Non-pharmacological, non-surgical interventions for urinary incontinence in older persons: A systematic review of systematic reviews. The SENATOR project ONTOP series.

BACKGROUND: Urinary incontinence is especially common in older age. Non-pharmacological therapies are particularly desirable in this group. OBJECTIVE: To define optimal evidence-based non-pharmacological, non-surgical therapies for urinary incontinence in older persons. METHODS: A Delphi process determined critical outcome measures of interest. Studies of any non-pharmacological intervention reporting critical outcomes were identified through database searches for relevant systematic reviews in Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo and Cochrane up to June 2018. Primary trials with a population mean age ≥65years were identified, from which data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed. Qualitative analysis and meta-analysis, when possible, were undertaken, followed by grading of the evidence using GradePro software. Finally, bullet-point recommendations were formulated for the indications and contraindications for non-pharmacological interventions for urinary incontinence in older persons. RESULTS: Frequency of incontinence was identified as a critically important outcome. In total, 33 systematic reviews were identified with 27 primary trials meeting inclusion criteria. Evaluated therapies included exercise therapy, habit retraining, behavioural therapy, electrical stimulation, transcutaneous tibial nerve stimulation, magnetic stimulation, caffeine reduction and acupuncture. From meta-analysis, group exercise therapy and behavioural therapy in women were beneficial in reducing episodes of incontinence (mean reduction of 1.07 (95 %CI 0.69-1.45) and 0.74 (95 %CI 0.42-1.06) episodes per day respectively, evidence grade 'moderate'). Evidence for other interventions was limited and of insufficient quality. CONCLUSIONS: There is sufficient evidence to warrant recommendation of group exercise therapy for stress incontinence and behavioural therapy for urgency, stress or mixed urinary incontinence in older women. Evidence was insufficient to recommend any other non-drug therapy.

Efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions to treat malnutrition in older persons: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The SENATOR project ONTOP series and MaNuEL knowledge hub project.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to perform a review of SRs of non-pharmacological interventions in older patients with well-defined malnutrition using relevant outcomes agreed by a broad panel of experts. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, and CINHAL databases were searched for SRs. Primary studies from those SRs were included. Quality assessment was undertaken using Cochrane and GRADE criteria. RESULTS: Eighteen primary studies from seventeen SRs were included. Eleven RCTs compared oral nutritional supplementation (ONS) with usual care. No beneficial effects of ONS treatment, after performing two meta-analysis in body weight changes (six studies), mean difference: 0.59 (95%CI -0.08, 1.96) kg, and in body mass index changes (two studies), mean difference: 0.31 (95%CI -0.17, 0.79) kg/m2 were found. Neither in MNA scores, muscle strength, activities of daily living, timed Up&Go, quality of life and mortality. Results of other intervention studies (dietary counselling and ONS, ONS combined with exercise, nutrition delivery systems) were inconsistent. The overall quality of the evidence was very low due to risk of bias and small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: This review has highlighted the lack of high quality evidence to indicate which interventions are effective in treating malnutrition in older people. High quality research studies are urgently needed in this area.

Nonpharmacological interventions to treat physical frailty and sarcopenia in older patients: a systematic overview - the SENATOR Project ONTOP Series.

BACKGROUND: Physical frailty (PF) and sarcopenia are predictors of negative health outcomes such as falls, disability, hospitalization, and death. Some systematic reviews (SRs) have been published on different nonpharmacological treatments of frailty and sarcopenia using heterogeneous definitions of them. OBJECTIVE: To critically appraise the evidence from SRs of the primary studies on nonpharmacological interventions to treat PF (defined by Fried's frailty phenotype) and sarcopenia (defined by the EWGSOP) in older patients. DESIGN: Overview of SRs and meta-analysis of comparative studies. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, and CINAHL were searched in October 2015. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: SRs that included at least one comparative study evaluating any nonpharmacological intervention to treat PF or sarcopenia in older patients in any health care setting. Any primary study described in these SRs with experimental design was included. DATA EXTRACTION AND MANAGEMENT: Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-texts of articles. Quality assessment was carried out by using criteria from the Cochrane Collaboration and the GRADE working group. RESULTS: Ten SRs with 5 primary studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. The most frequent interventions in the included studies were physical exercise (4) and nutritional supplementation (2). Muscle strength (MS; except for one study in a frail population) and physical performance (PP; except for another study in a frail population) improved with exercise and amino acid supplementation in frail and sarcopenic old adults. Falls and activities of daily living were assessed in two studies with opposite results. The overall quality of the evidence was low. CONCLUSION: This overview of SRs highlights the importance of exercise interventions with or without nutritional supplementation to improve the PP in community-dwelling patients aged >65 years with PF and sarcopenia. MS improved with multidisciplinary treatment and exercise interventions in this population.

Systematic review of systematic reviews of non-pharmacological interventions to treat behavioural disturbances in older patients with dementia. The SENATOR-OnTop series.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of non-pharmacological interventions for behavioural and psychological symptoms in dementia (BPSD). DESIGN: Systematic overview of reviews. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL and PsycINFO (2009-March 2015). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Systematic reviews (SRs) that included at least one comparative study evaluating any non-pharmacological intervention, to treat BPSD. DATA EXTRACTION: Eligible studies were selected and data extracted independently by 2 reviewers.The AMSTAR checklist was used to assess the quality of the SRs. DATA ANALYSIS: Extracted data were synthesised using a narrative approach. RESULTS: 38 SRs and 129 primary studies were identified, comprising the following categories of non-pharmacological interventions: (1) sensory stimulation interventions (25 SRs, 66 primary studies) that encompassed: shiatsu and acupressure, aromatherapy, massage/touch therapy, light therapy, sensory garden and horticultural activities, music/dance therapy, dance therapy, snoezelen multisensory stimulation therapy, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation; (2) cognitive/emotion-oriented interventions (13 SRs; 26 primary studies) that included cognitive stimulation, reminiscence therapy, validation therapy, simulated presence therapy; (3) behaviour management techniques (6 SRs; 22 primary studies); (4) Multicomponent interventions (3 SR; four primary studies); (5) other therapies (5 SRs, 15 primary studies) comprising exercise therapy, animal-assisted therapy, special care unit and dining room environment-based interventions. CONCLUSIONS: A large number of non-pharmacological interventions for BPSD were identified. The majority of the studies had great variation in how the same type of intervention was defined and applied, the follow-up duration, the type of outcome measured, usually with modest sample size. Overall, music therapy and behavioural management techniques were effective for reducing BPSD.

STOPPFrail (Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions in Frail adults with limited life expectancy): consensus validation.

Objective: to validate STOPPFrail, a list of explicit criteria for potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use in frail older adults with limited life expectancy. Design: a Delphi consensus survey of an expert panel comprising academic geriatricians, clinical pharmacologists, palliative care physicians, old age psychiatrists, general practitioners and clinical pharmacists. Setting: Ireland. Subjects: seventeen panellists. Methods: STOPPFrail criteria were initially created by the authors based on clinical experience and literature appraisal. Criteria were organised according to the physiological system; each criterion accompanied by an explanation. Using Delphi consensus methodology, panellists ranked their agreement with each criterion on a 5-point Likert scale and provided written feedback. Criteria with a median Likert response of 4/5 (agree/strongly agree) and a 25th centile of ≥4 were included in the final list. Results: all panellists completed three Delphi rounds. Thirty criteria were proposed, 27 were accepted. The first two criteria suggest deprescribing medications without indication or where compliance is poor. The remaining 25 criteria include lipid-lowering therapies, alpha-blockers for hypertension, anti-platelets, neuroleptics, memantine, proton-pump inhibitors, H2-receptor antagonists, anti-spasmodic agents, theophylline, leukotriene antagonists, calcium supplements, bone anti-resorptive therapy, selective oestrogen receptor modulators, non-steroidal anti-inflammatories, corticosteroids, 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors, alpha-1-selective blockers, muscarinic antagonists, oral diabetic agents, ACE-inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, systemic oestrogens, multivitamins, nutritional supplements and prophylactic antibiotics. Consensus could not be reached on the inclusion of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors. Full consensus was reached on the exclusion of anticoagulants and antidepressants from the list. Conclusion: STOPPFrail comprises 27 criteria relating to medications that are potentially inappropriate in frail older patients with limited life expectancy. STOPPFrail may assist physicians in deprescribing medications in these patients.

Efficacy of Non-Pharmacological Interventions to Prevent and Treat Delirium in Older Patients: A Systematic Overview. The SENATOR project ONTOP Series.

BACKGROUND: Non-pharmacological intervention (e.g. multidisciplinary interventions, music therapy, bright light therapy, educational interventions etc.) are alternative interventions that can be used in older subjects. There are plenty reviews of non-pharmacological interventions for the prevention and treatment of delirium in older patients and clinicians need a synthesized, methodologically sound document for their decision making. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We performed a systematic overview of systematic reviews (SRs) of comparative studies concerning non-pharmacological intervention to treat or prevent delirium in older patients. The PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, CINHAL, and PsychINFO (April 28th, 2014) were searched for relevant articles. AMSTAR was used to assess the quality of the SRs. The GRADE approach was used to assess the quality of primary studies. The elements of the multicomponent interventions were identified and compared among different studies to explore the possibility of performing a meta-analysis. Risk ratios were estimated using a random-effects model. Twenty-four SRs with 31 primary studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. Based on the AMSTAR criteria twelve reviews resulted of moderate quality and three resulted of high quality. Overall, multicomponent non-pharmacological interventions significantly reduced the incidence of delirium in surgical wards [2 randomized trials (RCTs): relative risk (RR) 0.71, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.59 to 0.86, I2=0%; (GRADE evidence: moderate)] and in medical wards [2 CCTs: RR 0.65, 95%CI 0.49 to 0.86, I2=0%; (GRADE evidence: moderate)]. There is no evidence supporting the efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions to prevent delirium in low risk populations (i.e. low rate of delirium in the control group)[1 RCT: RR 1.75, 95%CI 0.50 to 6.10 (GRADE evidence: very low)]. For patients who have developed delirium, the available evidence does not support the efficacy of multicomponent non-pharmacological interventions to treat delirium. Among single component interventions only staff education, reorientation protocol (GRADE evidence: very low)] and Geriatric Risk Assessment MedGuide software [hazard ratio 0.42, 95%CI 0.35 to 0.52, (GRADE evidence: moderate)] resulted effective in preventing delirium. CONCLUSIONS: In older patients multi-component non-pharmacological interventions as well as some single-components intervention were effective in preventing delirium but not to treat delirium.

Nonpharmacologic Interventions to Heal Pressure Ulcers in Older Patients: An Overview of Systematic Reviews (The SENATOR-ONTOP Series).

BACKGROUND: Pressure ulcers (PUs) are more frequent in older patients, and the healing process is usually challenging. Nonpharmacologic interventions may play a role in the treatment of older people with PUs, but most systematic reviews (SRs) have not addressed this specific population using convincing outcome measures. OBJECTIVE: To summarize and critically appraise the evidence from SRs of the primary studies on nonpharmacologic interventions to treat PUs in older patients. DESIGN: SR and meta-analysis of comparative studies. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, and CINHAL (from inception to October 2013) were searched. A new search for updates in the Cochrane Database was launched in July 2014. SRs that included at least 1 comparative study evaluating any nonpharmacologic intervention to treat PUs in older patients, in any health care setting, were included. Any primary study with experimental design was then identified and included. From each primary study, quality assessment was undertaken as specified by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation working group. Interventions were identified and compared among different studies to explore the possibility of performing a meta-analysis, using complete ulcer healing as the outcome measure. RESULTS: One hundred ten SRs with 45 primary studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. The most frequent interventions explored in these trials were support surfaces (13 studies), nutrition (8), and electrotherapy (6). High or moderate quality of evidence was found in none of the interventions, mainly because of the very serious risk of bias of most studies and imprecision in the treatment effect. Evidence grade is very low or insufficient to support the use of any support surface, nutrition intervention, multicomponent interventions, repositioning or other adjunctive therapy (ultrasound, negative pressure, laser, electromagnetic, light, shock wave, hydrotherapy, radiofrequency, or vibration therapy) to increase the rates of PU healing in older patients. Electrotherapy showed some beneficial effect in the treatment of PUs, although the quality of evidence is low. CONCLUSIONS: In older patients with PUs, evidence to use any nonpharmacologic therapy to increase the rates of wound healing is inconclusive, except for low quality evidence that supports the use of electrotherapy. This situation is especially alarming for interventions that are usually standard clinical practice (repositioning, support surfaces). Although there is some evidence in younger populations and other types of ulcers, studies in older populations with PUs using sound methodology are needed.

Evidence of and recommendations for non-pharmacological interventions for common geriatric conditions: the SENATOR-ONTOP systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Non-pharmacological therapies for common chronic medical conditions in older patients are underused in clinical practice. We propose a protocol for the assessment of the evidence of non-pharmacological interventions to prevent or treat relevant outcomes in several prevalent geriatric conditions in order to provide recommendations. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The conditions of interest for which the evidence about efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions will be searched include delirium, falls, pressure sores, urinary incontinence, dementia, heart failure, orthostatic hypotension, sarcopaenia and stroke. For each condition, the following steps will be undertaken: (A) prioritising clinical questions; (B) retrieving the evidence (MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL and PsychINFO will be searched to identify systematic reviews); (C) assessing the methodological quality of the evidence (risk of bias according to the Cochrane method will be applied to the primary studies retrieved from the systematic reviews); (D) developing recommendations based on the evidence (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) items-risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness and publication bias-will be used to rate the overall evidence and develop recommendations). DISSEMINATION: For each target condition, at least one systematic overview concerning the evidence of non-pharmacological interventions will be produced and published in peer-reviewed journals.

Subjective impact of minimally invasive dentistry in the oral health of older patients.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate if a minimally invasive oral health package with the use of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) or a conventional restorative technique (CT) would result in any perceived benefit from the patients' perspective and if there would be any difference between the two treatment groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this randomised clinical trial, 99 independently living older adults (65-90 years) with carious lesions were randomly allocated to receive either ART or conventional restorations using minimally invasive/intervention dentistry (MID) principles. Patients completed an Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP)-14 questionnaire before and 2 months after treatment. They were also asked to complete a global transition question about their oral health after treatment. RESULTS: At baseline, the mean OHIP-14 scores recorded were 7.34 (ART) and 7.44 (CT). Two months after treatment intervention, 90 patients answered the OHIP-14 and the mean scores were 7.23 (not significant (n.s.)) and 10.38 (n.s.) for the ART and CT groups, respectively. Overall, 75.5 % of patients stated that their oral health was better compared to the beginning of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Although not shown by the OHIP-14, patients perceived an improvement in their overall oral status after treatment, as demonstrated by the global transition ratings in both groups. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Dental treatment using minimally invasive techniques might be a good alternative to treat older individuals, and it can improve their oral health both objectively and subjectively.