Polypharmacy for the elderly and associated factors were assessed. A cross-sectional study was conducted using data from the SABE Study (Health, Well-being and Aging), 2006. 1,115 individuals representing 422,377 elderly aged 65 or more, living in São Paulo City, were interviewed. Polypharmacy was defined as the use of five or more medications. A multivariate regression logistics was used. Polypharmacy prevalence was 36%. Female (OR = 1.7; IC 95%: 1.0; 2.9), age over 75 years (OR = 1.9; CI 95%: 1.3; 2.7), higher income (OR = 1.8; CI 95%: 1.2; 2.8), working (OR = 1.8; CI 95%: 1.1; 2.9), regular self assessed health (OR = 1.6; CI 95%: 1.1; 2.3) or poor (OR = 2.6; CI 95%: 1.4; 4.9), hypertension (OR = 2.0; CI 95%: 1.4; 2.9), diabetes (OR = 4.1; CI 95%: 2.2; 7.5), rheumatic diseases (OR = 2.3; CI 95%: 1.5; 3.6) and cardiac problems (OR = 2.9; CI 95%: 1.9; 4.5) were associated positively with polypharmacy. Using only the public health system (OR = 0.5, 95% CI: 0.3; 0.7) was inversely associated with polypharmacy. Medicines for the cardiovascular system and for the alimentary tract and metabolism were the most used. The knowledge of factors associated with polypharmacy, such as those identified in this study, may be useful to alert health professionals about the importance of identifying and monitoring the elderly groups most vulnerable to polypharmacy.

Various medicines are considered unsuitable for older adults due to alterations in pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, lack of therapeutic efficacy, and/or increased risk of adverse events exceeding potential benefits. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication among older adults in the city of São Paulo, Brazil. A population-based cross-sectional study was conducted in a sample of 1,254 individuals aged 60 years or older (participants in the SABE Study), representing the elderly population of the city in 2006. Potentially inappropriate medication was defined according to the Beers criteria. Prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication was 28%. Potentially inappropriate medication was associated with polypharmacy (p=0.001), two or more diseases (p=0.011), and female gender (p=0.007). Thirty-six potentially inappropriate medicines were identified, the majority of which involving prescription medications. Specific criteria are needed for the Brazilian population, in addition to awareness-raising on clinical pharmacology in older adults. Prescription protocols and software programs could assist in the process of rational prescribing in this age group.

for the Chronic Diseases and Informed Decisions (CHRONIDE) Group IMPORTANCE As the rate of publication of new and sometimes conflicting medical research increases, clinicians rely heavily on clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) to inform practice. However, CPGs are of widely variable quality, and there are no existing objective measures to rate the quality of CPGs.OBJECTIVE To systematically assess 421 CPGs for the management of common noncommunicable diseases in primary care using the validated Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation Instrument, version II (AGREE-II) tool and elucidate the factors associated with quality of CPGs.EVIDENCE REVIEW MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and 12 websites for CPGs were searched for CPGs for the management of common noncommunicable diseases in primary care published between January 1, 2011, and August 30, 2017. The assessment of the quality of CPGs was performed by 3 appraisers using the 6 domains of the AGREE-II instrument. A multiple logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with quality of CPGs.FINDINGS Of the 421 CPGs reviewed, 23.5% (99) were classified as high quality. Among included guidelines, clarity of presentation (70%) and scope and purpose (61%) had the highest median AGREE-II scores. The domains with the lowest median scores were applicability (22%) and rigor of development (33%). Factors associated with high-quality CPGs included having more than 20 authors (odds ratio, 9.08; 95% CI, 3.35-24.62), development at governmental institutions (odds ratio, 10.38; 95% CI, 2.72-39.60), and reporting funding (odds ratio, 10.34; 95% CI,. Year of publication, region, guideline version, and scope were not associated with quality among included CPGs.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Primary care professionals and policymakers should be aware that CPGs in primary care are of widely variable quality, with less than 25% of included CPGs rated as high quality. High-quality CPGs were associated with a higher number of authors, governmental institutions, and the report of funding. Region of origin was not associated with quality of CPGs, which suggests that the improvement of the quality of CPGs should be an international concern.