Brain-Hazardous Medications and Potential Subadequate Antidepressant Dosing in Older Surgical Patients Receiving Home Antidepressants: An Observational Study of a Large US Health System.

BACKGROUND: Older surgical patients with depression often experience poor postoperative outcomes. Poor outcomes may stem from brain-hazardous medications and subadequate antidepressant dosing. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational cohort study covering the period between January 1, 2021 and December 31, 2021. Patients ≥60 years of age who underwent inpatient surgery and had an overnight stay at an integrated academic health care system comprising 14 hospitals were eligible. We analyzed the prevalence of home central nervous system (CNS)-active potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) and potential subadequate antidepressant dosing in older surgical patients receiving home antidepressants. Univariable and multivariable regression models were used to identify factors associated with home CNS-active PIM prescribing and potential subadequate antidepressant dosing. Additionally, outcomes were compared among patients receiving and not receiving CNS-active PIMs and patients receiving and not receiving subadequate antidepressant dosing. RESULTS: A total of 8031 patients were included in this study (47% female, mean age = 70 years) of whom 2087 (26%) were prescribed antidepressants. Roughly one-half (49%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 46.5-50.1) of patients receiving home antidepressants were also receiving ≥1 CNS-active PIM and 29% (95% CI, 27.0-29.3) were receiving a potential subadequate dose. Factors associated with an increased likelihood of receiving a home CNS-active PIM included female sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.46), anxiety (aOR, 2.43), asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (aOR, 1.39), and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor use (aOR, 1.54). Patients aged ≥75 years (aOR, 1.57), black race (aOR, 1.48) and those with congestive heart failure (aOR, 1.33) were more likely to be prescribed a potential subadequate antidepressant dose. Patients receiving potential subadequate antidepressant doses were discharged home less often (64% vs 73%), had a longer hospital length of stay (9 days vs 7 days), and a higher mortality rate (18% vs 10%) compared to patients receiving adequate home antidepressant doses (P-value for all <0.01). No differences in these outcomes were found among patients receiving home antidepressants with or without CNS-active PIMs. CONCLUSIONS: Older surgical patients receiving antidepressants are frequently prescribed brain-hazardous medications and potentially subadequate antidepressant doses. Those receiving subadequate antidepressant doses may be at risk for worse postoperative outcomes compared to patients receiving adequate doses. The role of preoperative medication optimization to improve outcomes for older surgical patients should be evaluated.

A Perioperative Mental Health Intervention for Depressed and Anxious Older Surgical Patients: Results From a Feasibility Study.

OBJECTIVES: The perioperative period is challenging and stressful for older adults. Those with depression and/or anxiety have an increased risk of adverse surgical outcomes. We assessed the feasibility of a perioperative mental health intervention composed of medication optimization and a wellness program following principles of behavioral activation and care coordination for older surgical patients. METHODS: We included orthopedic, oncologic, and cardiac surgical patients aged 60 and older. Feasibility outcomes included study reach, the number of patients who agreed to participate out of the total eligible; and intervention reach, the number of patients who completed the intervention out of patients who agreed to participate. Intervention efficacy was assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire for Anxiety and Depression (PHQ-ADS). Implementation potential and experiences were collected using patient surveys and qualitative interviews. Complementary caregiver feedback was also collected. RESULTS: Twenty-three out of 28 eligible older adults participated in this study (mean age 68.0 years, 65% women), achieving study reach of 82% and intervention reach of 83%. In qualitative interviews, patients (n = 15) and caregivers (complementary data, n = 5) described overwhelmingly positive experiences with both the intervention components and the interventionist, and reported improvement in managing depression and/or anxiety. Preliminary efficacy analysis indicated improvement in PHQ-ADS scores (F = 12.13, p <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The study procedures were reported by participants as feasible and the perioperative mental health intervention to reduce anxiety and depression in older surgical patients showed strong implementation potential. Preliminary data suggest its efficacy for improving depression and/or anxiety symptoms. A randomized controlled trial assessing the intervention and implementation effectiveness is currently ongoing.

Optimizing treatment for older adults with depression.

This review presents a comprehensive guide for optimizing medication management in older adults with depression within an outpatient setting. Medication optimization involves tailoring the antidepressant strategy to the individual, ensuring the administration of appropriate medications at optimal dosages. In the case of older adults, this process necessitates not only adjusting or changing antidepressants but also addressing the concurrent use of inappropriate medications, many of which have cognitive side effects. This review outlines various strategies for medication optimization in late-life depression: (1) Utilizing the full dose range of a medication to maximize therapeutic benefits and strive for remission. (2) Transitioning to alternative classes (such as a serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor [SNRI], bupropion, or mirtazapine) when first-line treatment with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [SSRIs] proves inadequate. (3) Exploring augmentation strategies like aripiprazole for treatment-resistant depression. (4) Implementing measurement-based care to help adjust treatment. (5) Sustaining an effective antidepressant strategy for at least 1 year following depression remission, with longer durations for recurrent episodes or severe presentations. (6) Safely discontinuing anticholinergic medications and benzodiazepines by employing a tapering method when necessary, coupled with counseling about the benefits of stopping them. Additionally, this article explores favorable medications for depression, as well as alternatives for managing anxiety, insomnia, allergy, overactive bladder, psychosis, and muscle spasm in order to avoid potent anticholinergics and benzodiazepines.

Description of the Content and Quality of Publicly Available Information on the Internet About Inhaled Volatile Anesthesia and Total Intravenous Anesthesia: Descriptive Study.

BACKGROUND: More than 300 million patients undergo surgical procedures requiring anesthesia worldwide annually. There are 2 standard-of-care general anesthesia administration options: inhaled volatile anesthesia (INVA) and total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA). There is limited evidence comparing these methods and their impact on patient experiences and outcomes. Patients often seek this information from sources such as the internet. However, the majority of websites on anesthesia-related topics are not comprehensive, updated, and fully accurate. The quality and availability of web-based patient information about INVA and TIVA have not been sufficiently examined. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to (1) assess information on the internet about INVA and TIVA for availability, readability, accuracy, and quality and (2) identify high-quality websites that can be recommended to patients to assist in their anesthesia information-seeking and decision-making. METHODS: Web-based searches were conducted using Google from April 2022 to November 2022. Websites were coded using a coding instrument developed based on the International Patient Decision Aids Standards criteria and adapted to be appropriate for assessing websites describing INVA and TIVA. Readability was calculated with the Flesch-Kincaid (F-K) grade level and the simple measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) readability formula. RESULTS: A total of 67 websites containing 201 individual web pages were included for coding and analysis. Most of the websites provided a basic definition of general anesthesia (unconsciousness, n=57, 85%; analgesia, n=47, 70%). Around half of the websites described common side effects of general anesthesia, while fewer described the rare but serious adverse events, such as intraoperative awareness (n=31, 46%), allergic reactions or anaphylaxis (n=29, 43%), and malignant hyperthermia (n=18, 27%). Of the 67 websites, the median F-K grade level was 11.3 (IQR 9.5-12.8) and the median SMOG score was 13.5 (IQR 12.2-14.4), both far above the American Medical Association (AMA) recommended reading level of sixth grade. A total of 51 (76%) websites distinguished INVA versus TIVA as general anesthesia options. A total of 12 of the 51 (24%) websites explicitly stated that there is a decision to be considered about receiving INVA versus TIVA for general anesthesia. Only 10 (20%) websites made any direct comparisons between INVA and TIVA, discussing their positive and negative features. A total of 12 (24%) websites addressed the concept of shared decision-making in planning anesthesia care, but none specifically asked patients to think about which features of INVA and TIVA matter the most to them. CONCLUSIONS: While the majority of websites described INVA and TIVA, few provided comparisons. There is a need for high-quality patient education and decision support about the choice of INVA versus TIVA to provide accurate and more comprehensive information in a format conducive to patient understanding.

A survey of surgical patients' perspectives and preferences towards general anesthesia techniques and shared-decision making.

BACKGROUND: The decision about which type of general anesthetic to administer is typically made by the clinical team without patient engagement. This study examined patients' preferences, experiences, attitudes, beliefs, perceptions, and perceived social norms about anesthesia and about engaging in the decision regarding general anesthetic choice with their clinician. METHODS: We conducted a survey in the United States, sent to a panel of surgical patients through Qualtrics (Qualtrics, Provo, UT) from March 2022 through May 2022. Questions were developed based on the Theory of Planned Behavior and validated measures were used when available. A patient partner who had experienced both intravenous and inhaled anesthesia contributed to the development and refinement of the questions. RESULTS: A total of 806 patients who received general anesthesia for an elective procedure in the last five years completed the survey. 43% of respondents preferred a patient-led decision making role and 28% preferred to share decision making with their clinical team, yet only 7.8% reported being engaged in full shared decision making about the anesthesia they received. Intraoperative awareness, pain, nausea, vomiting and quickly returning to work and usual household activities were important to respondents. Waking up in the middle of surgery was the most commonly reported concern, despite this experience being reported only 8% of the time. Most patients (65%) who searched for information about general anesthesia noted that it took a lot of effort to find the information, and 53% agreed to feeling frustrated during the search. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients prefer a patient-led or shared decision making process when it comes to their anesthetic care and want to be engaged in the decision. However, only a small percentage of patients reported being fully engaged in the decision. Further studies should inform future shared decision-making tools, informed consent materials, educational materials and framing of anesthetic choices for patients so that they are able to make a choice regarding the anesthetic they receive.