Current Gerontology and Geriatrics Research

Current Gerontology and Geriatrics Research / 2017 / Article

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2017 |Article ID 4276047 | 5 pages |

Diseases Linked to Polypharmacy in Elderly Patients

Academic Editor: Tomasz Kostka
Received27 Oct 2017
Accepted07 Dec 2017
Published25 Dec 2017


Introduction. Polypharmacy in several cases is deemed necessary and elderly patients are prone to this phenomenon. The objective of this study was to identify the prevalence and the predictors of polypharmacy among consecutively unplanned admissions of patients aged ≥65 years. Patients and Methods. In 310 patients (51% women), mean age 80.24 years (95% CI 79.35–81.10), demographic characteristics, medical history, medications, and cause of admission were recorded. Parametric tests and multiple logistic regression analysis were applied to identify the factors that have significant association with polypharmacy. Results. 53.5% of patients belonged to polypharmacy group. In multivariate analysis the independent predictors of polypharmacy were arterial hypertension (, OR = 2.708, and 95% CI 1.400–5.238), coronary artery disease (, OR = 8.274, and 95% CI 3.161–21.656), heart failure (, OR = 4.042, and 95% CI 1.145–14.270), atrial fibrillation (, OR = 2.477, and 95% CI 1.086–5.648), diabetes mellitus (, OR = 2.390, and 95% CI 1.232–4.636), dementia (, OR = 4.637, and 95% CI 1.876–11.464), and COPD (, OR = 3.626, and 95% CI 1.208–10.891). Conclusions. Polypharmacy mainly was linked to cardiovascular diseases. If deprescribing is not feasible, physicians must oversee those patients in order to recognise early, possible drug reactions.

1. Background

Between the determinants of polypharmacy increased age was highlighted as a major one [14] as aging is characterized by the presence of multiple independent chronic diseases in the same person, a fact that is almost always accompanied by multiple drug use [5].

Factors that contribute to the development of polypharmacy are the lower thresholds for treating risk factors in preventative medicine, the new drug treatments that are now available for managing many chronic illnesses, and the new indications for older drug treatments [6].

In Greece, data concerning the factors that lead to multiple drug use in the elderly are scarce. The present study was undertaken to identify factors associated with polypharmacy among consecutively unplanned admissions of patients aged ≥65 years, in a department of internal medicine.

2. Patients and Methods

2.1. Study Population

A prospective study was conducted among patients older than 65 years, consecutively admitted through the emergency department of General and Oncological Hospital of Kifissia “Agioi Anargyroi” during March 2015 to December 2016. For each patient, a study physician completed a questionnaire at admission. Patients’ demographic and social characteristics (age, gender, marital status, educational level, and living alone), medical history (comorbidities, physical activity status), and medication history (number and names of medications) were recorded by the study physician. Comorbidity was measured using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) [7] and physical activity status was evaluated using the Katz Index [8]. Information regarding demographic and social characteristics, medical history, and medication history was obtained by asking either the patients or their caregivers, when patients were not able to communicate. The research protocol was approved by the institutional ethical and scientific committee. Informed consent was obtained from participating patients or from their family members.

2.2. Definition of Polypharmacy

For this study polypharmacy was defined as the concurrent use of five or more medications.

2.3. Statistical Analysis

Categorical variables are expressed as frequencies and percentages. Continuous variables are expressed as means ± 95% confidence interval. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test was used to assess the distribution of evaluated continuous variables. We found that age was normally distributed while the CCI had non-Gaussian distribution. For categorical variables, a chi-square test was applied to evaluate whether the prevalence of polypharmacy differed across patients’ sociodemographic characteristics and across patients’ medical and medication history. Student’s -test and Mann–Whitney test were used to compare age and CCI, respectively, between polypharmacy and nonpolypharmacy group. Age was analyzed both as a continuous and as a categorical variable and categorized into two groups (65–80 and 81–100 years). Results were considered statistically significant when . Variables that had a significant influence on the presence of polypharmacy in the bivariate analysis were proceeding into the separate logistic regression analysis to identify the most important ones, associated with polypharmacy. By means of this method, the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval were designated, for the most important determinants of polypharmacy. All analyses were performed using SPSS v22.0.

3. Results

During the study period, 310 patients older than 65 years were admitted to the medical unit through the emergency department. Mean age was 80.24 years (95% CI 79.35–81.10, range 65–99). There were 158 women (51%) and 152 men (49%). 166 patients (53.5%) belonged to polypharmacy group. The mean number of medications was 7.32 (95% CI 6.99–7.63) in polypharmacy group and 2.63 (95% CI 2.40–2.85) in nonpolypharmacy group. The sociodemographic and medical history differences between patients in polypharmacy and in nonpolypharmacy group are presented in Tables 1 and 2, respectively.

Sociodemographic characteristics Polypharmacy group
Nonpolypharmacy group
Statistical significance

 Males76 (45.8%)76 (52.8%)NS
 Females90 (54.2%)68 (47.2%)
Age (95% CI) (years)80.64 (79.39–81.88)79.77 (78.48–81.00)NS
Age group
 65–80 (years)61 (36.7%)69 (47.9%)
(χ2 = 3.951)
 81–99 (years)105 (63.3%)75 (52.1%)
Marital status
 Married79 (47.6%)72 (50.0%)NS
 Unmarried3 (1.8%)4 (2.8%)
 Divorced3 (1.8%)5 (3.5%)
 Widowed81 (48.8%)63 (43.8%)
Educational status
 Primary125 (75.3%)108 (75.5%)NS
 Secondary31 (18.7%)23 (16.1%)
 Technological Education Institution3 (1.8%)4 (2.8%)
 University7 (4.2%)8 (5.6%)
Living alone
Yes21 (12.7%)34 (23.6%)
(χ2 = 6.347)
No145 (87.3%)110 (76.4%)
Katz index (95% CI)4.05 (3.68–4.40)4.17 (3.72–4.51)NS

NS: nonsignificant; CI: confidence interval.

Medical historyPolypharmacy group
Nonpolypharmacy group
Statistical significance

Arterial hypertension
 Yes125 (75.3%)79 (54.9%)
 No41 (24.7%)65 (45.1%)( = 14.317)
 Yes49 (29.5%)20 (13.9%)
 No117 (70.5%)124 (86.1%)( = 10.885)
Diabetes mellitus
 Yes72 (43.4%)30 (20.8%)
 No94 (56.6%)114 (79.2%)( = 17.745)
 Yes21 (12.7%)5 (3.5%)
 No145 (87.3%)139 (96.5%)( = 8.454)
Heart failure
 Yes31 (18.7%)4 (2.8%)
 No135 (81.3%)140 (97.2%)( = 19.456)
Atrial fibrillation
 Yes54 (32.5%)13 (9.0%)
 No112 (67.5%)131 (91.0%)( = 25.140)
Coronary artery disease
 Yes51 (30.7%)7 (4.9%)
 No115 (69.3%)137 (95.1%)( = 33.909)
Chronic renal failure
 Yes9 (5.4%)1 (0.7%)
 No157 (94.6%)143 (99.3%)( = 5.520)
 Yes23 (13.9%)7 (4.9%)
 No143 (86.1%)137 (95.1%)( = 7.137)
 Yes31 (18.7%)11 (7.6%)
 No135 (81.3%)133 (92.4%)( = 8.018)
Benign prostate hyperplasia
 Yes14 (8.4%)4 (2.8%)
 No152 (91.6%)140 (97.2%)( = 4.510)
Thyroid diseases
 Yes24 (14.5%)9 (6.3%)
 No142 (85.5%)135 (93.8%)( = 5.461)
 Yes19 (11.4%)4 (2.8%)
 No147 (88.6%)140 (97.2%)( = 8.435)

CCI (95% CI)5.77 (5.54–5.99)5.13 (4.79–5.50)
( = 7798.000)

COPD: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; CCI: Charlson Comorbidity Index; CI: confidence interval.

Statistical difference was found when we compared the polypharmacy and the nonpolypharmacy groups according to CCI (, ), age group (, ), and the living status (, ). Diseases that differed statistically significantly between the two groups are presented in Table 2.

In multivariate analysis the independent predictors of polypharmacy were arterial hypertension (, OR = 2.708, and 95% CI 1.400–5.238), coronary artery disease (, OR = 8.274, and 95% CI 3.161–21.656), heart failure (, OR = 4.042, and 95% CI 1.145–14.270), atrial fibrillation (, OR = 2.477, and 95% CI 1.086–5.648), diabetes mellitus (, OR = 2.390, and 95% CI 1.232–4.636), dementia (, OR = 4.637, and 95% CI 1.876–11.464), and COPD (, OR = 3.626, and 95% CI 1.208–10.891).

4. Discussion

According to the results of the present study, among elderly patients needing hospitalization up to 50% received five or more medications. In those patients polypharmacy was mainly linked to cardiovascular diseases (coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, arterial hypertension, and heart failure), diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and dementia.

It is not surprising that polypharmacy was linked to cardiovascular diseases. Polypharmacy in cardiovascular diseases is guided by evidence based guidelines recommending treatment with multiple drug classes [9]. For example, in heart failure the progressive use of multiple drugs and a complex therapeutic regimen are common and are driven by international guidelines. Even more so, elderly patients with heart failure often have comorbidities that require additional specific treatment, thus increasing the number of medications [10]. In a study of patients with self-reported heart failure the proportion of patients with heart failure who had five or more comorbid chronic conditions and the mean number of prescription medications increased from 42.1% to 58.0% and from 4.1 to 6.4 prescriptions, respectively, over a twenty-year period [11].

Coronary artery disease [12, 13], atrial fibrillation [13], and hypertension [3, 14] have previously been reported as predictors of polypharmacy. Consumption of more than five drugs was reported by 71% of patients with coronary artery disease [15] and by 40% of patients with atrial fibrillation [16]. In hypertensive patients the concurrent use of different drug classes (adrenergic inhibitors, vasodilators, beta blockers, and diuretics) is common as the risk of cardiovascular mortality is high on this population and blood pressure control is important for long term survival [17].

In this study polypharmacy was also significantly associated with diabetes mellitus, a finding consistent with previous studies [13, 17, 18]. In diabetic patients, several factors contribute to polypharmacy. Both the importance for a tight glycaemic control and multiple comorbidities associated with diabetes mellitus require the use of multiple drugs [19]. Consequently, the high number of prescribed medications in patients with diabetes is compatible with guideline recommendations [20].

Likewise, international guidelines recommend the use of a variety of drugs for the treatment of COPD [21] and the number of respiratory drugs in COPD patients increases as the severity of symptoms increases [22].

The association between polypharmacy and dementia is known and seems to be bidirectional. According to Clague et al., patients with dementia have more comorbidities and consequently receive more medications than those without dementia [23]. From another point of view polypharmacy increases the risk of potential inappropriate medication use, and as some potential inappropriate medications may have cognition-impairing effects, prolonged multiple drug use may result in dementia [24].

Our study has some limitations. The major limitation is that the study design did not allow making general conclusions concerning the prevalence of polypharmacy in the whole community, since the sample originates from the hospital. Another limitation of our study was the fact that it was conducted in only one department of internal medicine of a tertiary care hospital. However, we believe that the patients profile did not differ from that of patients attending the emergency departments of other tertiary hospitals and so the sample is representative of this patient’s population.

5. Conclusions

Despite the limitations the present study represents an attempt to understand the complicated phenomenon of polypharmacy. Elderly patients taking five or more medications suffer predominantly from cardiovascular diseases. Nevertheless, “polypharmacy is not synonymous with inappropriate treatment” [25] and maybe in several cases multiple drug use is necessary and appropriate. In these cases, polypharmacy is a problem we must learn to live with and instead of deprescribing physicians must oversee those patients in order to recognise early, possible drug reactions.


This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. This paper is an extended version of a work presented at the 12th International Congress of the European Union Geriatric Medicine Society, Lisbon, Portugal, 5–7 October 2016.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this article.


  1. V. Fano, F. Chini, P. Pezzotti, and K. Bontempi, “Estimating the prevalence and the determinants of polypharmacy using data from a health administrative database: a comparison of results obtained employing different algorithms,” Advances in Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, vol. 3, article 151, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
  2. T. Linjakumpu, S. Hartikainen, T. Klaukka, J. Veijola, S.-L. Kivelä, and R. Isoaho, “Use of medications and polypharmacy are increasing among the elderly,” Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, vol. 55, no. 8, pp. 809–817, 2002. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  3. H. F. Thomas, P. M. Sweetnam, B. Janchawee, and D. K. Luscombe, “Polypharmacy among older men in South Wales,” European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, vol. 55, no. 5, pp. 411–415, 1999. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  4. L. Bjerrum, J. Søgaard, J. Hallas, and J. Kragstrup, “Polypharmacy: correlations with sex, age and drug regimen,” European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 197–202, 1998. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  5. P. M. Mannucci, A. Nobili, and REPOSI Investigators, “Multimorbidity and polypharmacy in the elderly: lessons from REPOSI,” Internal and Emergency Medicine, vol. 9, no. 7, pp. 723–734, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  6. D. A. Gorard, “Escalating polypharmacy,” QJM: An International Journal of Medicine, vol. 99, no. 11, pp. 797–800, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  7. R. A. Deyo, D. C. Cherkin, and M. A. Ciol, “Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases,” Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, vol. 45, no. 6, pp. 613–619, 1992. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. S. Katz, “Assessing self-maintenance: activities of daily living, mobility, and instrumental activities of daily living,” Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, vol. 31, no. 12, pp. 721–727, 1983. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. S. C. Appleton, G. A. Abel, and R. A. Payne, “Cardiovascular polypharmacy is not associated with unplanned hospitalisation: evidence from a retrospective cohort study,” BMC Family Practice, vol. 15, no. 1, article 58, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. V. Mastromarino, M. Casenghi, M. Testa et al., “Polypharmacy in heart failure patients,” Current Heart Failure Reports, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 212–219, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. C. Y. Wong, S. I. Chaudhry, M. M. Desai, and H. M. Krumholz, “Trends in comorbidity, disability, and polypharmacy in heart failure,” American Journal of Medicine, vol. 124, no. 2, pp. 136–143, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. S. B. Salih, M. Yousuf, H. Durihim, H. Almodaimegh, and H. Tamim, “Prevalence and associated factors of polypharmacy among adult Saudi medical outpatients at a tertiary care center,” Journal of Family and Community Medicine, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 162–167, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. L. J. G. Veehof, R. E. Stewart, F. M. Haaijer-Ruskamp, and B. Meyboom-de Jong, “The development of polypharmacy. A longitudinal study,” Journal of Family Practice, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 261–267, 2000. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  14. U. Junius-Walker, G. Theile, and E. Hummers-Pradier, “Prevalence and predictors of polypharmacy among older primary care patients in Germany,” Journal of Family Practice, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 14–19, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  15. J. George, P. Devi, D. Y. Kamath, N. Anthony, N. S. Kunnoor, and S. S. Sanil, “Patterns and determinants of cardiovascular drug utilization in coronary care unit patients of a tertiary care hospital,” Journal of Cardiovascular Disease Research, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 214–221, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  16. M. Proietti, V. Raparelli, B. Olshansky, and G. Y. H. Lip, “Polypharmacy and major adverse events in atrial fibrillation: observations from the AFFIRM trial,” Clinical Research in Cardiology, vol. 105, no. 5, pp. 412–420, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  17. D. R. Bueno, H. L. Monteiro, C. S. C. Rosa, J. S. Codogno, R. A. Fernandes, and M. F. N. Marucci, “Association between physical activity levels and polypharmacy in hypertensive patients,” Medicina (Brazil), vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 240–247, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. M. Dutta and L. Prashad, “Prevalence and risk factors of polypharmacy among elderly in India: Evidence from SAGE data,” International Journal of Public Mental Health and Neurosciences, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 11–16, 2015. View at: Google Scholar
  19. C. B. Good, “Polypharmacy in elderly patients with diabetes,” Diabetes Spectrum, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 240–248, 2002. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  20. S. Bauer and M. A. Nauck, “Polypharmacy in people with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes is justified by current guidelines-a comprehensive assessment of drug prescriptions in patients needing inpatient treatment for diabetes-associated problems,” Diabetic Medicine, vol. 31, no. 9, pp. 1078–1085, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  21. J. Díez-Manglano, J. Barquero-Romero, P. A. Mena et al., “Polypharmacy in patients hospitalised for acute exacerbation of COPD,” European Respiratory Journal, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 791–794, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  22. F. M. Franssen, M. A. Spruit, and E. F. M. Wouters, “Determinants of polypharmacy and compliance with GOLD guidelines in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,” International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 493–501, 2011. View at: Google Scholar
  23. F. Clague, S. W. Mercer, G. McLean, E. Reynish, and B. Guthrie, “Comorbidity and polypharmacy in people with dementia: insights from a large, population-based cross-sectional analysis of primary care data,” Age and Ageing, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 33–39, 2017. View at: Google Scholar
  24. H.-Y. Park, J.-W. Park, H. J. Song, H. S. Sohn, and J.-W. Kwon, “The association between polypharmacy and dementia: a nested case-control study based on a 12-year longitudinal cohort database in South Korea,” PLoS ONE, vol. 12, no. 1, Article ID 0169463, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  25. S. L. Slabaugh, V. Maio, M. Templin, and S. Abouzaid, “Prevalence and risk of polypharmacy among the elderly in an outpatient setting: A retrospective cohort study in the Emilia-Romagna Region, Italy,” Drugs & Aging, vol. 27, no. 12, pp. 1019–1028, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright © 2017 Ioannis Vrettos et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

More related articles

2372 Views | 742 Downloads | 4 Citations
 PDF  Download Citation  Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder

Related articles

We are committed to sharing findings related to COVID-19 as quickly and safely as possible. Any author submitting a COVID-19 paper should notify us at to ensure their research is fast-tracked and made available on a preprint server as soon as possible. We will be providing unlimited waivers of publication charges for accepted articles related to COVID-19. Sign up here as a reviewer to help fast-track new submissions.