Lessons learned from our elders: how to study polypharmacy in populations with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
Use one clear, written rule for counting multiple meds so your data can join bigger studies.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The authors looked at past studies on people with IDD who take many medicines.
They asked: how can we measure this better?
They wrote a guide for future researchers on picking clear definitions and good samples.
What they found
They found no single way to count polypharmacy.
Some studies said two drugs, others said five.
They urge teams to pick one clear rule before starting any new study.
How this fits with other research
Dudley et al. (2019) extends these ideas. That team shows U.S. health data still misses many adults with IDD. Both papers say: fix your case definition first.
Matson et al. (2009) came before this work. They showed poor tools also hurt studies on community life. The new paper adds medicine lists to the same problem list.
Cook et al. (2011) shares the same worry. They fixed fuzzy words like "social skills." N et al. now do the same for "polypharmacy."
Why it matters
If you track meds for clients, pick one clear rule and stick to it. Write it in the behavior plan. This small step makes your data match future studies and helps doctors spot true risks faster.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add a line to each client's plan: "Polypharmacy = daily use of 3 or more prescribed drugs."
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Polypharmacy is the concurrent use of multiple medications, including both psychotropic and non-psychotropic drugs. Although it may sometimes be clinically indicated, polypharmacy can have a number of negative consequences, including medication nonadherence, adverse drug reactions, and undesirable drug-drug interactions. The objective of this paper was to gain a better understanding of how to study polypharmacy among people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). To do this, we reviewed literature on polypharmacy among the elderly and people with IDD to inform future research approaches and methods on polypharmacy in people with IDD. Results identified significant variability in methods used to study polypharmacy, including definitions of polypharmacy, samples studied, analytic strategies, and variables included in the analyses. Four valuable methodological lessons to strengthen future polypharmacy research in individuals with IDD emerged. These included the use of consistent definitions of polypharmacy, the implementation of population-based sampling strategies, the development of clinical guidelines, and the importance of studying associated variables.
Intellectual and developmental disabilities, 2014 · doi:10.1352/1934-9556-52.1.60