NSAIDs for Pain Control During the Peri-Operative Period of Hip Fracture Surgery: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Hip fracture (HF) mostly affects older adults and is responsible for increased morbidity and mortality. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are part of the peri-operative multimodal analgesic management, but their use could be associated with adverse events in older adults. This systematic review aimed to assess outcomes associated with NSAIDs use in the peri-operative period of HF surgery. METHODS: This systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Three databases (PubMed/EMBASE/Cochrane Central) were used to search for clinical trials and observational studies assessing efficacy, safety and impact of NSAIDs use on non-specific post-operative outcomes, such as functional status and post-operative complications. RESULTS: Among the 1320 references initially identified, four provided data on efficacy, four on safety and six on non-specific post-operative outcomes (three randomized controlled clinical trials, three observational studies). Mean study population ages ranged from 68 to 87 years. Two studies found that NSAIDs were effective on pain control, but two studies found conflicting results on opioid sparing. No increased risk of acute kidney injury was observed, while results concerning bleeding risk and delirium were conflicting. No study has found any effect of NSAIDs use on walk recovery. Quality of evidence was high for pain control, but low to very low for all the other studied outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The use of NSAIDs may be effective for pain control in the peri-operative period of HF surgery. However, safety data were conflicting with low levels of certainty. Further studies are needed to assess their benefit-risk balance in this context. The research protocol was previously registered on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42021237649).

Post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms and quality of life among older patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and its associated health restrictions have harmed the population psychologically. We aimed to compare the post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms and Quality of Life (QoL) in older French patients with cancer to the younger ones. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This longitudinal multicenter study named COVIPACT began in April 2020 during the first French lockdown and has included 579 outpatients receiving treatment for a solid or hematological malignancy. Data were collected every three months, namely at the first release period (M3), at the second lockdown (M6), at the second release period (M9), and finally at the last curfew period (M12) in France. Standardized validated self-questionnaires were used to assess PTSD symptoms (using the Event Scale-Revised self-questionnaire), insomnia (through the Insomnia Severity Index questionnaire), QoL (using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General questionnaire), and cognitive complaints (through the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Cognition questionnaire). Student (or Wilcoxon) tests and Chi-squared tests were used for continuous or discrete variables, respectively. We conducted linear mixed model to study the change during follow-up. RESULTS: Out of 579 included patients, 157 (27%) were ≥ 70 years old at baseline, of whom 104 participated in the longitudinal study. At baseline, older patients reported fewer PTSD symptoms (17% versus 23%, p = .06), insomnia (17% versus 27%, p = .02), and cognitive complaint (3% versus 16%, p < .01) than younger patients. QoL at baseline was similar between age subgroups. We observed no significant difference in the trajectory of PTSD symptoms, insomnia, or emotional well-being between both groups during the follow-up. Cognitive complaints were lower at baseline in older patients but steadily increased during the follow-up and reached the same level as younger patients at one year. DISCUSSION: One in five older patients reported PTSD symptoms, evolving similarly to younger patients during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. While cognitive complaints tend to recover in a bell-shaped curve at one year in younger patients, the trend is increasing in older ones. Screening for PTSD symptoms and late cognitive impairment should be given special attention in older patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04366154.

Gripwise Versus Jamar: The Challenge of a New Dynamometer Assessing Handgrip Strength.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia diagnosis is partly based on handgrip strength (HGS) assessment. The gold-standard dynamometer for this measurement is the Jamar. The electronic Gripwise is a smaller and lighter one, and its measurements are correlated with the Jamar's in laboratory tests. Our study aimed to confirm this correlation in aged patients. METHODS: This monocenter cross-sectional study was performed in patients of 65 years and older admitted at the University Hospital. Participants were assessed either in a seated or bedridden position, randomly allocated to begin the measurements with the Jamar or the Gripwise. RESULTS: Among 649 aged inpatients assessed for eligibility, 348 were included (mean age: 79 ±â€…9; 52% females). The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92-0.94, p < .001) for the maximum value measured with both devices and 0.94 (95% CI 0.93-0.95, p < .001) for the mean values. However, there was a significant difference in detecting low values (<16 kg in women, <27 kg in men), found in 48% of patients with Jamar, and 71% with Gripwise (p < .001). Thus, we determined alternate cutoffs for diagnosing HGS low values with the Gripwise (<12 kg in women, <22 kg in men), further validated in a supplementary validation population (n = 70). The diagnostic performances of these alternative cutoffs were high (93% sensitivity and 87% specificity in women; 94% sensitivity and 96% specificity in men). CONCLUSIONS: The correlation of the Gripwise with the Jamar was confirmed in aged inpatients. However, lower values recorded with the Gripwise require alternate cutoffs for a relevant low HGS diagnosis.

Supervised Physical Activity Quickly Improves Social Dimension of Quality of Life in Breast Cancer Patients.

PURPOSE: The objectives of the present study was to evaluate the implementation of the program in real life and the evolution of the quality of life (QoL) in breast cancer patients after 3 months of supervised PA in real life and to determine the factors associated with changes in various QoL dimensions. METHODS: This prospective cohort study was carried out in female patients with breast cancer diagnosed within a maximum of 3 yr. QoL and physical exertion intensity during the supervised physical activity (PA) sessions were assessed by the Quality of Life Questionnaire for Cancer and Borg scale, respectively. Statistical analyses comparing QoL scores between the start and the end of supervised PA program were assessed using paired Student's t -tests. Multivariate analysis was performed by linear regression with only variables with a P value <0.15 in univariate model. RESULTS: A total of 93 patients were included in the analyses. There was a significant improvement of social functioning at T3 (∆ = 11.5; P < 0.001). The improvement of social functioning was significantly and independently associated with the Borg improvement ( ß = 2.66 ± 1.31, P = 0.046), chemotherapy ( ß = 11.03 ± 5.45, P = 0.046), hormone therapy ( ß = -13.91 ± 5.51, P = 0.013), social isolation ( ß = -14.81 ± 6.55, P = 0.026), and comorbidities ( ß = -15.32 ± 5.59, P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a real enthusiasm and need among patients for practicing PA supervised by a sport trainer near their home. The increase in the intensity of exercise over time contributes to the improvement of the QoL, especially on the social functioning. These results, consistent with previous literature, reinforce the importance of exercise intensity on many dimensions of QoL. In addition, patients expressed great satisfaction with the supervised program, resulting in a strong desire to maintain long-term PA.

A prospective observational cohort study to screen major depressive disorders in geriatric oncology-Comparison of different scales.

OBJECTIVE: Systematic depression screening is recommended for older patients with cancer. The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of three mood disorder screening scales frequently used in geriatric oncology to help in diagnosing major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: A prospective multicentre study was conducted in patients 70 years of age and over with cancer, comparing three self-report questionnaires: the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - Depression (HADS-D) and the Distress Thermometer (DT). In the event of abnormal scores, a psychologist consultation was suggested and a reassessment of the patient's mood was planned within 3 weeks. Potential differences between initial abnormal screening score and confirmed MDD (according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders criteria [DSM-5]) were assessed using variance analysis for each screening scale. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients with a median age of 81 years (70-95) were included. Sixty-six patients had at least one abnormal score on one of the screening scales. MDD was confirmed in 10 of the 36 reassessed patients. Analysis of ROC curves showed that the HADS-D significantly predicted MDD (AUC = 0.760, IC95% : 0.603-0.917; p = 0.017), but not the GDS-15 or the initial DT. CONCLUSION: The HADS-D could better detect MDD, to confirm in a larger sample.

Dealing with the lack of evidence to treat depression in older patients with cancer: French Societies of Geriatric Oncology (SOFOG) and PsychoOncology (SFFPO) position paper based on a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Depression symptoms, frequently diagnosed in older patients with cancer, impacts on oncological treatment feasibility. The Francophone Society of Geriatric Oncology (SOFOG) has initiated a systematic review on depression treatment in older patients with cancer, to advocate guidelines. DATA SOURCES: Medline via PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL. METHODS: We included randomized and non-randomized controlled trials, reviews and meta-analysis, retrospective and prospective cohort studies, qualitative studies, and guidelines published between January 2013 and December 2018 that involved depression with cancer in which the entire sample or a sub-group aged 65 and above. Efficacy and tolerance of depression treatment were examined, as a primary or secondary outcome, among articles published in French or English. RESULTS: Of 3171 references, only seven studies met our eligibility criteria. This systematic review reveals a lack of evidence-based knowledge in this field, preventing from making any recommendations on drug and non-drug therapies. It has highlighted the need for multidisciplinary collaboration with the French and Francophone Society of Psycho-Oncology. CONCLUSION: In clinical practice, we advise health professionals to use the screening process not as a result but rather as an opportunity to engage with the patient and also to question the need for antidepressants and non-drug therapies.

Geriatric phone follow-up in the management of older patients treated for cancer: Telog study results.

INTRODUCTION: Geriatric assessment may require a specific follow-up implementation during oncological treatment. The main objective of our study was the nurse phone questionnaire validation, in terms of feasibility, and concordance of data collected compared to a medical geriatric follow-up (blind) consultation carried out three months after the initial assessment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This interventional, prospective, multi-center study has included patients aged 70 years and over, referred to geriatric consultation before receiving oncological treatment. Patients with an estimated life expectancy less than three months, unable to communicate by telephone or to complete the written consent, with an ECOG PS (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status) at four, or MMSE <18/30 (Mini Mental State Examination) were not included. Feasibility was considered if items were answered by phone for at least 80% of patients and, for concordance, if Cohen's Kappa coefficient was at least 0.7, between phone and consultation's answers data. RESULTS: 131 patients were included with a median age of 81 years [70-95], 62.6% of women (n = 82). Phone questionnaires were completed for 78.6% of patients (n = 103) with a median duration of 12 min per call [5-37]. 95 patients have completed the study, for whom concordance was only found for IADL (Instrumental Activity of Daily Living) Medication-item. CONCLUSION: It is important to define the profile of older patients treated for cancer who can benefit from phone follow-up. If a phone follow-up questionnaire carried out by a nurse is proven to be accurate, it would facilitate geriatric follow-up and space out consultations.

National survey on the management of heart failure in individuals over 80 years of age in French geriatric care units.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the prevalence and management of heart failure (HF) in very old patients in geriatric settings. METHODS: Members of the French Society of Geriatrics and Gerontology throughout France were invited to participate in a point prevalence survey and to include all patients ≥80 years old, hospitalized in geriatric settings, with HF (stable or decompensated) on June 18, 2012. General characteristics, presence of comorbidities, blood tests and medications were recorded. RESULTS: Among 7,197 patients in geriatric institution, prevalence of HF was 20.5% (n = 1,478): (27% in acute care, 24.2% in rehabilitation care and 18% in nursing home). Mean age was 88.2 (SD = 5.2) and Charlson co morbidity score was high (8.49 (SD = 2.21)). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was available in 770 (52%) patients: 536 (69.6%) had a preserved LVEF (≥ 50%), 120 (15.6%) a reduced LVEF (< 40%), and 114 (14.8%) a midrange LVEF (40-49%). Prescription of recommended HF drugs was low: 42.6% (629) used Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitors (ACEI) or Angiotensin Receptor Blockers (ARBs), 48.0% (709) ß-blockers, and 21.9% (324) ACEI or ARB with ß-blockers, even in reduced LVEF. In multivariate analysis ACEI or ARBs were more often used in patients with myocardial infarction (1.36 (1.04-1.78)), stroke (1.42 (1.06-1.91)), and diabetes (1.54 (1.14-2.06)). ß blockers were more likely used in patients with myocardial infarction (2.06 (1.54-2.76)) and atrial fibrillation (1.70 (1.28-2.28)). CONCLUSION: In this large very old population, prevalence of HF was high. Recommended HF drugs were underused even in reduced LVEF. These results indicate that management of HF in geriatric settings can still be improved.

Prospective comparison of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) in geriatric oncology.

INTRODUCTION: Among the various instruments recommended by the International Society of Geriatric Oncology, the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) is the most commonly used cognitive screening test before oncological treatment. Although the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) has been shown to be more sensitive than the MMSE in several pathologies, no specific data exist for older patients with cancer. We aimed to compare the proportions of older patients with cancer who had screened positive for cognitive impairment according to the MMSE and MoCA scores obtained during a pretherapeutic geriatric assessment (GA) in oncology. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective study was conducted among 66 patients older than 70 years who were candidates for a first-line treatment for either a solid tumor or hematological malignancy. Patients with brain tumor or previously known dementia were ineligible. During GA, cognitive function was assessed using both the MoCA and the MMSE tests administered in a random order. RESULTS: Median age was 78 years. Most patients (n = 43, 65.2%) had a solid tumor. The median scores were 26 [11-30] for MMSE and 24 [8-30] for MoCA. Thirteen (19.7%) and 44 (66.7%) patients were screened positive for cognitive impairment according to MMSE and MoCA scores, respectively. Overall, 55 (66.7%) patients were screened positive: 12 (21.8%) on both scores, 32 (70.5%) with the MoCA only, and one patient with MMSE only (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The MoCA test seems to be most relevant to screen for cognitive impairment in older patients with cancer.