interest

Mirko Petrovic, Balamurugan Tangiisuran, Chakravarthi Rajkumar, Tischa van der Cammen and Graziano Onder declare that they have no conflicts of interest directly relevant to the content of this study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Petrovic, M., Tangiisuran, B., Rajkumar, C. et al. Predicting the Risk of Adverse Drug Reactions in Older Inpatients: External Validation of the GerontoNet ADR Risk Score Using the CRIME Cohort. Drugs Aging 34, 135–142 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40266-016-0428-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40266-016-0428-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation