Medication management error types: Associations with mild cognitive impairment subtype.

Objective: Medication management errors are suspected to be prevalent among older adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). This study examined types of simulated medication-taking errors in cognitively normal older adults (CN; n = 131), single domain amnestic MCI (sdMCI, n = 91), and multi-domain MCI (mdMCI, n = 44). Errors were measured using the medication management ability assessment (MMAA). Methods: 266 participants seen for neuropsychological evaluation (94.4% White, 57.9% female, average age = 72, average education = 14 years) completed the MMAA (version 4.1), a performance-based task of medication management. Group differences in MMAA total scores, accuracy, and error types were evaluated using Kruskall-Wallis H tests. This study was the first to explore a newly operationalized error, perseverations, caused by taking a specific dose ≥2 times during the simulation. Results: CN and sdMCI groups had higher MMAA total scores than individuals with mdMCI, indicating better overall performance. The mdMCI group made a higher number of omission errors (missed pills) than other groups, but no differences were found for commission errors (extra pills). The sdMCI group made more perseverative errors compared to the CN group. Conclusions: Individuals with mdMCI made more simulated medication management errors than CN and sdMCI groups, indicating that they may be most vulnerable to difficulties in medication management. In contrast, sdMCI individuals were more likely to make perseverative errors, which may reflect a tendency towards overcompensation of memory loss. Future studies should assess whether MMAA performance is associated with patterns of real-world medication-taking in more diverse samples of older adults.

Anticholinergic and sedative medication use in older patients with cognitive concerns.

BACKGROUND: Anticholinergic (AC) and sedative medications are a risk factor for cognitive impairment. This study sought to characterize AC and sedative use in older patients seen for outpatient neuropsychological evaluation and evaluate their associations with different cognitive domains. We hypothesized that AC and sedative use would be associated with worse attention/processing speed (AP), executive functioning (EF), and memory. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional chart review of 392 patients (mean [M] age = 72 ± 7.7 years, range = 54-91). Medications were characterized by number of AC medications (≥1 on the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden Scale [ACB]), number of sedative medications, and polypharmacy (≥5 daily medications). Demographically adjusted composites were calculated for AP, EF, and memory. Bivariate Pearson correlations assessed relationships between medication use and cognition. Multivariate linear regressions evaluated significant medication-cognition associations, controlling for total medications, medical comorbidities, and estimated premorbid cognitive functioning. RESULTS: Polypharmacy was common (80%; n = 314). Most patients (70%; n = 275) used ≥1 sedative medications (range = 0-9). Over half (63%; n = 248) used ≥1 AC drugs (range = 0-7), yet ACB scores were ≤2 in 74% of patients. Sedative use was negatively correlated with AP (r = -0.134, p = 0.008) and EF (r = -0.105, p = 0.04). ACB scores were negatively correlated with AP (r = -0.106, p = 0.037). Sedatives and a priori covariates significantly predicted AP performance (R2 = 0.127, p < 0.001); using more sedative medications was uniquely associated with worse AP (ß = -0.426, p = 0.049). No significant associations were found with memory. CONCLUSION: AC and sedative medications and polypharmacy were prevalent in this sample of older patients. Though both drug classes had negative relationships with AP and EF, sedatives had a particularly negative association with AP. Contrary to our hypotheses, memory was not associated with medication use; however, anticholinergic burden was low within the sample, and AP and EF deficits may masquerade as memory problems.

Compensatory Strategy Intervention: What Older Patients Want and Why.

OBJECTIVE: Compensatory strategies can improve performance of instrumental activities of daily living in people with cognitive impairment. This study investigated patient interest in compensatory strategy interventions and preference for various intervention formats. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews with 38 older adults with cognitive impairment queried motivation to improve strategy use and interest in intervention formats/delivery methods. Two coders used thematic analysis to determine rates of interest in each intervention type and explore patient-reported barriers and facilitators to motivation and intervention models. RESULTS: Most of the samples reported motivation to enhance compensatory strategy use. Degree of motivation was driven by current experiences with strategy use, perceived benefit of potential changes, intrinsic desire to improve life and self, and current perceived need. The vast majority were interested in hour-long, multi-session, instructor-led interventions. Just over half of the sample was interested in a self-directed virtual program, and just under half was interested in involving family/friends. Facilitators and barriers to interest in intervention formats and delivery methods varied based on participants' previous experiences, preferred learning style, content, and time commitment of the intervention, and perceived current need for intervention. One-fifth of the sample expressed no interest in any intervention type, though they expressed openness to assistance in the future as needed. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults with cognitive impairment are generally motivated to enhance their compensatory strategy use. Clinicians/researchers designing compensatory strategy interventions should consider instructor-led formats, present individualized benefits of interventions, and demonstrate the benefits of both preventative and remedial intervention to optimize patient engagement.

Medication self-management in predominantly African American and Caribbean American people with epilepsy: The role of medication beliefs and epilepsy knowledge.

INTRODUCTION: Suboptimal medication adherence is common in people with epilepsy (PWE) and disproportionally prevalent among racially/ethnically diverse patients. Understanding reasons and risks of suboptimal adherence is critical to developing interventions that reduce negative health outcomes. This cross-sectional study characterized common barriers to medication self-management, prevalence of negative medication beliefs, and gaps in epilepsy knowledge among predominantly African American and Caribbean American PWE and examined their interrelationships. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-three PWE (Age = 42.1 ± 13.2; 60% female; 79% Black; 19% Hispanic/Latino) completed validated self-report questionnaires about medication self-management, medication beliefs, and epilepsy knowledge. Correlations and t-tests examined interrelationships. RESULTS: Four barriers to medication self-management were common, including not taking antiseizure medications at the same time every day, forgetting doses, not planning refills before running out, and spreading out doses when running low. More than half the sample believed medications were overused by prescribers. Nearly one-third believed medications were harmful, and nearly a quarter believed their antiseizure medications were minimally necessary with almost half reporting elevated concerns about negative consequences of antiseizure medications. Poorer medication self-management was associated with stronger beliefs that medications in general are harmful/overused by prescribers. Individuals who were "accepting" of their antiseizure medications (i.e., high perceived necessity, low concerns) were less likely to spread out time between doses when running low compared to non-accepting counterparts. Knowledge gaps related to the cause of seizures/epilepsy, chronicity of epilepsy treatment, and seizure semiology/diagnosis were common. Nevertheless, epilepsy knowledge was unrelated to medication self-management and medication beliefs. CONCLUSIONS: In these PWE, the most prevalent reasons for suboptimal medication self-management were behaviorally mediated and potentially modifiable. Negative medication beliefs and misconceptions about epilepsy and its treatment were common. Results further suggest that interventions addressing negative medication beliefs will be more effective than knowledge-based psychoeducation alone to improve medication self-management in this patient population.