Quality of life in sarcopenia measured with the SarQoL questionnaire: A meta-analysis of individual patient data.

Age-related sarcopenia, resulting from a gradual loss in skeletal muscle mass and strength, is pivotal to the increased prevalence of functional limitation among the older adult community. The purpose of this meta-analysis of individual patient data is to investigate the difference in health-related quality of life between sarcopenic individuals and those without the condition using the Sarcopenia Quality of Life (SarQoL) questionnaire. A protocol was published on PROSPERO. Multiple databases and the grey literature were searched until March 2023 for studies reporting quality of life assessed with the SarQoL for patients with and without sarcopenia. Two researchers conducted the systematic review independently. A two-stage meta-analysis was performed. First, crude (mean difference) and adjusted (beta coefficient) effect sizes were calculated within each database; then, a random effect meta-analysis was applied to pool them. Heterogeneity was measured using the Q-test and I2 value. Subgroup analyses were performed to investigate the source of potential heterogeneity. The strength of evidence of this association was assessed using GRADE. From the 413 studies identified, 32 were eventually included, of which 10 were unpublished data studies. Sarcopenic participants displayed significantly reduced health-related quality of life compared with non-sarcopenic individuals (mean difference = -12.32; 95 % CI = [-15.27; -9.37]). The model revealed significant heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses revealed a substantial impact of regions, clinical settings, and diagnostic criteria on the difference in health-related quality of life between sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic individuals. The level of evidence was moderate. This meta-analysis of individual patient data suggested that sarcopenia is associated with lower health-related quality of life measured with SarQoL.

Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing in Older People Living With HIV: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Antiretroviral therapy has transformed HIV from a progressive and often fatal infection to a chronic disease. Currently, people living with HIV (PLHIV) have near-normal life expectancy; however, they face accelerated ageing and a rise in non-AIDS-defining HIV-associated conditions. Comorbidities increase the number of prescribed drugs and, therefore, the risk of polypharmacy and prescribing potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). Still, there are no specific tools to identify PIMs in older PLHIV, which opens a pathway to investigate the particularities in the prescription of medication in this population. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review in 5 electronic databases for studies reporting the use of tools to identify PIMs in older PLHIV. No language or date restrictions were applied. To complete the search, abstracts published in the most relevant HIV Conferences and Events in their editions from 2010 to 2022 were screened. RESULTS: Of 50,193 records returned (13,701 of the databases and 36,492 of the Congresses), 39 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies were single-centre and conducted in Europe. Twenty-eight studies were cross-sectional, and most researchers used explicit criteria, mainly Beers and STOPP-START criteria, to identify PIMs. CONCLUSIONS: Potentially inappropriate prescribing is frequent among older PLHIV. Explicit conventional tools to identify PIMs in older populations may need to be adapted to tackle the needs of PLHIV. Implicit tools may be more valid, although their use is more time-consuming, and standardization is complex.

Versión en español de los criterios STOPP/START 3. Avances en la detección de la prescripción inapropiada de medicamentos en personas mayores / Spanish version of the STOPP/START 3 criteria: Advances in the detection of inappropriate prescribing medication in the older people

Los criterios STOPP/START son criterios explícitos basados en sistemas fisiológicos que resumen la evidencia sobre problemas de prescripción relevantes clínicamente relacionados con el uso de medicamentos potencialmente inapropiados (criterios STOPP) y con potenciales omisiones de prescripción (criterios START). Las dos versiones anteriores de los criterios STOPP/START se publicaron en 2008 y en 2015, y sus versiones en español, en 2009 y en 2015. En 2023 se acaba de publicar la versión3 de dichos criterios. El objetivo de este artículo es presentar la versión traducida al español, así como revisar la utilización y el impacto que ha tenido la versión2 del año 2015 en nuestro idioma. Se realizó una traducción del inglés al español por profesionales expertos y con alto nivel de inglés de la versión3 de los criterios STOPP/START, que incorporan la evidencia publicada desde abril de 2014 hasta marzo de 2022. Además, se hizo una revisión sistemática de las publicaciones que han usado la traducción española de la versión previa (versión2 de 2015) de los criterios STOPP/START. La nueva versión, presentada en este artículo, cuenta con 190 criterios STOPP/START (133 criterios STOPP y 57 criterios START), lo que supone un aumento del 40% en el número de criterios en comparación con la versión anterior. En la revisión se encontraron 37 estudios (21 observacionales, 11 de intervención y 5 de otro tipo) que han usado la versión española en lugar de la internacional. La versión3 en español de los criterios STOPP/START es una lista explícita actualizada de medicamentos potencialmente inapropiados y posibles omisiones en la prescripción que tienen el objetivo de optimizar la medicación y minimizar las reacciones adversas a los medicamentos durante la revisión de la medicación en las personas mayores, en particular aquellas con multimorbilidad y polifarmacia (AU)

The STOPP/START criteria are explicit physiologic systems-based criteria that summarize evidence on clinically relevant prescribing problems related to the use of potentially inappropriate medications (STOPP criteria) and potential prescribing omissions (START criteria). The two previous versions of the STOPP/START criteria were published in 2008 and 2015, and their Spanish versions in 2009 and 2015. Version3 of these criteria has just been published in 2023. The aim of this article is to present the Spanish translated version, and to review the use and impact that version2 of 2015 has had in our language. A translation from English to Spanish was performed by expert professionals with a high level of English of version3 of the STOPP/START criteria, which incorporates the evidence published from April 2014 to March 2022. In addition, a systematic review of publications that have used the Spanish translation of the previous version (version2 of 2015) of the STOPP/START criteria was performed. The new version, presented in this article, has 190 STOPP/START criteria (133 STOPP criteria and 57 START criteria), which is a 40% increase in the number of criteria compared to the previous version. The review found 37 studies (21 observational, 11 interventional and 5 other) that used the Spanish version instead of the international version. The Spanish version 3 of the STOPP/START criteria is an updated explicit list of potentially inappropriate medications and possible omissions in prescribing that aims to optimize medication and minimize adverse drug reactions during medication review in the elderly, particularly those with multimorbidity and polypharmacy (AU)

[Spanish version of the STOPP/START 3 criteria: Advances in the detection of inappropriate prescribing medication in the older people]. / Versión en español de los criterios STOPP/START 3. Avances en la detección de la prescripción inapropiada de medicamentos en personas mayores.

The STOPP/START criteria are explicit physiologic systems-based criteria that summarize evidence on clinically relevant prescribing problems related to the use of potentially inappropriate medications (STOPP criteria) and potential prescribing omissions (START criteria). The two previous versions of the STOPP/START criteria were published in 2008 and 2015, and their Spanish versions in 2009 and 2015. Version3 of these criteria has just been published in 2023. The aim of this article is to present the Spanish translated version, and to review the use and impact that version2 of 2015 has had in our language. A translation from English to Spanish was performed by expert professionals with a high level of English of version3 of the STOPP/START criteria, which incorporates the evidence published from April 2014 to March 2022. In addition, a systematic review of publications that have used the Spanish translation of the previous version (version2 of 2015) of the STOPP/START criteria was performed. The new version, presented in this article, has 190 STOPP/START criteria (133 STOPP criteria and 57 START criteria), which is a 40% increase in the number of criteria compared to the previous version. The review found 37 studies (21 observational, 11 interventional and 5 other) that used the Spanish version instead of the international version. The Spanish version 3 of the STOPP/START criteria is an updated explicit list of potentially inappropriate medications and possible omissions in prescribing that aims to optimize medication and minimize adverse drug reactions during medication review in the elderly, particularly those with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. With this new version, the original criteria are intended to be more widely disseminated within the Spanish-speaking healthcare community. The Spanish version2 of the STOPP/START has been widely used, so we consider that the translation into Spanish has helped to improve pharmacotherapy in older patients with polypharmacy and multimorbidity in our linguistic environment.

Measuring health-related quality of life in sarcopenia: summary of the SarQoL psychometric properties.

Patient perspectives are now widely recognized as a key element in the evaluation of health interventions. Therefore, the provision of specific and validated Patient Reported Outcome Measures that emphasize the lived experience of patients suffering from specific diseases is very important. In the field of sarcopenia, the only validated specific health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instrument available is the Sarcopenia Quality of Life questionnaire (SarQoL). This self-administrated HRQoL questionnaire, developed in 2015, consists of 55 items arranged into 22 questions and has currently been translated into 35 languages. Nineteen validation studies performed on SarQoL have consensually confirmed the capacity of SarQoL to detect difference in HRQoL between older people with and without sarcopenia, its reliability and its validity. Two further observational studies have also indicated its responsiveness to change. A short form SarQoL, including only 14 items has further been developed and validated to reduce the potential burden of administration. Research on the psychometric properties of SarQoL questionnaire is still encouraged as the responsiveness to change of SarQoL has not yet been measured in the context of interventional studies, as limited prospective data currently exist and as there is still not cut-off score to define a low HRQoL. In addition, SarQoL has mainly been used in community-dwelling older individuals with sarcopenia and would benefit to be studied in other types of populations. This review aims to provide to researchers, clinicians, regulators, pharmaceutical industries and other stakeholders a clear summary of comprehensive evidence on the SarQoL questionnaire published up to January 2023Query.

Acute Sarcopenia.

Sarcopenia is currently understood as an organ insufficiency. However, the distinction of acute and chronic sarcopenia as different categories, which makes sense in this conceptual framework, is still evolving. The first set of modern definitions of sarcopenia only considered chronic sarcopenia. However, research showed that function in acute care settings differs from the loss that evolves slowly over months or years, and this fact is starting to permeate modern definitions. The updated version of the EWGSOP definition identifies acute and chronic sarcopenia as subcategories. Different studies have reported rates of incident sarcopenia in hospitalised older patients around 15-20%, which adds to the prevalent sarcopenia present on admission. Diagnosing sarcopenia in acute settings carries specific challenges related to the patients, the acute condition, and limitations in the use of diagnostic tests for muscle mass, muscle strength, and physical performance. Prevention and management of acute sarcopenia rely on exercise during admission, but the quality of evidence is still low. Nutritional intervention and drugs may have a role, but more research is needed.

Deprescribing practices, habits and attitudes of geriatricians and geriatricians-in-training across Europe: a large web-based survey.

PURPOSE: To provide an overview of the current deprescribing attitudes, practices, and approaches of geriatricians and geriatricians-in-training across Europe. METHODS: An online survey was disseminated among European geriatricians and geriatricians-in-training. The survey comprised Likert scale and multiple-choice questions on deprescribing approaches and practices, deprescribing education and knowledge, and facilitators/barriers of deprescribing. Responses to the survey questions and participant characteristics were quantified and differences evaluated between geriatricians and geriatricians-in-training and between European regions. RESULTS: The 964 respondents (median age 42 years old; 64% female; 21% geriatricians-in-training) were generally willing to deprescribe (98%) and felt confident about deprescribing (85%). Despite differences across European regions, the most commonly reported reasons for deprescribing were functional impairment and occurrence of adverse drug reactions. The most important barriers for deprescribing were patients' unwillingness, fear of negative consequences, lack of time, and poor communication between multiple prescribers. Perceived risk of adverse drug reactions was highest for psychotropic drugs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, cardiovascular drugs, and opioid analgesics. Only one in four respondents (23% of geriatricians and 37% of geriatricians-in-training) think education in medical school had sufficiently prepared them for deprescribing in clinical practice. They reported that their future deprescribing activities would probably increase with improved information sharing between various prescribers, deprescribing recommendations in guidelines, and increased education and training. Approximately 90% think that a paradigm shift is required for prescribers and patients, increasing focus on the possible benefits of deprescribing (potentially) inappropriate medications. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the outcomes of this survey, we recommend investing in improved inter-professional communication, better education and evidence-based recommendations to improve future patient-centered deprescribing practices.

Short-Term Therapeutic Adherence of Hospitalized Older Patients with Oropharyngeal Dysphagia after an Education Intervention: Analysis of Compliance Rates, Risk Factors and Associated Complications.

Oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) is associated with adverse outcomes that require a multidisciplinary approach with different strategies. Our aim was to assess the adherence of older patients to dysphagia management recommendations during hospitalization, after a specific nurse guided dysphagia education intervention and to identify short term complications of OD and their relationship with short-term adherence. We carried out a prospective observational study in an acute and an orthogeriatric unit of a university hospital over ten months with a one-month follow-up. Four hundred and forty-seven patients (mean age 92 years, 70.7% women) were diagnosed with dysphagia using Volume-Viscosity Swallow Test (V-VST). Compensatory measures and individualized recommendations were explained in detail by trained nurse. Therapeutic adherence was directly observed during hospital admission, after an education intervention, and self-reported after one-month. We also recorded the following reported complications at one month, including respiratory infection, use of antibiotics, weight loss, transfers to the emergency department, or hospitalization). Postural measures and liquid volume were advised to all patients, followed by modified texture food (95.5%), fluid thickeners (32.7%), and delivery method (12.5%). The in-hospital compliance rate with all recommendations was 37.1% and one-month after hospital discharge was 76.4%. Both compliance rates were interrelated and were lower in patients with dementia, malnutrition, and safety signs. Higher compliance rates were observed for sitting feeding and food texture, and an increase in adherence after discharge in the liquid volume and use of thickeners. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that adherence to recommendations during the month after discharge was associated with lower short-term mortality and complications (i.e., respiratory infection, use of antibiotics, weight loss, transfers to the emergency department, or hospitalization). One-third of our participants followed recommendations during hospitalization and three-quarters one month after admission, with higher compliance for posture and food texture. Compliance should be routinely assessed and fostered in older patients with dysphagia.

Spanish translation, cultural adaptation and validation of the SarQoL®: a specific health-related quality of life questionnaire for sarcopenia.

BACKGROUND: In 2015, a specific health-related quality of life questionnaire for sarcopenia, SarQoL®, was developed and validated in French. Since then, SarQoL® has been adapted and validated in different languages. We prepared a translation, cultural adaptation and validation of the psychometric properties of the SarQoL® into Spanish. METHODS: A cross-sectional study with 86 participants. The translation and adaptation followed international guidelines with two direct translations, a synthesized version of the direct translations, two reverse translations, consensus by an expert committee of a pre-final version, pre-test by end users and final version. The discriminative power (logistic regression analyses), construct validity (Pearson and Spearman´s correlation), internal consistency (Cronbach´s alpha coefficient), test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient) and ceiling and floor effects were analyzed. RESULTS: The Spanish version showed good construct validity (high correlation with comparable domains of the SF-36), high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha coefficient: 0.84) and excellent test-retest reliability (ICC: 0.967, 95%, CI 0.917 - 0.989). However, it had no discriminative power between sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic participants defined with the EWGSOP and FNIH diagnostic criteria of sarcopenia. It did show discriminative power between patients with decreased vs normal muscle strength (54.9 vs. 62.6, p 0.009) and low vs. normal physical performance (57.3 vs. 70.2; p 0.005). No ceiling or floor effect was found. CONCLUSIONS: The Spanish version of SarQoL® has similar psychometric properties to those of the original version of the instrument. It did not discriminate between sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic patients diagnosed according to the EWGSOP or FNIH criteria, but it did with those with low muscle strength and low physical performance.

Characteristics, hospital referrals and 60-day mortality of older patients living in nursing homes with COVID-19 assessed by a liaison geriatric team during the first wave: a research article.

BACKGROUND: The infection by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) has been especially serious in older patients. The aim of this study is to describe baseline and clinical characteristics, hospital referrals, 60-day mortality, factors associated with hospital referrals and mortality in older patients living in nursing homes (NH) with suspected COVID-19. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was performed during March and April 2020 of institutionalized patients assessed by a liaison geriatric hospital-based team. Were collected all older patients living in 31 nursing homes of a public hospital catchment area assessed by a liaison geriatric team due to the suspicion of COVID-19 during the first wave, when the hospital system was collapsed. Sociodemographic variables, comprehensive geriatric assessment, clinical characteristics, treatment received including care setting, and 60-days mortality were recorded from electronic medical records. A logistic regression analysis was performed to analyze the factors associated with mortality. RESULTS: 419 patients were included in the study (median age 89 years old, 71.6 % women, 63.7 % with moderate-severe dependence, and 43.8 % with advanced dementia). 31.1 % were referred to the emergency department in the first assessment, with a higher rate of hospital referral in those with better functional and mental status. COVID-19 atypical symptoms like functional decline, delirium, or eating disorders were frequent. 36.9% had died in the 60 days following the first call. According to multivariate logistic regression age (p 0.010), Barthel index <60 (p 0.002), presence of tachypnea (p 0.021), fever (p 0.006) and the use of ceftriaxone (p 0.004) were associated with mortality. No mortality differences were found between those referred to the hospital or cared at the nursing home. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: 31% of the nursing home patients assessed by a liaison geriatric hospital-based team for COVID-19 were referred to the hospital, being more frequently referred those with a better functional and cognitive situation. The 60-days mortality rate due to COVID-19 was 36.8% and was associated with older age, functional dependence, the presence of tachypnea and fever, and the use of ceftriaxone. Geriatric comprehensive assessment and coordination between NH and the hospital geriatric department teams were crucial.

High versus standard doses of corticosteroids in severe COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study.

Despite the increasing evidence of the benefit of corticosteroids for the treatment of moderate-severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, no data are available about the potential role of high doses of steroids for these patients. We evaluated the mortality, the risk of need for mechanical ventilation (MV), or death and the risk of developing a severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) between high (HD) and standard doses (SD) among patients with a severe COVID-19. All consecutive confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted to a single center were selected, including those treated with steroids and an ARDS. Patients were allocated to the HD (≥ 250 mg/day of methylprednisolone) of corticosteroids or the SD (≤ 1.5 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone) at discretion of treating physician. Five hundred seventy-three patients were included: 428 (74.7%) men, with a median (IQR) age of 64 (54-73) years. In the HD group, a worse baseline respiratory situation was observed and male gender, older age, and comorbidities were significantly more common. After adjusting by baseline characteristics, HDs were associated with a higher mortality than SD (adjusted OR 2.46, 95% CI 1.59-3.81, p < 0.001) and with an increased risk of needing MV or death (adjusted OR 2.35, p = 0.001). Conversely, the risk of developing a severe ARDS was similar between groups. Interaction analysis showed that HD increased mortality exclusively in elderly patients. Our real-world experience advises against exceeding 1-1.5 mg/kg/day of corticosteroids for severe COVID-19 with an ARDS, especially in older subjects. This reinforces the rationale of modulating rather than suppressing immune responses in these patients.

The Impact of Immunosuppression and Autoimmune Disease on Severe Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19.

Immunosuppression (IS) and autoimmune disease (AD) are prevalent in patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but their impact on its clinical course is unknown. We investigated relationships between IS, AD, and outcomes in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Data on consecutive admissions for COVID-19 were extracted retrospectively from medical records. Patients were assigned to one of four cohorts, according to whether or not they had an AD (AD and NAD) or were immunosuppressed (IS and NIS). The primary endpoint was development of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); secondary endpoints included death, and a composite of mechanical ventilation (MV) or death. A total of 789 patients were included: 569 (72.1%) male, 76 (9.6%) with an AD, and 63 (8.0%) with IS. Relative to the NIS-NAD cohort, patients in the IS-AD cohort had a significantly reduced risk of severe ARDS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23-0.80; p = 0.008). No significant relationships between IS or AD status and either death or the composite of MV and death were identified, although a trend towards higher mortality was identified in the IS-NAD cohort (aHR vs NIS-NAD 1.71; 95% CI 0.94-3.12; p = 0.081). Patients in this cohort also had higher median serum levels of interleukin-6 compared with IS-AD patients (98.2 vs 21.6 pg/mL; p = 0.0328) and NIS-NAD patients (29.1 pg/mL; p = 0.0057). In conclusion, among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, those receiving immunosuppressive treatment for an AD may have a reduced risk of developing severe ARDS.

Non-severe immunosuppression might be associated with a lower risk of moderate-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome in COVID-19: A pilot study.

The role of immunosuppression among coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients has not been elucidated and management may be challenging. This observational study included confirmed COVID-19 patients. The primary endpoint was the development of moderate-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Time to moderate-severe ARDS, the need for mechanical or noninvasive ventilation (MV/NIV), death, and a composite of death or MV/NIV were secondary endpoints. Of 138 patients included, 27 (19.6%) were immunosuppressed (IS) and 95 (68.8%) were male, with a median (IQR) age of 68 (54-78) years. A significantly lower proportion of IS patients (25.9%) compared to non-IS patients (52.3%) developed moderate-severe ARDS, in both unadjusted (0.32; 95% CI, 0.13-0.83; p = .017) and adjusted (aOR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.08-0.80; p = .019) analyses. After stratifying by pathologies, only IS patients with autoimmune diseases remained significant (aOR 0.25; 95% CI, 0.07-0.98; p = .046). Nonsignificant trends toward a longer time to moderate or severe ARDS, a lower need for MV/NIV, and a lower risk of death or MV/NIV were detected among IS. In our cohort of COVID-19 patients, nonsevere immunosuppression was associated with a lower risk of moderate-severe ARDS, especially among AD. This suggests a potential protective effect from a hypothesized hyper-inflammatory response.

Dilemas terapéuticos en la enfermedad por SARS-CoV-2, un reto para la geriatría / Therapeutic dilemmas in SARS-CoV-2 disease, a challenge for geriatrics

No disponible