Abstract
Objective Improper management of polypharmacy in community and hospital pharmacies may lead to adverse effects and drug interactions in patients of all age groups, especially children and the elderly. This study aimed to determine the scenario of polypharmacy in multiple communities in Nepal and the costs associated with them.
Design Cross-sectional study
Setting Local communities of nine districts in Nepal
Participants Total 400 patients of all age groups, who were consuming medicines and who fulfilled inclusion criteria from May 2017 to August 2018
Primary and secondary outcome measures A semi-structured questionnaire, based on the prescription optimization method, was used for data collection. Multinomial logistic regression was performed to analyze the statistical significance of polypharmacy with the predictor variables (e.g., age, education level, occupation, diagnosis, total cost of medicines). The p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant at 95% confidence interval. Polypharmacy cases and their economic implications were reported.
Results Eighty-one patients (20.3%) with an age group of 22-31 years with female patients (219, 54.8%) reported more polypharmacy events. There were 216 patients (54%) with prescriptions of five medicines i.e., moderate polypharmacy. Total number of medicines consumed by all 400 patients was 2269, with a mean±SD 5.67 ±1.08. Total expenditure by all 400 patients was USD 3409.54 during the study period, with a mean±SD8.66±6.04. Both moderate and severe polypharmacy cases were non-significantly related with age, gender and total cost of medications. They had significant relationship in almost all levels of education and occupation and showed mixed type of significance and non-significance with the diagnosis of the respondents.
Conclusion Polypharmacy cases can be minimized, considering adverse drug reactions and drug interactions. Further studies are warranted in medication utilization and avoidable polypharmacy along with detailed pharmacoeconomic evaluation.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research was funded by Pokhara University Research Center (PURC) (PURC: 1/2073/74). However, the funding agency had no control over the ideas, views and findings presented in the research.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethics approval was taken from the Nobel College Institutional Review Committee (IRC), Sinamangal, Kathmandu (NIRC 0103/2017).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵a All authors have equal contributions.
Data Availability
All data supporting the findings of this study are contained within the manuscript. Any additional information regarding the study including the questionnaires would be shared by the corresponding author upon request.
