The Antipsychotic Risperidone Alters Dihydroceramide and Ceramide Composition and Plasma Membrane Function in Leukocytes In Vitro and In Vivo.

Atypical or second-generation antipsychotics are used in the treatment of psychosis and behavioral problems in older persons with dementia. However, these pharmaceutical drugs are associated with an increased risk of stroke in such patients. In this study, we evaluated the effects of risperidone treatment on phospholipid and sphingolipid composition and lipid raft function in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) of older patients (mean age >88 years). The results showed that the levels of dihydroceramides, very-long-chain ceramides, and lysophosphatidylcholines decreased in PBMCs of the risperidone-treated group compared with untreated controls. These findings were confirmed by in vitro assays using human THP-1 monocytes. The reduction in the levels of very-long-chain ceramides and dihydroceramides could be due to the decrease in the expression of fatty acid elongase 3, as observed in THP-1 monocytes. Moreover, risperidone disrupted lipid raft domains in the plasma membrane of PBMCs. These results indicated that risperidone alters phospholipid and sphingolipid composition and lipid raft domains in PBMCs of older patients, potentially affecting multiple signaling pathways associated with these membrane domains.

Populations and outcome measures used in ongoing research in sarcopenia.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia research may be hampered by the heterogeneity of populations and outcome measures used in clinical studies. AIM: The aim of this study was to describe the inclusion/exclusion criteria and outcome measures used in ongoing research in sarcopenia. METHODS: All active intervention studies registered in the World Health Organization with the keyword sarcopenia were included. Study design, type of intervention, inclusion/exclusion criteria and outcome measures were registered and classified. RESULTS: In April 2014, 151 studies on sarcopenia were registered in the WHO database. One hundred twenty-three were intervention studies. Most trials (94.3 %) were single centre and randomized (93.5 %), 51.2 % were double blind. Nutritional interventions (36.6 %), physical exercise (12.2 %) or both (19.5 %) were the most common interventions tested. Only 54.4 % included subjects of both genders, and 46.3 % had an upper age limit. Definition of the target populations was heterogeneous, with 57.7 % including healthy subjects and none using recent definitions of sarcopenia. Lifestyle and the degree of physical activity of subjects were not described or considered in most cases (79.7 %). Subjects with cardiovascular, neuropsychiatric or metabolic disorders and those with physical disability were usually excluded. Muscle mass and muscle strength were the primary outcome variables in 28.5 and 29.5 % of studies and physical performance in 19.5 %, but only 4.1 % used the three variables used the three of them. An additional 26.8 % used biological outcome variables. Little information and agreement existed in the way muscle and physical performance parameters were measured. CONCLUSIONS: We found a large heterogeneity in trial design, definition of populations and outcome measures in present research.

The use of biomarkers for the etiologic diagnosis of MCI in Europe: an EADC survey.

We investigated the use of Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarkers in European Alzheimer's Disease Consortium centers and assessed their perceived usefulness for the etiologic diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI). We surveyed availability, frequency of use, and confidence in diagnostic usefulness of markers of brain amyloidosis (amyloid positron emission tomography [PET], cerebrospinal fluid [CSF] Aß42) and neurodegeneration (medial temporal atrophy [MTA] on MR, fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography [FDG-PET], CSF tau). The most frequently used biomarker is visually rated MTA (75% of the 37 responders reported using it "always/frequently") followed by CSF markers (22%), FDG-PET (16%), and amyloid-PET (3%). Only 45% of responders perceive MTA as contributing to diagnostic confidence, where the contribution was rated as "moderate". Seventy-nine percent of responders felt "very/extremely" comfortable delivering a diagnosis of MCI due to AD when both amyloid and neuronal injury biomarkers were abnormal (P < .02 versus any individual biomarker). Responders largely agreed that a combination of amyloidosis and neuronal injury biomarkers was a strongly indicative AD signature.

Real-world experience with CDK4-6 inhibition in the old and oldest old with a diagnosis of breast cancer.

This study describes characteristics, toxicity and survival in old patients with HR+/HER2-breast cancer (BC) treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors. Retrospective observational study that included patients ≥ 75 years with HR+/HER2-BC treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors between 2017 and 2021. Patients' general and cancer-related data were collected. Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment scales were gathered. Adverse events reported before each cycle were included. At the end of the follow-up period, mortality was retrospectively registered from medical records. All 19 patients (94.7% women, median age 77.9 ± 10.1) were at risk of frailty (G8 ≤ 14) and malnutrition (MNA-SF ≤ 11). Most were independent (52.7% Lawton ≥ 6), had no cognitive impairment (89.5%, MMSE ≥ 24), poor physical performance (70%, SPPB < 8; 62.5% TUG ≥ 12'') and polypharmacy (72.2%). Almost half had stage IV disease (47.1%). Palbociclib+letrozole was the most frequently prescribed treatment (36.8%). All patients developed some toxicity (94.7% hematologic, 36.8% renal) but except one, grade ≤ 2. Over the 42-month follow-up period, 10 reported progression and 8 died. The median survival time was 19.9 ± 3.4 months. Five months after starting treatment, the probability of survival was 73%. At 30 months, 53% of patients survived. We found a high risk of frailty and drug toxicity in this small sample. Most patients presented hematologic toxicity but to a low degree. The probability of survival increases with treatment.

Peripheral IL-6 Levels but not Sarcopenia Are Predictive of 1-Year Mortality After Hip Fracture in Older Patients.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenic patients may have an increased risk of poor outcomes after a hip fracture. The objective of this study was to determine whether sarcopenia and a set of biomarkers were potential predictors of 1-year-mortality in older patients after a hip fracture. METHODS: About 150 patients at least 80 years old were hospitalized for the surgical treatment of a hip fracture. The primary outcome measure was the death in the first year after the hip fracture. Sarcopenia was defined at baseline by having both low muscle mass (bioimpedance analysis) and handgrip and using the updated European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP2) definition of probable sarcopenia. Janssen's (J) and Masanés (M) cutoff points were used to define low muscle mass. RESULTS: Mortality 1 year after the hip fracture was 11.5%. In univariate analyses, baseline sarcopenia was not associated with mortality, using neither of the muscle mass cutoff points: 5.9% in sarcopenic (J) versus 12.4% in non-sarcopenic participants (p = .694) and 16% in sarcopenic (M) versus 9.6% in non-sarcopenic participants (p = .285). Probable sarcopenia (EWGSOP2) was not associated with mortality. Peripheral levels of IL-6 at baseline were significantly higher in the group of participants who died in the year after the hip fracture (17.14 ± 16.74 vs 11.42 ± 7.99 pg/mL, p = .026). TNF-α peripheral levels had a nonsignificant trend to be higher in participants who died. No other biomarker was associated with mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Sarcopenia at baseline was not a predictor of 1-year mortality in older patients after a hip fracture. IL-6 was associated with a higher risk of mortality in these patients, regardless of sarcopenia status.

Biomarkers of sarcopenia in very old patients with hip fracture.

BACKGROUND: Hip fracture is both a cause and a consequence of sarcopenia. Older persons with sarcopenia have an increased risk of falling, and the prevalence of sarcopenia may be increased in those who suffer a hip fracture. The aim of this study was to explore potential biomarkers (neuromuscular and peripheral pro-inflammatory and oxidative stress markers) that may be associated with sarcopenia in very old persons with hip fracture. METHODS: We recruited 150 consecutive patients ≥80 years old admitted to an orthogeriatric unit for an osteoporotic hip fracture. Muscle mass was assessed pre-operatively using bioelectrical impedance analysis; Janssen's (J) and Masanés' (M) reference cut-off points were used to define low muscle mass. Muscle strength was assessed with handgrip strength (Jamar's dynamometer). Sarcopenia was defined by having both low muscle mass and strength and using the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2 definition of probable sarcopenia (low grip strength). Peripheral markers-pro-inflammatory and oxidative stress parameters-were determined either in the plasma or in the erythrocyte fraction obtained from peripheral whole blood of every patient pre-operatively. RESULTS: Mean age was 87.6 ± 4.9 years, and 78.7% were women. The prevalence of sarcopenia was 11.5% with Janssen's, 34.9% with Masanés' cut-offs, and 93.3% with the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2 definition of probable sarcopenia. Among the four pro-inflammatory cytokines tested in plasma, only tumour necrosis factor-α was different (lower) in sarcopenic than in non-sarcopenic participants using both muscle mass cut-offs (J 7.9 ± 6.2 vs. 8.3 ± 5.8, M 6.8 ± 4.7 vs. 9.1 ± 6.2). Erythrocyte glutathione system showed a non-significant tendency to lower glutathione levels and glutathione/oxidized glutathione ratios in sarcopenic participants compared with non-sarcopenic subjects. Catalase activity was also lower in sarcopenic participants (J 2904 ± 1429 vs. 3329 ± 1483, M 3037 ± 1430 vs. 3431 ± 1498). No significant differences were found between groups in chymotrypsin-like activity of the 20S proteasome, superoxide dismutase, glutathione peroxidase and butyrylcholinesterase activity, C-terminal agrin fragment, interferon-γ, or interleukin-1ß. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of sarcopenia in patients with hip fracture varies according to the definition and the muscle mass reference cut-off points used. We did not find differences in most neuromuscular, pro-inflammatory, or oxidative stress markers, except for lower peripheral tumour necrosis factor-α levels and catalase activity in sarcopenic participants, which may be markers of an early inflammatory reaction that is hampered in sarcopenic patients.

[Cross-speciality geriatrics: A health-care challenge for the 21st century]. / Geriatría transversal. Un reto asistencial para el siglo xxi.

Increasing numbers of older persons are being treated by specialties other than Geriatric Medicine. Specialists turn to Geriatric Teams when they need to accurately stratify their patients' risk and prognosis, predict the potential impact of their, often, invasive interventions, optimise their clinical status, and contribute to discharge planning. Oncology and Haematology, Cardiology, General Surgery, and other surgical departments are examples where such collaborative working is already established, to a varying extent. The use of the term "Cross-speciality Geriatrics" is suggested when geriatric care is provided in clinical areas traditionally outside the reach of Geriatric Teams. The core principles of Geriatric Medicine (comprehensive geriatric assessment, patient-centred multidisciplinary targeted interventions, and input at point-of-care) are adapted to the specifics of each specialty and applied to frail older patients in order to deliver a holistic assessment/treatment, better patient/carer experience, and improved clinical outcomes. Using Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment methodology and Frailty scoring in such patients provides invaluable prognostic information, helps in decision making, and enables personalised treatment strategies. There is evidence that such an approach improves the efficiency of health care systems and patient outcomes. This article includes a review of these concepts, describes existing models of care, presents the most commonly used clinical tools, and offers examples of excellence in this new era of geriatric care. In an ever ageing population it is likely that teams will be asked to provide Cross-specialty Geriatrics across different Health Care systems. The fundamentals for its implementation are in place, but further evidence is required to guide future development and consolidation, making it one of the most important challenges for Geriatrics in the coming years.

[Inappropriate prescription in older patients: the STOPP/START criteria]. / Prescripción inapropiada de medicamentos en los pacientes mayores: los criterios STOPP/START.

Older people are a heterogeneous group of patients, often with multiple comorbidities for which they are prescribed a large number of drugs, leading to an increased risk of adverse drug reactions (ADR) and drug interactions. This risk is compounded by physiological age-related changes in physiology, changes in drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, as well as by disease-related, functional and social issues. Inappropriate prescription of drugs is common in the older individuals and contributes to the increased risk of ADR. Several tools have been developed to detect potentially inappropriate prescription, the most frequently used in Spain being Beers' criteria. However, the value of these criteria is limited, especially as they were developed in a different healthcare system. In this article, the Spanish version of a new tool to detect potentially inappropriate prescriptions-STOPP (Screening Tool of Older Person's Prescriptions) and START (Screening Tool to Alert doctors to Right i.e. appropriate, indicated Treatment) criteria-is presented. The creation, development, reliability, and use of these criteria in routine practice is described and discussed. These criteria have shown better sensitivity than Beers' criteria in detecting prescription problems and have the added value of being able to detect not only inappropriate prescription of some drugs, but also the omission of well indicated drugs. The STOPP/START criteria could become a useful screening tool to improve prescription in older people.

[Prevalence of sarcopenia and characteristics of sarcopenic subjects in patients over 80 years with hip fracture]. / Prevalencia de sarcopenia y características de los sarcopénicos en pacientes mayores de 80 años ingresados por fractura de cadera.

INTRODUCTION: Aim: to estimate the prevalence of sarcopenia in very old patients admitted to an Orthogeriatric Unit for the treatment of a hip fracture (HF), and to compare characteristics of patients with and without sarcopenia. Methods: one hundred and fifty consecutive patients ≥ 80 years old admitted with HF were included. Sarcopenia was diagnosed with low muscle mass (bioimpedance, using two different cut-off points, Janssen and Masanés) and low grip strength (Jamar's dynamometer). Socio-demographic, nutritional variables (MNA-SF, body mass index [BMI], phase angle), cognitive (Pfeiffer, Reisberg's GDS) and functional variables (Barthel index, FAC) were registered, as well as the number of recent falls and medications on admission. Results: mean age: 87.6 ± 4.9 years (78.7% women). Prevalence of sarcopenia: 11.5% (Janssen's cut-offs) and 34.9% (Masanés cut-offs). Of the 77.5% who had independent ambulation before the fracture, 40% reported three or more recent falls. Before admission, 38% had dementia and 80.4% had mild to moderate dependence to BADL before admission; 14.2% were independent for all BADL. MNA was suggestive of malnutrition in 12.6%, and 85.2% were on four or more prescribed drugs. Sarcopenic (Masanés) had a lower BMI than non-sarcopenic participants (18.6 vs 24.3, p = 0.003), but no other significant differences were found between both groups. Phase angle was also unrelated to sarcopenia status. Conclusions: up to one third of very old patients with HF had sarcopenia on admission. Prevalence varied widely depending on the cut-off points selected to define low muscle mass. Sarcopenic patients in this setting were mostly similar to non-sarcopenic patients, except for a lower BMI.

INTRODUCCIÓN: Objetivo: calcular la prevalencia de sarcopenia en ancianos ingresados por fractura de cadera (FC) y comparar las características de sarcopénicos y no sarcopénicos. Método: se incluyeron 150 pacientes consecutivos de 80 o más años ingresados por una FC. Se diagnosticó sarcopenia a aquellos con baja masa muscular (bioimpedanciometría, puntos de corte de Janssen y Masanés) y baja fuerza muscular (dinamómetro de Jamar). Se recogieron variables sociodemográficas, cognitivas (Pfeiffer, GDS-Reisberg), funcionales (Barthel, FAC), nutricionales (MNA-SF, índice de masa corporal [IMC], ángulo de fase) y se registró el número de caídas y el número de fármacos. Resultados: edad media: 87,6 ± 4,9 años (78,7% mujeres). La prevalencia de sarcopenia fue del 11,5% (Janssen) y 34,9% (Masanés). Del 77,5% que deambulaba de forma independiente, un 40% había sufrido ≥ 3 caídas. El 38% padecía demencia. Un 80,4% presentaba dependencia leve-moderada y el 14,2% era independiente para actividades básicas de la vida diaria (ABVD). El MNA era compatible con malnutrición en el 12,6% y tomaba ≥ 4 medicamentos el 85,2%. Los pacientes sarcopénicos (Masanés) presentaban índice de masa corporal más bajo (18,6 vs. 24,3, p = 0,003); no se encontraron diferencias entre sarcopénicos y no sarcopénicos en otras variables. No hubo asociación entre el ángulo de fase y la sarcopenia. Conclusiones: hasta un tercio de los pacientes mayores que ingresaron por FC presentan sarcopenia en el momento del ingreso. La prevalencia, en el presente estudio, depende de los puntos de corte usados para definir la baja masa muscular. En contra de lo previsible, los pacientes sarcopénicos con FC muy mayores apenas se diferencian de los no sarcopénicos, salvo por un menor IMC.

Prevalencia de sarcopenia y características de los sarcopénicos en pacientes mayores de 80 años ingresados por fractura de cadera / Prevalence of sarcopenia and characteristics of sarcopenic subjects in patients over 80 years with hip fracture

Objetivo: calcular la prevalencia de sarcopenia en ancianos ingresados por fractura de cadera (FC) y comparar las características de sarcopénicos y no sarcopénicos. Método: se incluyeron 150 pacientes consecutivos de 80 o más años ingresados por una FC. Se diagnosticó sarcopenia a aquellos con baja masa muscular (bioimpedanciometría, puntos de corte de Janssen y Masanés) y baja fuerza muscular (dinamómetro de Jamar). Se recogieron variables sociodemográficas, cognitivas (Pfeiffer, GDS-Reisberg), funcionales (Barthel, FAC), nutricionales (MNA-SF, índice de masa corporal [IMC], ángulo de fase) y se registró el número de caídas y el número de fármacos. Resultados: edad media: 87,6 ± 4,9 años (78,7% mujeres). La prevalencia de sarcopenia fue del 11,5% (Janssen) y 34,9% (Masanés). Del 77,5% que deambulaba de forma independiente, un 40% había sufrido ≥ 3 caídas. El 38% padecía demencia. Un 80,4% presentaba dependencia leve-moderada y el 14,2% era independiente para actividades básicas de la vida diaria (ABVD). El MNA era compatible con malnutrición en el 12,6% y tomaba ≥ 4 medicamentos el 85,2%. Los pacientes sarcopénicos (Masanés) presentaban índice de masa corporal más bajo (18,6 vs. 24,3, p = 0,003); no se encontraron diferencias entre sarcopénicos y no sarcopénicos en otras variables. No hubo asociación entre el ángulo de fase y la sarcopenia. Conclusiones: hasta un tercio de los pacientes mayores que ingresaron por FC presentan sarcopenia en el momento del ingreso. La prevalencia, en el presente estudio, depende de los puntos de corte usados para definir la baja masa muscular. En contra de lo previsible, los pacientes sarcopénicos con FC muy mayores apenas se diferencian de los no sarcopénicos, salvo por un menor IMC

Aim: to estimate the prevalence of sarcopenia in very old patients admitted to an Orthogeriatric Unit for the treatment of a hip fracture (HF), and to compare characteristics of patients with and without sarcopenia. Methods: one hundred and fifty consecutive patients ≥ 80 years old admitted with HF were included. Sarcopenia was diagnosed with low muscle mass (bioimpedance, using two different cut-off points, Janssen and Masanés) and low grip strength (Jamar's dynamometer). Socio-demographic, nutritional variables (MNA-SF, body mass index [BMI], phase angle), cognitive (Pfeiffer, Reisberg's GDS) and functional variables (Barthel index, FAC) were registered, as well as the number of recent falls and medications on admission. Results: mean age: 87.6 ± 4.9 years (78.7% women). Prevalence of sarcopenia: 11.5% (Janssen's cut-offs) and 34.9% (Masanés cut-offs). Of the 77.5% who had independent ambulation before the fracture, 40% reported three or more recent falls. Before admission, 38% had dementia and 80.4% had mild to moderate dependence to BADL before admission; 14.2% were independent for all BADL. MNA was suggestive of malnutrition in 12.6%, and 85.2% were on four or more prescribed drugs. Sarcopenic (Masanés) had a lower BMI than non-sarcopenic participants (18.6 vs 24.3, p = 0.003), but no other significant differences were found between both groups. Phase angle was also unrelated to sarcopenia status. Conclusions: up to one third of very old patients with HF had sarcopenia on admission. Prevalence varied widely depending on the cut-off points selected to define low muscle mass. Sarcopenic patients in this setting were mostly similar to non-sarcopenic patients, except for a lower BMI

Exclusion of older adults from ongoing clinical trials about type 2 diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the extent of exclusion of older individuals from ongoing clinical trials regarding type 2 diabetes mellitus. DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: World Health Organization Clinical Trials Registry Platform. PARTICIPANTS: Using the Participation of the Elderly in Clinical Trials methodology, data from ongoing clinical trials on type 2 diabetes mellitus were extracted from the platform on July 31, 2011. MEASUREMENTS: Proportion of trials excluding individuals using an arbitrary upper age limit or other exclusion criteria that might indirectly cause limited recruitment of older individuals. Exclusion criteria were classified as justified or poorly justified. RESULTS: Of 440 trials investigating treatments for type 2 diabetes mellitus, 289 (65.7%) excluded individuals using an arbitrary upper age limit. Such exclusion was significantly more common in trials with calculated sample sizes of less than 100 subjects (73.6% vs 59.5%; P = .002). Exclusion for comorbidity was present in 338 trials (76.8%); this exclusion was poorly justified in 236 trials (53.6%). Exclusion for polypharmacy (29.5% of trials), cognitive impairment (18.4%), short life expectancy (8.9%), and other poorly justified exclusion criteria that could limit the inclusion of older individuals was also present. Only six trials (1.4%) were designed specifically to study older adults. CONCLUSION: Despite the recommendations of international regulatory agencies, exclusion of older individuals from ongoing trials regarding type 2 diabetes mellitus is frequent--higher than reported for other age-related diseases. This exclusion limits the value of the evidence that clinicians use when treating old, frail, complex patients with diabetes mellitus.

Geriatría transversal. Un reto asistencial para el siglo XXI / Cross-speciality geriatrics: A health-care challenge for the 21st century

Cada vez es mayor el número de pacientes de edad avanzada que está siendo tratado por especialidades diferentes a la geriatría, las cuales, por las características de sus tratamientos, necesitan conocer el pronóstico que tiene su indicación en los pacientes ancianos frágiles y optimizar la situación de estos pacientes para mejorar dicho pronóstico. Las más frecuentes, actualmente, son oncología y hematología, cardiología, cirugía general y otros servicios quirúrgicos. Se entiende por geriatría transversal la ampliación del área de conocimiento y atención de la geriatría en sentido horizontal, fuera de sus unidades habituales, aplicando los principios de la medicina geriátrica con un enfoque multidisciplinar al terreno de otros servicios que atienden a pacientes muy mayores y frágiles con enfermedades graves, con el objetivo de ofrecer una atención centrada en la persona y mejorar su manejo integral. La valoración geriátrica y la detección de la fragilidad en estos casos aportan información pronóstica y ayudan en la toma de decisiones y en la selección de un tratamiento individualizado. En algunos casos es posible mejorar la evolución de los pacientes y la eficiencia del sistema sanitario. En este artículo se revisan estos conceptos, se describen algunos modelos existentes, se mencionan los instrumentos más empleados para esta función y se resumen algunas actividades de esta nueva área de la asistencia geriátrica. Es previsible que cada vez en más hospitales se solicite a los servicios de geriatría la implementación de este tipo de valoraciones e intervenciones. Existe información básica para su puesta en marcha, pero no la suficiente como para considerar que están respondidas todas las preguntas que se plantean. Será, pues, en los próximos años un nuevo reto para esta especialidad

Increasing numbers of older persons are being treated by specialties other than Geriatric Medicine. Specialists turn to Geriatric Teams when they need to accurately stratify their patients' risk and prognosis, predict the potential impact of their, often, invasive interventions, optimise their clinical status, and contribute to discharge planning. Oncology and Haematology, Cardiology, General Surgery, and other surgical departments are examples where such collaborative working is already established, to a varying extent. The use of the term "Cross-speciality Geriatrics" is suggested when geriatric care is provided in clinical areas traditionally outside the reach of Geriatric Teams. The core principles of Geriatric Medicine (comprehensive geriatric assessment, patient-centred multidisciplinary targeted interventions, and input at point-of-care) are adapted to the specifics of each specialty and applied to frail older patients in order to deliver a holistic assessment/treatment, better patient/carer experience, and improved clinical outcomes. Using Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment methodology and Frailty scoring in such patients provides invaluable prognostic information, helps in decision making, and enables personalised treatment strategies. There is evidence that such an approach improves the efficiency of health care systems and patient outcomes. This article includes a review of these concepts, describes existing models of care, presents the most commonly used clinical tools, and offers examples of excellence in this new era of geriatric care. In an ever ageing population it is likely that teams will be asked to provide Cross-specialty Geriatrics across different Health Care systems. The fundamentals for its implementation are in place, but further evidence is required to guide future development and consolidation, making it one of the most important challenges for Geriatrics in the coming years

Nuevos criterios para evaluar la prescripción inapropiada en personas mayores / New criteria to detect inappropriate prescription in older patients

No disponible

No disponible

Prescripción inapropiada de medicamentos en los pacientes mayores: los criterios STOPP/START / Inappropriate prescription in older patients: The STOPP/START criteria

Las personas mayores son un grupo heterogéneo de pacientes, en el que a menudo coexisten múltiples enfermedades para las que se prescribe un elevado número de medicamentos, con el riesgo consiguiente de reacciones adversas a medicamentos (RAM) e interacciones farmacológicas. Este riesgo aumenta con la edad, como consecuencia de los cambios fisiológicos del envejecimiento, los cambios en el comportamiento farmacocinético y farmacodinámico de los medicamentos, y la influencia de las enfermedades, los problemas funcionales y los aspectos sociales La prescripción inapropiada de fármacos es un problema frecuente en los mayores, que contribuye al aumento del riesgo de RAM. Se han desarrollado varias herramientas para detectar la prescripción potencialmente inadecuada, siendo los criterios de Beers la más utilizada en nuestro entorno. No obstante, el valor de estos criterios es limitado, especialmente por haberse desarrollado en un sistema sanitario diferente (AU)

Older people are a heterogeneous group of patients, often with multiple comorbidities for which they are prescribed a large number of drugs, leading to an increased risk of adverse drug reactions (ADR) and drug interactions. This risk is compounded by physiological age-related changes in physiology, changes in drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, as well as by disease-related, functional and social issues Inappropriate prescription of drugs is common in the older individuals and contributes to the increased risk of ADR. Several tools have been developed to detect potentially inappropriate prescription, the most frequently used in Spain being Beers’ criteria. However, the value of these criteria is limited, especially as they were developed in a different healthcare system(AU)

Prescripción inapropiada de medicamentos en los pacientes mayores: los criterios STOPP/START / Inappropriate prescription in older patients: The STOPP/START criteria

ResumenLas personas mayores son un grupo heterogéneo de pacientes, en el que a menudo coexisten múltiples enfermedades para las que se prescribe un elevado número de medicamentos, con el riesgo consiguiente de reacciones adversas a medicamentos (RAM) e interacciones farmacológicas. Este riesgo aumenta con la edad, como consecuencia de los cambios fisiológicos del envejecimiento, los cambios en el comportamiento farmacocinético y farmacodinámico de los medicamentos, y la influencia de las enfermedades, los problemas funcionales y los aspectos sociales.ResumenLa prescripción inapropiada de fármacos es un problema frecuente en los mayores, que contribuye al aumento del riesgo de RAM. Se han desarrollado varias herramientas para detectar la prescripción potencialmente inadecuada, siendo los criterios de Beers la más utilizada en nuestro entorno. No obstante, el valor de estos criterios es limitado, especialmente por haberse desarrollado en un sistema sanitario diferente(AU)

AbstractOlder people are a heterogeneous group of patients, often with multiple comorbidities for which they are prescribed a large number of drugs, leading to an increased risk of adverse drug reactions (ADR) and drug interactions. This risk is compounded by physiological age-related changes in physiology, changes in drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, as well as by disease-related, functional and social issues.AbstractInappropriate prescription of drugs is common in the older individuals and contributes to the increased risk of ADR. Several tools have been developed to detect potentially inappropriate prescription, the most frequently used in Spain being Beers’ criteria. However, the value of these criteria is limited, especially as they were developed in a different healthcare system(AU)