Prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications in people living with HIV: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) are associated with adverse health outcomes. The use of PIM among persons living with HIV (PLHIV) could be more problematic due to peculiarities such as antiretroviral toxicity and drug-disease interactions. However, PIM among PLHIV continues to receive little attention. Therefore, we aimed to systematically review and estimate the prevalence of PIM among PLHIV. We searched the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to identify relevant studies from 1 January 2014 to 30 June 2024. Studies included were peer-reviewed articles that determined PIM prevalence using validated explicit or implicit tools and provided statistical information on the measured outcomes. Systematic, narrative, and literature reviews as well as case studies, commentaries, and editorials were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Prevalence Critical Appraisal Tool. Subgroup analysis was performed for the different geographic regions, PIM criteria, age, study period, and median numbers of medicines. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Sensitivity analyses, publication bias, and cumulative meta-analysis were conducted. A total of 13 articles, including 3200 PLHIV, were included for the systematic review, while meta-analysis was conducted using 8 studies comprising 2546 PLHIV. Most of the studies (46%) employed a cross-sectional study design. 11 out of the 13 studies were conducted in Europe. Most studies reported benzodiazepines as the most common PIM among PLHIV, while hypertension and dyslipidaemia were identified as the most frequent comorbidities. Overall, the pooled prevalence of PIM was 44.8% (95% CI, 32%-58%) using a random-effect model. PIM prevalence among PLHIV was higher among those exposed to polypharmacy (59.3%; CI: 48.9% – 68.9%), those aged > 70 years (44.6%; CI: 24.1–67.1), and post-COVID (48.9%; CI: 39%-59%). This study suggests that PIM exposure among PLHIV is a budding issue. Findings from this review advocate for mitigating measures against PIM use. Also, this review contributes data on the use of PIM across different cohorts, creating awareness for policymakers and health managers. PROSPERO – CRD42024529411.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Infectious Diseases
Published
2025-11-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-025-11996-y
Primary Topic
HIV-related health complications and treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications in people living with HIV: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Ruth Jeminiwa, Ismaeel U. Yunusa, Abdulmuminu Isah, Blessing Onyinye Ukoha-Kalu et al.
BMC Infectious Diseases
HIV-related health complications and treatments
article

Prevalence of potentially inappropriate medications in people living with HIV: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Ruth Jeminiwa, Ismaeel U. Yunusa, Abdulmuminu Isah, Blessing Onyinye Ukoha-Kalu, Mohammed Abba‐Aji, Mukhtar Ijaiya, Ibraheem Abioye, Chukwuemeka Augustine Nwachuya, Yusuf Ibrahim, Mustapha Muhammed Abubakar, Desmond Daniels, Mustapha Ibrahim Usman, Jamilu Sani, Osagie Kenneth Cole, Oluwaseun Samuel Ilugbuhi
article en

Abstract

Potentially inappropriate medications (PIM) are associated with adverse health outcomes. The use of PIM among persons living with HIV (PLHIV) could be more problematic due to peculiarities such as antiretroviral toxicity and drug-disease interactions. However, PIM among PLHIV continues to receive little attention. Therefore, we aimed to systematically review and estimate the prevalence of PIM among PLHIV. We searched the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases to identify relevant studies from 1 January 2014 to 30 June 2024. Studies included were peer-reviewed articles that determined PIM prevalence using validated explicit or implicit tools and provided statistical information on the measured outcomes. Systematic, narrative, and literature reviews as well as case studies, commentaries, and editorials were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Prevalence Critical Appraisal Tool. Subgroup analysis was performed for the different geographic regions, PIM criteria, age, study period, and median numbers of medicines. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Sensitivity analyses, publication bias, and cumulative meta-analysis were conducted. A total of 13 articles, including 3200 PLHIV, were included for the systematic review, while meta-analysis was conducted using 8 studies comprising 2546 PLHIV. Most of the studies (46%) employed a cross-sectional study design. 11 out of the 13 studies were conducted in Europe. Most studies reported benzodiazepines as the most common PIM among PLHIV, while hypertension and dyslipidaemia were identified as the most frequent comorbidities. Overall, the pooled prevalence of PIM was 44.8% (95% CI, 32%-58%) using a random-effect model. PIM prevalence among PLHIV was higher among those exposed to polypharmacy (59.3%; CI: 48.9% – 68.9%), those aged > 70 years (44.6%; CI: 24.1–67.1), and post-COVID (48.9%; CI: 39%-59%). This study suggests that PIM exposure among PLHIV is a budding issue. Findings from this review advocate for mitigating measures against PIM use. Also, this review contributes data on the use of PIM across different cohorts, creating awareness for policymakers and health managers. PROSPERO – CRD42024529411.

BMC Infectious DiseasesVol. 25(1)
Boston University (US), University of Nigeria (NG), Thomas Jefferson University (US), University of South Carolina (US), St Mary's University Twickenham London (GB), Kaduna State University (NG), Nigerian Meteorological Agency (NG), Barrington Public Library (US), Centre for the Study of the Economies of Africa (NG), Glasgow Centre for Population Health (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 50%
HIV-related health complications and treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.