Skip to main content
. 2017 Mar 1;73(6):735–742. doi: 10.1007/s00228-017-2218-2

Table 1.

Characteristics of study population and comparison between people with and without PIMs

Characteristics of study sample Total PIM(s) No PIM Simple OR (95% CI) Multiple OR (95% CI)
Cases, n 428 175 253
Gender, n (%)
 Female 270 (63.1) 113 (64.6) 157 (62.1) 1.114 (0.747-1.663) 1.116 (0.720–1.730)
 Male 158 (36.9) 62 (35.4) 96 (37.9) Ref
Age (years), mean ± SD (range) 83.2 ± 6.6 (65–99) 83.0 ± 6.8 83.3 ± 6.4 0.993 (0.964–1.022) 0.995 (0.964–1.028)
Number of medications at admission, mean ± SD (range) 7.8 ± 3.5 (0–20) 9.3 ± 3.1 6.7 ± 3.4 1.281 (1.197–1.370) 1.281 (1.197–1.370)
MMSE (0–30), mean ± SD (range) 19.8 ± 4.6 (7–29) 19.7 ± 4.3 19.9 ± 4.8 0.990 (0.923–1.063) -
Type of accommodation, n (%)
 Nursing home 124 (29.0) 59 (33.7) 65 (25.7) 1.471 (0.965–2.243) -
 Living at home 304 (71.0) 116 (66.3) 188 (74.3) Ref
Geographic location, n (%)
 Skellefteå 107 (25.0) 50 (28.6) 57 (22.5) 1.375 (0.885–2.138) -
 Umeå 321 (75.0) 125 (71.4) 196 (77.5) Ref

The multiple analyses include sex, age and significant variables from the simple model (number of medications at admission)

CI confidence interval, MMSE Mini-Mental Stage Examination, OR odds ratio, PIM(s) potentially inappropriate medication(s), SD standard deviation