Association of cancer with functional decline at old age: a longitudinal study in Danish twins.

INTRODUCTION: There is evidence that older adults with cancer have a higher risk of functional decline than cancer-free older adults. However, few studies are longitudinal, and none are twin studies. Thus, we aimed to investigate the relationship between cancer and functional decline in older adult (aged 70+ years) twins. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cancer cases in the Longitudinal Study of Aging Danish Twins were identified through the Danish Cancer Registry. Functional status was assessed using hand grip strength (6 years follow-up), and self-reported questions on mobility (10 years follow-up), and cut-offs were defined to assess functional decline. Cox regression models were performed for all the individual twins. In addition, we extended the analysis to discordant twin pairs (twin pairs with one having cancer and the other being cancer-free), to control to a certain extent for (unmeasured) shared confounders (genetic and environmental factors). RESULTS: The analysis based on individual twins showed that individual twins with cancer are at increased hazard of worsening hand grip strength (hazard ratio (HR) 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04, 1.80) than cancer-free twins. Among the discordant twin pairs, twins with cancer had a higher hazard of worsening hand grip strength (HR 3.50, 95% CI 1.15, 10.63) than cancer-free cotwins. In contrast, there was no evidence of a difference between the hazard of experiencing mobility decline for twins with cancer compared with cancer-free twins, in both individual twins and discordant twin pairs analyses. DISCUSSION: Cancer was associated with hand grip strength functional decline in old individual twins and discordant pairs. Our results strengthen the importance of comprehensive geriatric assessment in older adults with cancer, as well as the importance of routine assessment of functional status. Promoting physical activity through exercise training programmes could enable the prevention of functional decline in older adults with cancer.

Designing a tool ensuring older patients the right medication at the right time after discharge from hospital- the first step in a participatory design process.

BACKGROUND: On average, older patients use five or more medications daily, increasing the risk of adverse drug reactions, interactions, or medication errors. Healthcare sector transitions increase the risk of information loss, misunderstandings, unclear treatment responsibilities, and medication errors. Therefore, it is crucial to identify possible solutions to decrease these risks. Patients, relatives, and healthcare professionals were asked to design the solution they need. METHODS: We conducted a participatory design approach to collect information from patients, relatives, and healthcare professionals. The informants were asked to design their take on a tool ensuring that patients received the correct medication after discharge from the hospital. We included two patients using five or more medications daily, one relative, three general practitioners, four nurses from different healthcare sectors, two hospital physicians, and three pharmacists. RESULTS: The patients' solution was a physical location providing a medication overview, including side effects and interactions. Healthcare professionals suggested different solutions, including targeted and timely information that provided an overview of the patient's diagnoses, treatment and medication. The common themes identified across all sub-groups were: (1) Overview of medications, side effects, and diagnoses, (2) Sharing knowledge among healthcare professionals, (3) Timely discharge letters, (4) Does the shared medication record and existing communication platforms provide relevant information to the patient or healthcare professional? CONCLUSION: All study participants describe the need for a more concise, relevant overview of information. This study describes elements for further elaboration in future participatory design processes aimed at creating a tool to ensure older patients receive the correct medication at the correct time.

Handling polypharmacy -a qualitative study using focus group interviews with older patients, their relatives, and healthcare professionals.

BACKGROUND: On average, older patients use five or more medications daily. A consequence is an increased risk of adverse drug reactions, interactions, or medication errors. Therefore, it is important to understand the challenges experienced by the patients, relatives, and healthcare professionals pertinent to the concomitant use of many drugs. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study using focus group interviews to collect information from patients, relatives, and healthcare professionals regarding older patients' management of prescribed medicine. We interviewed seven patients using five or more medications daily, three relatives, three general practitioners, nine nurses from different healthcare sectors, one home care assistant, two hospital physicians, and four pharmacists. RESULTS: The following themes were identified: (1) Unintentional non-adherence, (2) Intentional non-adherence, (3) Generic substitution, (4) Medication lists, (5) Timing and medication schedule, (6) Medication reviews and (7) Dose dispensing/pill organizers. CONCLUSION: Medication is the subject of concern among patients and relatives. They become confused and insecure about information from different actors and the package leaflets. Therefore, patients often request a thorough medication review to provide an overview, knowledge of possible side effects and interactions, and a clarification of the medication's timing. In addition, patients, relatives and nurses all request an indication of when medicine should be taken, including allowable deviations from this timing. Therefore, prescribing physicians should prioritize communicating information regarding these matters when prescribing.

Effect of a home-based isometric handgrip training programme on systolic blood pressure in adults: A randomised assessor-blinded trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of 20 weeks of home-based isometric handgrip training (IHT) compared with usual care on systolic blood pressure (SBP) in adults. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a randomised, controlled, assessor-blinded trial. Participants were randomised to either IHT (intervention group) or usual care (control group). INTERVENTIONS: Participants randomised to the intervention group performed a session of 16 min of effective workout home-based IHT three times per week for 20 weeks. Participants randomised to the control group were asked to continue their daily activities as usual. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was the difference in SBP between groups over 20 weeks. Secondary outcomes were diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, handgrip strength, and self-administered home blood pressure measures. RESULTS: Forty-eight adults (mean [SD] age, 64 [8] years) were included in this trial. The adjusted between-group mean difference in SBP was 8.12 mmHg (95% CI 0.24 to 16.01, p = 0.04) - favouring the usual care group. No differences between groups were found in any of the home blood pressure measurements. CONCLUSIONS: This trial showed that 20 weeks of home-based isometric handgrip training was not superior compared to the usual care in lowering SBP.

The Impact of Age on Predictive Performance of National Early Warning Score at Arrival to Emergency Departments: Development and External Validation.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To investigate how age affects the predictive performance of the National Early Warning Score (NEWS) at arrival to the emergency department (ED) regarding inhospital mortality and intensive care admission. METHODS: International multicenter retrospective cohorts from 2 Danish and 3 Dutch ED. Development cohort: 14,809 Danish patients aged ≥18 years with at least systolic blood pressure or pulse measured from the Danish Multicenter Cohort. External validation cohort: 50,448 Dutch patients aged ≥18 years with all vital signs measured from the Netherlands Emergency Department Evaluation Database (NEED). Multivariable logistic regression was used for model building. Performance was evaluated overall and within age categories: 18 to 64 years, 65 to 80 years, and more than 80 years. RESULTS: In the Danish Multicenter Cohort, a total of 2.5% died inhospital, and 2.8% were admitted to the ICU, compared with 2.8% and 1.6%, respectively, in the NEED. Age did not add information for the prediction of intensive care admission but was the strongest predictor for inhospital mortality. For NEWS alone, severe underestimation of risk was observed for persons above 80 while overall Area Under Receiver Operating Characteristic (AUROC) was 0.82 (confidence interval [CI] 0.80 to 0.84) in the Danish Multicenter Cohort versus 0.75 (CI 0.75 to 0.77) in the NEED. When combining NEWS with age, underestimation of risks was eliminated for persons above 80, and overall AUROC increased significantly to 0.86 (CI 0.85 to 0.88) in the Danish Multicenter Cohort versus 0.82 (CI 0.81 to 0.83) in the NEED. CONCLUSION: Combining NEWS with age improved the prediction performance regarding inhospital mortality, mostly for persons aged above 80, and can potentially improve decision policies at arrival to EDs.

Medication reviews and deprescribing as a single intervention in falls prevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: our aim was to assess the effectiveness of medication review and deprescribing interventions as a single intervention in falls prevention. DESIGN: systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, PsycINFO until 28 March 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: randomised controlled trials of older participants comparing any medication review or deprescribing intervention with usual care and reporting falls as an outcome. STUDY RECORDS: title/abstract and full-text screening by two reviewers. RISK OF BIAS: Cochrane Collaboration revised tool. DATA SYNTHESIS: results reported separately for different settings and sufficiently comparable studies meta-analysed. RESULTS: forty-nine heterogeneous studies were included. COMMUNITY: meta-analyses of medication reviews resulted in a risk ratio (RR) of 1.05 (95% confidence interval, 0.85-1.29, I2 = 0%, 3 studies(s)) for number of fallers, in an RR = 0.95 (0.70-1.27, I2 = 37%, 3 s) for number of injurious fallers and in a rate ratio (RaR) of 0.89 (0.69-1.14, I2 = 0%, 2 s) for injurious falls. HOSPITAL: meta-analyses assessing medication reviews resulted in an RR = 0.97 (0.74-1.28, I2 = 15%, 2 s) and in an RR = 0.50 (0.07-3.50, I2 = 72% %, 2 s) for number of fallers after and during admission, respectively. LONG-TERM CARE: meta-analyses investigating medication reviews or deprescribing plans resulted in an RR = 0.86 (0.72-1.02, I2 = 0%, 5 s) for number of fallers and in an RaR = 0.93 (0.64-1.35, I2 = 92%, 7 s) for number of falls. CONCLUSIONS: the heterogeneity of the interventions precluded us to estimate the exact effect of medication review and deprescribing as a single intervention. For future studies, more comparability is warranted. These interventions should not be implemented as a stand-alone strategy in falls prevention but included in multimodal strategies due to the multifactorial nature of falls.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020218231.

World guidelines for falls prevention and management for older adults: a global initiative.

BACKGROUND: falls and fall-related injuries are common in older adults, have negative effects on functional independence and quality of life and are associated with increased morbidity, mortality and health related costs. Current guidelines are inconsistent, with no up-to-date, globally applicable ones present. OBJECTIVES: to create a set of evidence- and expert consensus-based falls prevention and management recommendations applicable to older adults for use by healthcare and other professionals that consider: (i) a person-centred approach that includes the perspectives of older adults with lived experience, caregivers and other stakeholders; (ii) gaps in previous guidelines; (iii) recent developments in e-health and (iv) implementation across locations with limited access to resources such as low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: a steering committee and a worldwide multidisciplinary group of experts and stakeholders, including older adults, were assembled. Geriatrics and gerontological societies were represented. Using a modified Delphi process, recommendations from 11 topic-specific working groups (WGs), 10 ad-hoc WGs and a WG dealing with the perspectives of older adults were reviewed and refined. The final recommendations were determined by voting. RECOMMENDATIONS: all older adults should be advised on falls prevention and physical activity. Opportunistic case finding for falls risk is recommended for community-dwelling older adults. Those considered at high risk should be offered a comprehensive multifactorial falls risk assessment with a view to co-design and implement personalised multidomain interventions. Other recommendations cover details of assessment and intervention components and combinations, and recommendations for specific settings and populations. CONCLUSIONS: the core set of recommendations provided will require flexible implementation strategies that consider both local context and resources.

What matters and influence resuscitation preference? Development, field testing, and structural validation of items among older patients in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Decisions about resuscitation preference is an essential part of patient-centered care but a prerequisite is having an idea about which questions to ask and understand how such questions may be clustered in dimensions. The European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021 encourages resuscitation shared decision making in emergency care treatment plans and needs and experiences of people approaching end-of-life have been characterized within the physical, psychological, social, and spiritual dimensions. We aimed to develop, test, and validate the dimensionality of items that may influence resuscitation preference in older Emergency Department (ED) patients. METHODS: A 36-item questionnaire was designed based on qualitative interviews exploring what matters and what may influence resuscitation preference and existing literature. Items were organized in physical, psychological, social, and spiritual dimensions. Initial pilot-testing to assess content validity included ten older community-dwelling persons. Field-testing, confirmatory factor analysis and post-hoc bifactor analysis was performed on 269 older ED patients. Several model fit indexes and reliability coefficients (explained common variance (ECV) and omega values) were computed to evaluate structural validity, dimensionality, and model-based reliability. RESULTS: Items were reduced from 36 to 26 in field testing. Items concerning religious beliefs from the spiritual dimension were misunderstood and deemed unimportant by older ED patients. Remaining items concerned physical functioning in daily living, coping, self-control in life, optimism, overall mood, quality of life and social participation in life. Confirmatory factor analysis displayed poor fit, whereas post-hoc bifactor analysis displayed satisfactory goodness of fit (χ2 =562.335 (p<0.001); root mean square error of approximation=0.063 (90% CI [0.055;0.070])). The self-assessed independence may be the bifactor explaining what matters to older ED patients' resuscitation preference. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a questionnaire and investigated the dimensionality of what matters and may influence resuscitation preference among older ED patients. We could not confirm a spiritual dimension. Also, in bifactor analysis the expected dimensions were overruled by an overall explanatory general factor suggesting independence to be of particular importance for clinicians practicing resuscitation discussions in EDs. Studies to investigate how independence may relate to patients' choice of resuscitation preference are needed.

Patient Preferences for Discussing Life Expectancy: a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Discussing life expectancy helps inform decisions related to preventive medication, screening, and personal care planning. Our aim was to systematically review the literature on patient preferences for discussing life expectancy and to identify predictors for these preferences. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and gray literature from inception until 17 February 2021. Two authors screened titles/abstracts and full texts, and extracted data and one author assessed quality. The outcome of interest was the proportion of patients willing to discuss life expectancy. We reported descriptive statistics, performed a narrative synthesis, and explored sub-groups of patients according to patient characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 41 studies with an accumulated population of 27,570 participants were included, comprising quantitative survey/questionnaire studies (n=27) and qualitative interview studies (n=14). Willingness to discuss life expectancy ranged from 19 to 100% (median 61%, interquartile range (IQR) 50-73) across studies, with the majority (77%) reporting more than half of subjects willing to discuss. There was considerable heterogeneity in willingness to discuss life expectancy, even between studies from patients with similar ages, diseases, and cultural profiles. The highest variability in willingness to discuss was found among patients with cancer (range 19-100%, median 61%, IQR 51-81) and patients aged 50-64 years (range 19-97%, median 61%, IQR 45-87). This made it impossible to determine predictors for willingness to discuss life expectancy. DISCUSSION: Most patients are willing to discuss life expectancy; however, a substantial proportion is not. Heterogeneity and variability in preferences make it challenging to identify clear predictors of willingness to discuss. Variability in preferences may to some extent be influenced by age, disease, and cultural differences. These findings highlight the individual and complex nature in which patients approach this topic and stress the importance of clinicians considering eliciting patient's individual preferences when initiating discussions about life expectancy.

SARS-CoV-2 infection among patients with haematological disorders: Severity and one-month outcome in 66 Danish patients in a nationwide cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with haematological disorders may be particularly vulnerable to respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection; however, this is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, nationwide study including 66 patients in follow-up at Danish haematology departments with a malignant or non-malignant haematological disorder and with verified SARS-CoV-2 infection. Outcomes were intensive care unit (ICU) admission and one-month survival rate. RESULTS: Mean age was 66.7 years, 60.6% were males, 90.9% had comorbidity, and 13.6% had a BMI ≥ 30. The most frequent diagnoses were chronic lymphocytic leukaemia/lymphoma (47.0%), multiple myeloma (16.7%) and acute leukaemia/myelodysplastic syndrome (AL/MDS) (12.1%). Treatment for the haematological disease was ongoing in 59.1% of cases. Neutropenia was present in 6.5%, lymphopenia in 46.6% and hypogammaglobulinaemia in 26.3%. The SARS-CoV-2 infection was mild in 50.0%, severe in 36.4% and critical in 13.6%. After one month, 21.2% had been admitted to ICU, and 24.2% died. Mortality was highest in older patients, patients with severe/critical SARS-CoV-2 infection, high comorbidity score or high performance status score, purine analogue treatment and with AL/MDS. Although older patients and patients with comorbidities had the highest mortality rates, mortality was considerable among all haematological patients. CONCLUSION: Haematological patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection has a severe clinical course.