Background: The estimates of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) prevalence across various studies are significantly variable, contributing to uncertainty in ADHD prevalence estimation. Previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses have attributed this variability primarily to the methodological characteristics of the studies, including the diagnostic criteria, source of information, and impairment requirement for the diagnosis. Methods: Review identified studies reporting ADHD prevalence in representative samples of children and adults in Europe and worldwide. Studies that were conducted in the general population were included. We focused on studies that report ADHD prevalence based on clinical diagnosis (clinical diagnostic criteria based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and International Classification of Diseases criteria, other diagnostic tools, such as various scales or interviews based on clinical diagnostic criteria). PubMed/Medline was searched to identify relevant articles published until 2024/2/01. The study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020200220) and followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines for systematic review and meta-analysis. Results: In total, 117 studies were subjected to full evaluation. In the meta-analysis, 103 studies representing 159 independent datapoints were included. The overall prevalence of ADHD in register studies was 1.6%, 95% CI [0.9; 3.0], in survey studies 5.0%, 95% CI [2.9; 8.6], in one-stage clinical studies 4.2%, 95% CI [2.9; 6.0], and in two-stage clinical studies 4.8%, 95% CI [4.0; 5.8]. Conclusions: Exact comparisons among studies with different diagnostic criteria and types of sampling can impact prevalence estimates. When comparing data from methodologically different studies, these factors need to be considered.

The population of developed countries is aging, leading to an increase in the use of medication in daily practice, which can lead to serious treatment costs and irrational polypharmacy. A collaborative care approach, such as providing medication review service provided by a clinical pharmacist (CP), is a possible way to reduce drug-related problems and irrational polypharmacy. The aim of this study was to determinate whether a CP’s medication review service can improve the quality of drug prescribing in elderly patients treated with polypharmacy in primary care. In a retrospective observational medical chart review study, patients aged 65 years or more in the period 2012–2014 who received 10 or more medications concomitantly and who were screened by a CP were included. Data on pharmacotherapy and CPs’ interventions were obtained from the patients’ medical records (non-electronic chart review). Potential drug-drug interactions (pDDIs) were determined with Lexicomp Online™ 3.0.2. Only potential X-type DDIs (pXDDIs) were included. Potentially inappropriate medications in the elderly (PIMs) were identified using the PRICUS list. Ninety-one patients were included. The CPs suggested 625 interventions, of which 304 (48.6%) were accepted by the general practitioners (GPs). After adopting the CPs’ interventions, the number of total medications decreased by 11.2% (p < 0.05) and the number of pXDDIs decreased by 42% (p < 0.05). The number of clinically important pXDDIs decreased by 50% (3 cases). The number of prescribed PIMs decreased by 20% (p = 0.069). The acceptance of CP’s recommendations reduced the number of pXDDIs (p < 0.05) and improved the adherence to heart failure treatment guidelines. A collaborative care approach offering a CP medication review service significantly improved the quality of pharmacotherapy by reducing the total number of medications and pXDDIs. The results support the implementation of this service in the Slovenian healthcare system.

Clinical pharmacists have not yet become an integral part of interdisciplinary ward rounds in most psychiatric hospitals across the European Union. This retrospective observational pre-post study examined the impact of clinical pharmacist recommendations in an interdisciplinary medical team during psychiatric hospital rounding. The study included all patients in a Slovenian psychiatric hospital who were hospitalized 2019–2020. The clinical pharmacist made 315 recommendations for a total of 224 participants (average age M = 59.4, median = 56). Psychiatrists accepted 295 (93.7%) of the recommendations. After the recommendations, the number of expressed and potential drug-related problems decreased in 166 (93.8%) and 129 (93.8%) interventions, respectively. Three months after discharge, 222 accepted recommendations were continued (70.5%). The most common recommendations were related to antipsychotics (19.4%, N = 61) followed by antidepressants (16.8%, N = 53). Including a clinical pharmacist in the interdisciplinary ward rounds at a psychiatric hospital reduced the number of expressed and potential drug-related problems with a very high recommendation acceptance rate. These results are the first in Central Europe to explore the benefits of including a clinical pharmacist in ward rounding.

Mental health problems (MHPs) are very common in the elderly and can have an important influence on their quality of life (QoL). There is almost no data on the impact of clinical pharmacists’ (CPs) interventions on the QoL including elderly patients and MHPs. The main aim of this study was to determinate the impact of (CP’s) interventions on the QoL and quality of pharmacotherapy. A prospective non-randomized pre-post study was designed which included residents of a nursing home aged 65 age or more with at least one MHP. Each patient also filled out the EQ-5D questionnaire. The medical review MR included drug-related problems (DRPs) and potentially drug-drug interactions (pDDIs), as well as potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). After 2 months, the participants were interviewed again. The mean number of medications before the intervention was 12,2 ± 3,1 per patient and decreased to 10,3 ± 3,0 medications per patient (p < 0,05) (n = 24). The total number of PIMs and pDDIs was also reduced and QoL was also significantly higher (p < 0,05). A collaborative care approach with a CP led to a decrease of DRPs, pDDIs, PIMs, the total number of medications and to an improvement in the patients’ QoL.

Psychogeriatric primary care patients are frequently treated with excessive polypharmacy (≥ 10 medications), leading to complications and increased costs. Such cases are rarely included in treatment guidelines and randomized controlled trials. This paper evaluates the impact of clinical pharmacist medication reviews on the quality of pharmacotherapy in primary care psychogeriatric patients with excessive polypharmacy. The retrospective observational multicentric pre-post study included patients (aged 65 or above) treated with at least one psychotropic and ten or more medications. Clinical pharmacists’ recommendations were retrieved from medication review forms for the period 2012⁠–⁠2014. The study outcome measures were the number of medications, potentially inappropriate medications in the elderly (PIMs), potential drug-drug interactions which should be avoided (pXDDIs), and adherence to treatment guidelines. The study included 246 patients receiving 3294 medications, of which 14.6% were psychotropics. The clinical pharmacists proposed 374 interventions in psychopharmacotherapy. The general practitioners accepted 45.2% of them (169). Accepting clinical pharmacist recommendations reduced the total number of medications by 7.5% from 13.4 to 12.4 per patient (p < 0.05), the total number of prescribed PIMs by 21.8% from 312 to 244 (p < 0.05), the number of pXDDIs by 54.9% from 71 to 31 (p < 0.05) and also improved treatment guidelines adherence for antidepressants and antipsychotics (p < 0.05). Clinical pharmacist interventions significantly improved the quality of psychopharmacotherapy by reducing the total number of medications, PIMs, and pXDDIs. Accepting clinical pharmacist interventions led to better treatment guidelines adherence.