Smoking, respiratory symptoms, lung function and life expectancy: A longitudinal study of ageing.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Prognostic indices have been developed to predict various outcomes, including mortality. These indices and hazard ratios may be difficult for patients to understand. We investigated the association between smoking, respiratory symptoms and lung function with remaining life expectancy (LE) in older adults. METHODS: Data were from the 2004/05 English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) (n = 8930), participants aged ≥50-years, with mortality data until 2012. Respiratory symptoms included were chronic phlegm and shortness of breath (SOB). The association between smoking, respiratory symptoms and FEV1/FVC, and remaining LE was estimated using a parametric survival function and adjusted for covariates including age at baseline and sex. RESULTS: The extent to which symptoms and FEV1/FVC predicted differences in remaining LE varied by smoking. Compared to asymptomatic never smokers with normal lung function (the reference group), in never smokers, only those with SOB had a significant reduction in remaining LE. In former and current smokers, those with respiratory symptoms had significantly lower remaining LE compared to the reference group if they had FEV1/FVC <0.70 compared to those with FEV1/FVC ≥0.70. Males aged 50-years, current smokers with SOB and FEV1/FVC <0.70, had a remaining LE of 19.2 (95%CI: 16.5-22.2) years, a decrease of 8.1 (5.3-10.8) years, compared to the reference group. CONCLUSION: Smoking, respiratory symptoms and FEV1/FVC are strongly associated with remaining LE in older people. The use of remaining LE to communicate mortality risk to patients needs further investigation.

Predicting life expectancy of older people using respiratory symptoms and smoking status: Data from the Australian Longitudinal Study of Ageing.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Respiratory symptoms are recognizable to patients and may be markers of chronic disease and mortality risk. This risk may be easier to conceptualize if presented as remaining life expectancy (LE) rather than hazard ratios. We aimed to predict the remaining LE of older people with respiratory symptoms using data from the Australian Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ALSA). METHODS: The ALSA is a prospective longitudinal cohort of older Australians (n = 2087) with 22 years of follow-up. The symptoms analysed were cough, shortness of breath (SOB) and wheeze. The implied impact on LE was estimated using a parametric survival function. RESULTS: SOB predicted shorter LE irrespective of smoking status. Cough predicted shorter LE in former smokers and wheeze predicted shorter LE in current smokers. The estimated remaining LE of a 70-year-old male never smoker with no symptoms was 16.6 (95% CI: 14.8-17.7) years. The years of life lost for a 70-year-old male current smoker with cough, SOB and wheeze compared to a never smoker with no symptoms was 4.93 (95% CI: 2.87-7.36) years with only 2.99 (95% CI: 1.35-4.97) years being attributed to their current smoking and the remainder to their respiratory symptoms. CONCLUSION: Respiratory symptoms predict mortality in older people. Cough in former smokers, wheeze in current smokers and all those with SOB require further investigations and disease-specific management.

Interventions for improving medication-taking ability and adherence in older adults prescribed multiple medications.

BACKGROUND: Older people taking multiple medications represent a large and growing proportion of the population. Managing multiple medications can be challenging, and this is especially the case for older people, who have higher rates of comorbidity and physical and cognitive impairment than younger adults. Good medication-taking ability and medication adherence are necessary to ensure safe and effective use of medications. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of interventions designed to improve medication-taking ability and/or medication adherence in older community-dwelling adults prescribed multiple long-term medications. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PsycINFO, CINAHL Plus, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts from inception until June 2019. We also searched grey literature, online trial registries, and reference lists of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cluster-RCTs. Eligible studies tested interventions aimed at improving medication-taking ability and/or medication adherence among people aged ≥ 65 years (or of mean/median age > 65 years), living in the community or being discharged from hospital back into the community, and taking four or more regular prescription medications (or with group mean/median of more than four medications). Interventions targeting carers of older people who met these criteria were also included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently reviewed abstracts and full texts of eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias of included studies. We conducted meta-analyses when possible and used a random-effects model to yield summary estimates of effect, risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuous outcomes, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Narrative synthesis was performed when meta-analysis was not possible. We assessed overall certainty of evidence for each outcome using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Primary outcomes were medication-taking ability and medication adherence. Secondary outcomes included health-related quality of life (HRQoL), emergency department (ED)/hospital admissions, and mortality. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 50 studies (14,269 participants) comprising 40 RCTs, six cluster-RCTs, and four quasi-RCTs. All included studies evaluated interventions versus usual care; six studies also reported a comparison between two interventions as part of a three-arm RCT design. Interventions were grouped on the basis of their educational and/or behavioural components: 14 involved educational components only, 7 used behavioural strategies only, and 29 provided mixed educational and behavioural interventions. Overall, our confidence in results regarding the effectiveness of interventions was low to very low due to a high degree of heterogeneity of included studies and high or unclear risk of bias across multiple domains in most studies. Five studies evaluated interventions for improving medication-taking ability, and 48 evaluated interventions for improving medication adherence (three studies evaluated both outcomes). No studies involved educational or behavioural interventions alone for improving medication-taking ability. Low-quality evidence from five studies, each using a different measure of medication-taking ability, meant that we were unable to determine the effects of mixed interventions on medication-taking ability. Low-quality evidence suggests that behavioural only interventions (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.38; 4 studies) and mixed interventions (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.37; 12 studies) may increase the proportions of people who are adherent compared with usual care. We could not include in the meta-analysis results from two studies involving mixed interventions: one had a positive effect on adherence, and the other had little or no effect. Very low-quality evidence means that we are uncertain of the effects of educational only interventions (5 studies) on the proportions of people who are adherent. Low-quality evidence suggests that educational only interventions (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.43; 5 studies) and mixed interventions (SMD 0.47, 95% CI -0.08 to 1.02; 7 studies) may have little or no impact on medication adherence assessed through continuous measures of adherence. We excluded 10 studies (4 educational only and 6 mixed interventions) from the meta-analysis including four studies with unclear or no available results. Very low-quality evidence means that we are uncertain of the effects of behavioural only interventions (3 studies) on medication adherence when assessed through continuous outcomes. Low-quality evidence suggests that mixed interventions may reduce the number of ED/hospital admissions (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.90; 11 studies) compared with usual care, although results from six further studies that we were unable to include in meta-analyses indicate that the intervention may have a smaller, or even no, effect on these outcomes. Similarly, low-quality evidence suggests that mixed interventions may lead to little or no change in HRQoL (7 studies), and very low-quality evidence means that we are uncertain of the effects on mortality (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.30; 7 studies). Moderate-quality evidence shows that educational interventions alone probably have little or no effect on HRQoL (6 studies) or on ED/hospital admissions (4 studies) when compared with usual care. Very low-quality evidence means that we are uncertain of the effects of behavioural interventions on HRQoL (1 study) or on ED/hospital admissions (2 studies). We identified no studies evaluating effects of educational or behavioural interventions alone on mortality. Six studies reported a comparison between two interventions; however due to the limited number of studies assessing the same types of interventions and comparisons, we are unable to draw firm conclusions for any outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Behavioural only or mixed educational and behavioural interventions may improve the proportion of people who satisfactorily adhere to their prescribed medications, but we are uncertain of the effects of educational only interventions. No type of intervention was found to improve adherence when it was measured as a continuous variable, with educational only and mixed interventions having little or no impact and evidence of insufficient quality to determine the effects of behavioural only interventions. We were unable to determine the impact of interventions on medication-taking ability. The quality of evidence for these findings is low due to heterogeneity and methodological limitations of studies included in the review. Further well-designed RCTs are needed to investigate the effects of interventions for improving medication-taking ability and medication adherence in older adults prescribed multiple medications.

Case-Finding and Treatment Effects in COPD: Secondary Analysis of an Interdisciplinary Intervention Trial.

Background: US Preventive Services Taskforce recommends against screening for COPD in asymptomatic adults due to limited evidence on the efficacy of treatments for this population. However, global and Australian guidelines recommend a case-finding approach where those with symptoms and/or risk factors, including smoking, are screened. This study aims to explore patient characteristics by time of COPD diagnosis and the effectiveness of early treatment in those with or without symptoms. Methods: Secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial that included those with a pre-existing (n=130) or new diagnosis (n=142) of COPD. Those randomised to the intervention arm received an interdisciplinary intervention of smoking cessation support, home medicines review and home-based pulmonary rehabilitation, while controls received usual care. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) measured using St George's Respiratory Questionnaire. To estimate the impact of early treatment, we compared the effectiveness of treatment versus control at 6- and 12-months for the new versus pre-existing diagnosis groups, and those symptomatic versus asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic based on COPD Assessment Test score. Results: Approximately half of those newly diagnosed with COPD were already symptomatic. Early treatment in those diagnosed via case-finding had a positive non-significant impact on HR-QoL. The size of the treatment effects generally favoured the pre-existing diagnosis group when compared to case-finding and favoured those symptomatic when compared to those asymptomatic. Conclusion: Despite useful insights into the impacts of case-finding and early treatments, this study, like most others, was not sufficiently powered. Further larger studies or combining sub-groups across studies are required.

Prevalence of strong anticholinergic use in residents with and without cognitive impairment and frailty: Analysis from 106 nursing homes in 12 Asia-Pacific and European countries.

PURPOSE: There is a need to balance the benefits and risks associated with strong anticholinergic medications in older adults, particularly among those with frailty and cognitive impairment. This study explored the international prevalence of strong anticholinergic medication use in residents of nursing homes with and without cognitive impairment and frailty. METHODS: Secondary, cross-sectional analyses of data from 5,800 residents of 106 nursing homes in Australia, China, Czech Republic, England, Finland, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, and Spain were conducted. Strong anticholinergic medications were defined as medications with a score of 2 or 3 on the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden scale. Dementia or cognitive impairment was defined as a documented diagnosis or using a validated scale. Frailty was defined using the FRAIL-NH scale as 0-2 (non-frail), 3-6 (frail) and 7-14 (most-frail). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Overall, 17.4 % (n = 1010) residents used ≥1 strong anticholinergic medication, ranging from 1.3 % (n = 2) in China to 27.1 % (n = 147) in Italy. The most prevalent strong anticholinergics were quetiapine (n = 290, 5.0 % of all residents), olanzapine (132, 2.3 %), carbamazepine (102, 1.8 %), paroxetine (88, 1.5 %) and amitriptyline (87, 1.5 %). Prevalence was higher among residents with cognitive impairment (n = 602, 17.9 %) compared to those without (n = 408, 16.8 %), and among residents who were most frail (n = 553, 17.9 %) compared to those who were frail (n = 286, 16.5 %) or non-frail (n = 171, 17.5 %). CONCLUSIONS: One in six residents who were most frail and living with cognitive impairment used a strong anticholinergic. However, there was a 20-fold variation in prevalence across the 12 countries. Targeted deprescribing interventions may reduce potentially avoidable medication-harm.

To Cope or Not to Cope? Characterizing Biology Graduate Teaching Assistant (GTA) Coping with Teaching and Research Anxieties.

Recent evidence suggests a mental health crisis among graduate students, particularly with regard to anxiety. To manage anxieties, graduate students can employ coping strategies. Coping is an individual's response(s) to external stressors, often with the goal of reducing or tolerating the stress; these strategies are generally considered adaptive or maladaptive. Adaptive coping strategies advance individuals through problems, while maladaptive strategies prevent stressors from being resolved. We previously identified differences between teaching and research anxieties in a sample of biology graduate teaching assistants (GTAs). This study investigated whether coping with these anxieties differed in this population as well. We interviewed 23 biology GTAs twice over one year. Interview data were qualitatively analyzed using Skinner and colleagues' major coping families as categories. Biology GTAs most often used adaptive coping strategies, such as problem solving and information seeking, to manage both teaching and research anxieties. However, other coping strategies were preferentially employed for either teaching or research, suggesting differences in these aspects of graduate student life. Over one year, GTAs reduced the number of coping strategies they employed. Understanding how GTAs cope with teaching and research anxieties may inform the types of support faculty and professional development leaders can provide to graduate students.

Undiagnosed and Misdiagnosed Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Data from the BOLD Australia Study.

PURPOSE: Spirometry is necessary to confirm COPD, but many patients are diagnosed based on clinical presentation and/or chest x-ray. There are also those who do not present to primary care for case finding and remain undiagnosed. We aimed to identify: (a) factors that are associated with undiagnosed COPD; and (b) factors that are associated with a potential misdiagnosis of COPD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This analysis used data from the Burden of Obstructive Lung Disease (BOLD), a cross-sectional study of community dwelling adults randomly selected from six study sites, chosen to provide a representative sample of the Australian population (n= 3357). Participants were grouped by COPD diagnostic criteria based on spirometry and self-reported diagnosis. Odds ratios for predictors of undiagnosed and misdiagnosed were estimated using logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the BOLD Australia sample, 1.8% had confirmed COPD, of whom only half self-reported a diagnosis of COPD. A further 6.9% probably had COPD, but were undiagnosed. The priority target population for case finding of undiagnosed COPD was aged ≥60 years (particularly those ≥75 years), with wheezing, shortness of breath and a body mass index (BMI) <25kg/m2. The priority target population for identifying and reviewing misdiagnosed COPD was aged <60 years, female, with no wheezing and a BMI ≥25kg/m2. CONCLUSION: Challenges continue in accurately diagnosing COPD and greater efforts are needed to identify undiagnosed and misdiagnosed individuals to ensure an accurate diagnosis and the initiation of appropriate management in order to reduce the burden of COPD.

Interdisciplinary model of care (RADICALS) for early detection and management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in Australian primary care: study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Up to half of all smokers develop clinically significant chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Gaps exist in the implementation and uptake of evidence-based guidelines for managing COPD in primary care. We describe the methodology of a cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) evaluating the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of an interdisciplinary model of care aimed at reducing the burden of smoking and COPD in Australian primary care settings. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A cRCT is being undertaken to evaluate an interdisciplinary model of care (RADICALS - Review of Airway Dysfunction and Interdisciplinary Community-based care of Adult Long-term Smokers). General practice clinics across Melbourne, Australia, are identified and randomised to the intervention group (RADICALS) or usual care. Patients who are current or ex-smokers, of at least 10 pack years, including those with an existing diagnosis of COPD, are being recruited to identify 280 participants with a spirometry-confirmed diagnosis of COPD. Handheld lung function devices are being used to facilitate case-finding. RADICALS includes individualised smoking cessation support, home-based pulmonary rehabilitation and home medicines review. Patients at control group sites receive usual care and Quitline referral, as appropriate. Follow-ups occur at 6 and 12 months from baseline to assess changes in quality of life, abstinence rates, health resource utilisation, symptom severity and lung function. The primary outcome is change in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire score of patients with COPD at 6 months from baseline. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This project has been approved by the Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee and La Trobe University Human Ethics Committee (CF14/1018 - 2014000433). Results of the study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and research conferences. If the intervention is successful, the RADICALS programme could potentially be integrated into general practices across Australia and sustained over time. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12614001155684; Pre-results.