Statin therapy in multimorbid older patients with polypharmacy- a cross-sectional analysis of the Swiss OPERAM trial population.

Background: Statin therapy in multimorbid older individuals with polypharmacy is controversial, particularly in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Thereby, physicians must weigh potential benefits against potential side effects, drug-drug interactions, and limited life expectancy. Aim: To assess the prevalence and determinants of potentially inappropriate statin therapy in multimorbid older patients. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of patients aged ≥70 years with multimorbidity and polypharmacy in the Swiss study center of OPERAM, a cluster-randomized trial on pharmacotherapy optimization to reduce drug-related hospital admissions. We assessed potential underuse (no statin but formal indication) and potential overuse (statin but no formal indication, including predicted >60% one-year mortality based on the Walter Score) based on current guidelines for patients in secondary and primary cardiovascular prevention. We assessed the association of potential statin overuse and underuse with six patient characteristics (age, gender, number of diagnoses, number of medications, mental impairment, being housebound) in LASSO-selection analyses. Results: Of 715 multimorbid older adults (79.7 ± 6.5 years, 39.9% women), 337 (47%) were on statin. Statin therapy was appropriate in 474 (66.3%), underused in 130 (18.2%), and overused in 111 (15.5%) patients. In participants in secondary cardiovascular prevention (n = 437), being female (odds ratio [OR] 2.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.67-4.22) was significantly associated with potential underuse while being housebound (OR 3.53, 95%CI 1.32-9.46) and taking ≥10 medications (OR 1.95,95%CI 1.05-3.67) were associated with potential overuse. In participants in primary cardiovascular prevention (n = 278), 28.1% were potentially under- (9%) or overusing (19%) a statin, with no identified risk factor. Conclusion: A third of hospitalized multimorbid older patients with polypharmacy potentially (either) overused or underused statin therapy. Among patients in secondary cardiovascular prevention, women were at risk for potential statin underuse. Housebound patients and those taking ≥10 medications were at risk for potential overuse of a statin. Physicians should carefully evaluate the indication for statin prescription in multimorbid older patients with polypharmacy.

Overtreatment and associated risk factors among multimorbid older patients with diabetes.

BACKGROUND: In multimorbid older patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), the intensity of glucose-lowering medication (GLM) should be focused on attaining a suitable level of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c ) while avoiding side effects. We aimed at identifying patients with overtreatment of T2DM as well as associated risk factors. METHODS: In a secondary analysis of a multicenter study of multimorbid older patients, we evaluated HbA1c levels among patients with T2DM. Patients were aged ≥70 years, with multimorbidity (≥3 chronic diagnoses) and polypharmacy (≥5 chronic medications), enrolled in four university medical centers across Europe (Belgium, Ireland, Netherlands, and Switzerland). We defined overtreatment as HbA1c < 7.5% with ≥1 GLM other than metformin, as suggested by Choosing Wisely and used prevalence ratios (PRs) to evaluate risk factors of overtreatment in age- and sex-adjusted analyses. RESULTS: Among the 564 patients with T2DM (median age 78 years, 39% women), mean ± standard deviation HbA1c was 7.2 ± 1.2%. Metformin (prevalence 51%) was the most frequently prescribed GLM and 199 (35%) patients were overtreated. The presence of severe renal impairment (PR 1.36, 1.21-1.53) and outpatient physician (other than general practitioner [GP], i.e. specialist) or emergency department visits (PR 1.22, 1.03-1.46 for 1-2 visits, and PR 1.35, 1.19-1.54 for ≥3 visits versus no visits) were associated with overtreatment. These factors remained associated with overtreatment in multivariable analyses. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicountry study of multimorbid older patients with T2DM, more than one third were overtreated, highlighting the high prevalence of this problem. Careful balancing of benefits and risks in the choice of GLM may improve patient care, especially in the context of comorbidities such as severe renal impairment, and frequent non-GP healthcare contacts.

OLD-TAVR score to predict 2-year mortality in patients aged 75 years and more undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

PURPOSE: Decision-making on transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients aged 75 years and older is complex. It could be facilitated by the identification of predictors of long-term mortality. This study aimed to identify predictors of 2-year mortality to develop a 2-year mortality risk score. METHODS: Cohort study of consecutive patients aged ≥ 75 years who underwent TAVR after a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) at our university hospital between 2012 and 2019. Predictors of 2-year mortality were determined using multivariable Cox regression. A point-based predictive model was developed based on risk factors and subsequently internally validated by fivefold cross-validation. RESULTS: The 345 patients (median age 87 years, 54% women) were fit/vulnerable (32%), mildly frail (37%), or moderately/severely frail (31%). The overall 2-year mortality rate was 26%, predicted by atrial fibrillation, hemoglobin ≤ 10 g/dL, age ≥ 87 years, BMI ≤ 24, eGFR ≤ 50 ml/min, and moderate/severe frailty. The risk score (range 0-12), named OLD-TAVR score, for 2-year mortality showed good discriminative power (AUC 0.70) and remained consistent after fivefold cross-validation (cvAUC 0.69). A risk score ≥ 8 (prevalence 20%) predicted a 45% (95%CI: 34-58%) two-year mortality, with high specificity (86%) and good positive predictive power (+ LR 2.43). CONCLUSION: A 2-year mortality risk score (OLD-TAVR score) for very old patients undergoing TAVR was developed based on six bio-clinical items. A score ≥ 8 identified patients in whom 2-year mortality was very high and thereby the TAVR futile. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER AND DATE OF REGISTRATION: Study protocol B403, 26/09/2022, retrospectively registered.

Association between diabetes overtreatment in older multimorbid patients and clinical outcomes: an ancillary European multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes overtreatment is a frequent and severe issue in multimorbid older patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at assessing the association between diabetes overtreatment and 1-year functional decline, hospitalisation and mortality in older inpatients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. METHODS: Ancillary study of the European multicentre OPERAM project on multimorbid patients aged ≥70 years with T2D and glucose-lowering treatment (GLT). Diabetes overtreatment was defined according to the 2019 Endocrine Society guideline using HbA1c target range individualised according to the patient's overall health status and the use of GLT with a high risk of hypoglycaemia. Multivariable regressions were used to assess the association between diabetes overtreatment and the three outcomes. RESULTS: Among the 490 patients with T2D on GLT (median age: 78 years; 38% female), 168 (34.3%) had diabetes overtreatment. In patients with diabetes overtreatment as compared with those not overtreated, there was no difference in functional decline (29.3% vs 38.0%, P = 0.088) nor hospitalisation rates (107.3 vs 125.8/100 p-y, P = 0.115) but there was a higher mortality rate (32.8 vs 21.4/100 p-y, P = 0.033). In multivariable analyses, diabetes overtreatment was not associated with functional decline nor hospitalisation (hazard ratio, HR [95%CI]: 0.80 [0.63; 1.02]) but was associated with a higher mortality rate (HR [95%CI]: 1.64 [1.06; 2.52]). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes overtreatment was associated with a higher mortality rate but not with hospitalisation or functional decline. Interventional studies should be undertaken to test the effect of de-intensifying GLT on clinical outcomes in overtreated patients.

Geriatric care for surgical patients: results and reflections from a cross-sectional survey in acute Belgian hospitals.

PURPOSE: To explore geriatric care for surgical patients in Belgian hospitals and geriatricians' reflections on current practice. METHODS: A web-based survey was developed based on literature review and local expertise, and was pretested with 4 participants. In June 2021, the 27-question survey was sent to 91 heads of geriatrics departments. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were performed. RESULTS: Fifty-four surveys were completed, corresponding to a response rate of 59%. Preoperative geriatric risk screening is performed in 25 hospitals and systematically followed by geriatric assessment in 17 hospitals. During the perioperative hospitalisation, 91% of geriatric teams provide non-medical and 82% provide medical advice. To a lesser extent, they provide geriatric protocols, geriatric education and training, and attend multidisciplinary team meetings. Overall, time allocation of geriatric teams goes mainly to postoperative evaluations and interventions, rather than to preoperative assessment and care planning. Most surgical patients are hospitalised on surgical wards, with reactive (73%) or proactive (46%) geriatric consultation. In 36 hospitals, surgical patients are also admitted on geriatric wards, predominantly orthopaedic/trauma, abdominal and vascular surgery. Ninety-eight per cent of geriatricians feel that more geriatric input for surgical patients is needed. The most common reported barriers to further implement geriatric-surgical services are shortage of geriatricians and geriatric nurses, and unadjusted legislation and financing. CONCLUSION: Geriatric care for surgical patients in Belgian hospitals is mainly reactive, although geriatricians favour more proactive services. The main opportunities and challenges for improvement are to resolve staff shortages in the geriatric work field and to update legislation and financing.

Optimizing Therapy to Prevent Avoidable Hospital Admissions in Multimorbid Older Adults (OPERAM): cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of optimising drug treatment on drug related hospital admissions in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy admitted to hospital. DESIGN: Cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 110 clusters of inpatient wards within university based hospitals in four European countries (Switzerland, Netherlands, Belgium, and Republic of Ireland) defined by attending hospital doctors. PARTICIPANTS: 2008 older adults (≥70 years) with multimorbidity (≥3 chronic conditions) and polypharmacy (≥5 drugs used long term). INTERVENTION: Clinical staff clusters were randomised to usual care or a structured pharmacotherapy optimisation intervention performed at the individual level jointly by a doctor and a pharmacist, with the support of a clinical decision software system deploying the screening tool of older person's prescriptions and screening tool to alert to the right treatment (STOPP/START) criteria to identify potentially inappropriate prescribing. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Primary outcome was first drug related hospital admission within 12 months. RESULTS: 2008 older adults (median nine drugs) were randomised and enrolled in 54 intervention clusters (963 participants) and 56 control clusters (1045 participants) receiving usual care. In the intervention arm, 86.1% of participants (n=789) had inappropriate prescribing, with a mean of 2.75 (SD 2.24) STOPP/START recommendations for each participant. 62.2% (n=491) had ≥1 recommendation successfully implemented at two months, predominantly discontinuation of potentially inappropriate drugs. In the intervention group, 211 participants (21.9%) experienced a first drug related hospital admission compared with 234 (22.4%) in the control group. In the intention-to-treat analysis censored for death as competing event (n=375, 18.7%), the hazard ratio for first drug related hospital admission was 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.77 to 1.17). In the per protocol analysis, the hazard ratio for a drug related hospital admission was 0.91 (0.69 to 1.19). The hazard ratio for first fall was 0.96 (0.79 to 1.15; 237 v 263 first falls) and for death was 0.90 (0.71 to 1.13; 172 v 203 deaths). CONCLUSIONS: Inappropriate prescribing was common in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy admitted to hospital and was reduced through an intervention to optimise pharmacotherapy, but without effect on drug related hospital admissions. Additional efforts are needed to identify pharmacotherapy optimisation interventions that reduce inappropriate prescribing and improve patient outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02986425.

Measurement properties of EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in recording self-reported health status in older patients with substantial multimorbidity and polypharmacy.

BACKGROUND: The EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L are two generic health-related quality of life measures, which may be used in clinical and health economic research. They measure impairment in 5 aspects of health: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. The aim of this study was to assess the performance of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in measuring the self-reported health status of older patients with substantial multimorbidity and associated polypharmacy. METHODS: Between 2017 and 2019, we administered EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L to a subset of patients participating in the OPERAM trial at 6 months and 12 months after enrolment. The OPERAM trial is a two-arm multinational cluster randomised controlled trial of structured medication review assisted by a software-based decision support system versus usual pharmaceutical care, for older people (aged ≥ 70 years) with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. In the psychometric analyses, we only included participants who completed the measures in full at 6 and 12 months. We assessed whether responses to the measures were consistent by assessing the proportion of EQ-5D-5L responses, which were 2 or more levels away from that person's EQ-5D-3L response. We also compared the measures in terms of informativity, and discriminant validity and responsiveness relative to the Barthel Index, which measures independence in activities of daily living. RESULTS: 224 patients (mean age of 77 years; 56% male) were included in the psychometric analyses. Ceiling effects reported with the EQ-5D-5L (22%) were lower than with the EQ-5D-3L (29%). For the mobility item, the EQ-5D-5L demonstrated better informativity (Shannon's evenness index score of 0.86) than the EQ-5D-3L (Shannon's evenness index score of 0.69). Both the 3L and 5L versions of EQ-5D demonstrated good performance in terms of discriminant validity, i.e. (out of all items of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L, the pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression items had the weakest correlation with the Barthel Index. Both the 3L and 5L versions of EQ-5D demonstrated good responsiveness to changes in the Barthel Index. CONCLUSION: Both EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L demonstrated validity and responsiveness when administered to older adults with substantial multimorbidity and polypharmacy who were able to complete the measures.

Intervention protocol: OPtimising thERapy to prevent avoidable hospital Admission in the Multi-morbid elderly (OPERAM): a structured medication review with support of a computerised decision support system.

BACKGROUND: Several approaches to medication optimisation by identifying drug-related problems in older people have been described. Although some interventions have shown reductions in drug-related problems (DRPs), evidence supporting the effectiveness of medication reviews on clinical and economic outcomes is lacking. Application of the STOPP/START (version 2) explicit screening tool for inappropriate prescribing has decreased inappropriate prescribing and significantly reduced adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and associated healthcare costs in older patients with multi-morbidity and polypharmacy. Therefore, application of STOPP/START criteria during a medication review is likely to be beneficial. Incorporation of explicit screening tools into clinical decision support systems (CDSS) has gained traction as a means to improve both quality and efficiency in the rather time-consuming medication review process. Although CDSS can generate more potential inappropriate medication recommendations, some of these have been shown to be less clinically relevant, resulting in alert fatigue. Moreover, explicit tools such as STOPP/START do not cover all relevant DRPs on an individual patient level. The OPERAM study aims to assess the impact of a structured drug review on the quality of pharmacotherapy in older people with multi-morbidity and polypharmacy. The aim of this paper is to describe the structured, multi-component intervention of the OPERAM trial and compare it with the approach in the comparator arm. METHOD: This paper describes a multi-component intervention, integrating interventions that have demonstrated effectiveness in defining DRPs. The intervention involves a structured history-taking of medication (SHiM), a medication review according to the systemic tool to reduce inappropriate prescribing (STRIP) method, assisted by a clinical decision support system (STRIP Assistant, STRIPA) with integrated STOPP/START criteria (version 2), followed by shared decision-making with both patient and attending physician. The developed method integrates patient input, patient data, involvement from other healthcare professionals and CDSS-assistance into one structured intervention. DISCUSSION: The clinical and economical effectiveness of this experimental intervention will be evaluated in a cohort of hospitalised, older patients with multi-morbidity and polypharmacy in the multicentre, randomized controlled OPERAM trial (OPtimising thERapy to prevent Avoidable hospital admissions in the Multi-morbid elderly), which will be completed in the last quarter of 2019. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Universal Trial Number: U1111-1181-9400 Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02986425, Registered 08 December 2016. FOPH (Swiss national portal): SNCTP000002183. Netherlands Trial Register: NTR6012 (07-10-2016).

Rationale and design of OPtimising thERapy to prevent Avoidable hospital admissions in Multimorbid older people (OPERAM): a cluster randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Multimorbidity and polypharmacy are important risk factors for drug-related hospital admissions (DRAs). DRAs are often linked to prescribing problems (overprescribing and underprescribing), as well as non-adherence with drug regimens for different reasons. In this trial, we aim to assess whether a structured medication review compared with standard care can reduce DRAs in multimorbid older patients with polypharmacy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: OPtimising thERapy to prevent Avoidable hospital admissions in Multimorbid older people is a European multicentre, cluster randomised, controlled trial. Hospitalised patients ≥70 years with ≥3 chronic medical conditions and concurrent use of ≥5 chronic medications are included in the four participating study centres of Bern (Switzerland), Utrecht (The Netherlands), Brussels (Belgium) and Cork (Ireland). Patients treated by the same prescribing physician constitute a cluster, and clusters are randomised 1:1 to either standard care or Systematic Tool to Reduce Inappropriate Prescribing (STRIP) intervention with the help of a clinical decision support system, the STRIP Assistant. STRIP is a structured method performing customised medication reviews, based on Screening Tool of Older People's Prescriptions/Screening Tool to Alert to Right Treatment criteria to detect potentially inappropriate prescribing. The primary endpoint is any DRA where the main reason or a contributory reason for the patient's admission is caused by overtreatment or undertreatment, and/or inappropriate treatment. Secondary endpoints include number of any hospitalisations, all-cause mortality, number of falls, quality of life, degree of polypharmacy, activities of daily living, patient's drug compliance, the number of significant drug-drug interactions, drug overuse and underuse and potentially inappropriate medication. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The local Ethics Committees in Switzerland, Ireland, The Netherlands and Belgium approved this trial protocol. We will publish the results of this trial in a peer-reviewed journal. MAIN FUNDING: European Union's Horizon 2020 programme. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02986425 , SNCTP000002183 , NTR6012, U1111-1181-9400.

International core outcome set for clinical trials of medication review in multi-morbid older patients with polypharmacy.

BACKGROUND: Comparisons of clinical trial findings in systematic reviews can be hindered by the heterogeneity of the outcomes reported. Moreover, the outcomes that matter most to patients might be underreported. A core outcome set can address these issues, as it defines a minimum set of outcomes that should be reported in all clinical trials in a particular area of research. The objective in this study was to develop a core outcome set for clinical trials of medication review in multi-morbid older patients with polypharmacy. METHODS: Firstly, eligible outcomes were identified through a systematic review of trials of medication review in older patients (≥65 years) and interviews with 15 older patients. Secondly, an international three-round Delphi survey in four countries involving patients, healthcare professionals, and experts was conducted to validate outcomes to be included in the core outcome set. Consensus meetings were conducted to validate the results. RESULTS: Of the 164 participants invited to take part in the Delphi survey, 150 completed Round 1, including 55 patients or family caregivers, 55 healthcare professionals, and 40 experts. A total of 129 participants completed all three rounds. Sixty-four eligible outcomes were extracted from 47 articles, 32 clinical trial protocols, and patient interviews. Thirty outcomes were removed and one added after Round 1, 18 outcomes were removed after Round 2, and seven after Round 3. Results were discussed during consensus meetings. Consensus was reached on seven outcomes, which constitute the core outcome set: drug-related hospital admissions; drug overuse; drug underuse; potentially inappropriate medications; clinically significant drug-drug interactions; health-related quality of life; pain relief. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a core outcome set of seven outcomes which should be used in future trials of medication review in multi-morbid older patients with polypharmacy.

Development of a core outcome set for medication review in older patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Medication review has been advocated to address the challenge of polypharmacy in older patients, yet there is no consensus on how best to evaluate its efficacy. Heterogeneity of outcomes reported in clinical trials can hinder the comparison of clinical trial findings in systematic reviews. Moreover, the outcomes that matter most to older patients might be under-reported or disregarded altogether. A core outcome set can address this issue as it defines a minimum set of outcomes that should be reported in all clinical trials in any particular field of research. As part of the European Commission-funded project, called OPtimising thERapy to prevent Avoidable hospital admissions in the Multimorbid elderly, this paper describes the methods used to develop a core outcome set for clinical trials of medication review in older patients with multimorbidity. METHODS/DESIGN: The study was designed in several steps. First, a systematic review established which outcomes were measured in published and ongoing clinical trials of medication review in older patients. Second, we undertook semistructured interviews with older patients and carers aimed at identifying additional relevant outcomes. Then, a multilanguage European Delphi survey adapted to older patients was designed. The international Delphi survey was conducted with older patients, health care professionals, researchers, and clinical experts in geriatric pharmacotherapy to validate outcomes to be included in the core outcome set. Consensus meetings were conducted to validate the results. DISCUSSION: We present the method for developing a core outcome set for medication review in older patients with multimorbidity. This study protocol could be used as a basis to develop core outcome sets in other fields of geriatric research.

A systematic review of the outcomes reported in trials of medication review in older patients: the need for a core outcome set.

AIM: Medication review has been advocated as one of the measures to tackle the challenge of polypharmacy in older patients, yet there is no consensus on how best to evaluate its efficacy. This study aimed to assess outcome reporting in trials of medication review in older patients. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective studies and RCT protocols involving medication review performed in patients aged 65 years or older in any setting of care were identified from: (1) a recent systematic review; (2) RCT registries of ongoing studies; (3) the Cochrane library. The type, definition, and frequency of all outcomes reported were extracted independently by two researchers. RESULTS: Forty-seven RCTs or prospective published studies and 32 RCT protocols were identified. A total of 327 distinct outcomes were identified in the 47 published studies. Only one fifth (21%) of the studies evaluated the impact of medication reviews on adverse events such as drug reactions or drug-related hospital admissions. Most of the outcomes were related to medication use (n = 114, 35%) and healthcare use (n = 74, 23%). Very few outcomes were patient-related (n = 24, 7%). A total of 248 distinct outcomes were identified in the 32 RCT protocols. Overall, the number of outcomes and the number and type of health domains covered by the outcomes varied largely. CONCLUSION: Outcome reporting from RCTs concerning medication review in older patients is heterogeneous. This review highlights the need for a standardized core outcome set for medication review in older patients, to improve outcome reporting and evidence synthesis.

The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) after surgery for hip fracture (HF).

BACKGROUND: The NLR is a prognostic factor for outcome and survival in cardiology, oncology and digestive surgery. NLR has not yet been studied in HF. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a prospective cohort of 247 consecutive patients, older than 65 years, operated for HF. Mortality at 12 months was registered, as the perioperative NLR values. RESULTS: After hip surgery in the 247 patients (women 71%, median age 85 years, range: 66-102), the mortality was 27.2% [95%confidence interval (CI): 21.4-33.0] at 12 months. Univariate analysis detected four risk factors for mortality: age (Hazard Ratio (HR)--by 10 year-increments: 2.08 [95%CI: 1.37-3.17], P<0.001), male gender (HR: 1.92 [95%CI: 1.17-3.14], P=0.009, MCM (≥3) (HR: 1.71 [95%CI: 1.006-2.92], P=0.047 and NLR>5 at day 5 (HR: 1.8 [95%CI: 1.11-2.94], P=0.002). In multivariate analysis, two factors remained significantly associated with mortality: age (HR: 2.28 [95%CI: 1.49-3.47], P<0.001) and male gender (HR: 2.26 [95%CI: 1.38-3.72], P=0.001). Two independent risk factors of postoperative cardiovascular complications were identified: NLR>5 at day 5 (Odds Ratio (OR): 3.34 [95%CI: 2.33-4.80], P=0.001) and MCM (OR: 3.04 [95%CI: 2.16-4.29], P=0.006). A higher risk of infection was independently associated with a NLR>5 at day 5 (OR: 2.12 [95%CI: 1.44-3.11], P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The NLR at fifth postoperative day is a risk factor of postoperative mortality and cardiovascular complications.

Risk scores and geriatric profile: can they really help us in anticoagulation decision making among older patients suffering from atrial fibrillation?

OBJECTIVES: Anticoagulation for the prevention of cardio-embolism is most frequently indicated but largely underused in frail older patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). This study aimed at identifying characteristics associated with anticoagulation underuse. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of consecutive geriatric patients aged ≥75 years, with AF and clear anticoagulation indication (CHADS2 [Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age >75, Diabetes mellitus, and prior Stroke or transient ischemic attack] ≥2) upon hospital admission. All patients benefited from a comprehensive geriatric assessment. Their risks of stroke and bleeding were predicted using CHADS2 and HEMORR2HAGES (Hepatic or renal disease, Ethanol abuse, Malignancy, Older (age >75 years), Reduced platelet count or function, Rebleed risk, Hypertension (uncontrolled), Anemia, Genetic factors, Excessive fall risk, and Stroke) scores, respectively. RESULTS: Anticoagulation underuse was observed in 384 (50%) of 773 geriatric patients with AF (median age 85 years; female 57%, cognitive disorder 33%, nursing home 20%). No geriatric characteristic was found to be associated with anticoagulation underuse. Conversely, anticoagulation underuse was markedly increased in the patients treated with aspirin (odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval]: 5.3 [3.8; 7.5]). Other independent predictors of anticoagulation underuse were ethanol abuse (OR: 4.0 [1.4; 13.3]) and age ≥90 years (OR: 2.0 [1.2; 3.4]). Anticoagulation underuse was not inferior in patients with a lower bleeding risk and/or a higher stroke risk and underuse was surprisingly not inferior either in the AF patients who had previously had a stroke. CONCLUSION: Half of this geriatric population did not receive any anticoagulation despite a clear indication, regardless of their individual bleeding or stroke risks. Aspirin use is the main characteristic associated with anticoagulation underuse.

Drug therapy optimization at the end of life.

Older people reaching end-of-life status are particularly at risk of adverse effects of drug therapy. Polypharmacy, declining organ function, co-morbidity, malnutrition, cachexia and changes in body composition all sum up to increase the risk of many drug-related problems in individuals who receive end-of-life care. End of life is defined by a limited lifespan or advanced disability. Optimal prescribing for end-of-life patients with multimorbidity, especially in those dying from non-cancer conditions, remains mostly unexplored, despite the increasing recognition that the management goals for patients with chronic diseases should be redefined in the setting of reduced life expectancy. Most drugs used for symptom palliation in end-of-life care of older patients are used without solid evidence of their benefits and risks in this particularly frail population. Appropriate dosing or optimal administration routes are in most cases unknown. Avoiding or discontinuing drugs that aim to prolong life or prevent disability is usually common sense in end-of-life care, particularly when the time needed to obtain the expected benefits from the drug is longer than the life expectancy of a particular individual. However, discontinuation of drugs is not standard practice, and prescriptions are usually not adapted to changes in the course of advanced diseases. Careful consideration of remaining life expectancy, time until benefit, goals of care and treatment targets for each drug seems to be a sensible framework for decision making. In this article, some key issues on drug therapy at the end of life are discussed, including principles of decision making about drug treatments, specific aspects of drug therapy in some common geriatric conditions (heart failure and dementia), treatment of acute concurrent problems such as infections, evidence to guide the choice and use of drugs to treat symptoms in palliative care, and avoidance of some long-term therapies in end-of-life care. Solid evidence is lacking to guide optimal pharmacotherapy in most end-of-life settings, especially in non-cancer diseases and very old patients. Some open questions for research are suggested.

Cardiovascular prevention in general practice: development and validation of an algorithm.

OBJECTIVE: General practice visits are a unique opportunity to identify and treat individuals with a high cardiovascular (CV) risk. However, a case-finding strategy suited to the daily general practice is not provided in the CV prevention guidelines. We wanted to create, validate and test an algorithm for global CV risk assessment and management. METHODS: The algorithm was 1) developed based on evidence from epidemiological studies and clinical trials, 2) validated in a population-based cohort and 3) tested by randomly selected general practitioners (GPs) who rated its usefulness and applicability. RESULTS: 1) Screening for seven clinical risk factors (RF) allowed a quick classification of patients in four CV risk typologies: obvious high risk (previous CV event and/or type 2 diabetes) in 17%, obvious low risk (no RF) in 14%, smoking-related risk (single RF) in 6%, or undetermined risk (any other RF) to further evaluate in 63% patients. Inter-physician reproducibility for risk prediction was excellent. Overall, predicted risk was high, moderate and low in 25, 17 and 58% of the patients, respectively. 2) These risk predictions were validated in a cohort of 962 men followed over 10 years. 3) Most GPs reported that the algorithm was applicable and useful, while half of them started using it frequently in their daily practice. CONCLUSION: This algorithm is a new, pragmatic and evidence-based strategy for systematic and global CV risk management. It was validated at the population level, and shown to be applicable and useful in the daily general practice.