Drug interactions for elderly people with mental and behavioral disorders: a systematic scoping review

Performance of triggers in detecting hospitalizations related to drug-induced respiratory disorders in older adults: A pilot cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

There is no gold-standard trigger for detecting drug-induced respiratory disorders, a type of Adverse Drug Event (ADE) with high morbimortality, particularly in older people.

OBJECTIVE

To propose and evaluate the performance of triggers for detecting hospitalizations related to drug-induced respiratory disorders in older people.

METHODS

A pilot cross-sectional study was conducted with older people (age ≥ 60) admitted to a Brazilian hospital. Electronic chart documentation was screened using ICD-10 codes; Global Trigger Tool (GTT); and drugs potentially associated with respiratory disorders. A chart and medication review were conducted to perform the causality assessment using the instrument developed by the World Health Organization. The performance of triggers was evaluated by the Positive Predictive Value (PPV), with values ≥ 0.20 indicating good performance.

RESULTS

Among 221 older people, 72 were eligible. Potential drug-induced dyspnea and/or cough were detected in six older people (6/72), corresponding to a prevalence of 8.3 %. The overall PPV of the triggers was 0.14, with abrupt medication stop (PPV = 1.00), codeine (PPV = 1.00), captopril (PPV = 0.33), and carvedilol (PPV = 0.33) showing good performance. Two triggers were proposed for detecting therapeutic ineffectiveness associated with respiratory disorders: furosemide (PPV = 0.23) and prednisone (PPV = 0.20).

CONCLUSION

The triggers enabled the identification that one in 12 hospitalizations was related to drug-induced respiratory. Although good performance was observed in the application of triggers, additional investigations are needed to assess the feasibility of incorporating them into clinical practice for the screening, detection, management, and reporting of these ADEs, which are considered to be underreported and difficult to detect.

Application of trigger tools for detecting adverse drug events in older people: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To identify trigger tools applied to detect adverse drug events (ADEs) in older people and describe their utility and performance.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in the PubMed, Lilacs, and Scopus databases (January 2024). Studies that developed, applied, or validated trigger tools and evaluated their utility and/or performance for detecting ADEs in older people were considered. Direct proportion meta-analyses using the inverse-variance method were performed for prevalence of ADEs and positive predictive value (PPV).

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies (25 publications) were included. Twelve trigger tools were identified, of which six were developed for detecting ADEs in older population, four developed for general population and modified for older people, and two developed for general population. No tools for detecting ADEs in older people receiving palliative care or hospitalized in intensive or surgical care units were found. The performance of triggers was presented through PPV (11.5-71%), negative predictive values (83.3%), and sensitivity (30-94.8%). The overall PPV was 33.3% (95%CI: 32.5-34.2%). Triggers with good performance were changes in plasma levels of digoxin, glucose, and potassium; changes in international normalized ratio; abrupt medication stop; hypotension; and constipation. The prevalence of ADEs ranged from 2.8 to 66%, with overall prevalence of ADEs of 20% (95%CI: 19.3-20.8%). Preventability ranged from 8.4 to 94.4%. Metabolic or electrolyte disturbances induced by diuretics, constipation induced by opioids, and falls and delirium induced by benzodiazepines were the most prevalent ADEs.

CONCLUSION

The trigger tools are flexible and easy to apply, and they can contribute to the detection of ADEs, their associated risk factors, the level of harm, and preventability in different health settings. However, there is no consensus on good or poor values of PPV, which indicate the performance of triggers. Furthermore, there is limited evidence regarding the evaluation of performance through negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity.

PROSPERO

CRD42022379893.

A Universal Pharmacological-Based List of Drugs with Anticholinergic Activity

Anticholinergic burden tools have relevant pharmacological gaps that may explain their limited predictive ability for clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to provide a universal pharmacological-based list of drugs with their documented affinity for muscarinic receptors. A comprehensive literature review was performed to identify the anticholinergic burden tools. Drugs included in these instruments were searched in four pharmacological databases, and the investigation was supplemented with PubMed. The evidence regarding the potential antagonism of the five muscarinic receptors of each drug was assessed. The proportion of drugs included in the tools with an affinity for muscarinic receptors was evaluated. A universal list of drugs with anticholinergic activity was developed based on their documented affinity for the different subtypes of muscarinic receptors and their ability to cross the blood-brain barrier. A total of 23 tools were identified, including 304 different drugs. Only 48.68%, 47.70%, 48.03%, 43.75%, and 42.76% of the drugs had an affinity to the M1, M2, M3, M4, and M5 receptor, respectively, reported in any pharmacological database. The proportion of drugs with confirmed antagonism varied among the tools (36.8% to 100%). A universal pharmacological-based list of 133 drugs is presented. It should be further validated in different clinical settings.

A comprehensive look at explicit screening tools for potentially inappropriate medication: A systematic scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To map explicit screening tools to identify potentially inappropriate medication (PIMs), and the characteristics and limitations of these tools. Including PIMs-interactions, therapeutic alternatives and the clinical management of PIMs.

METHODS

A systematic scoping review was conducted in PubMed and Scopus (until May 2021). The number of PIMs listed as essential drugs was identified in Model List of Essential Medicines by the World Health Organization (WHO) and National List of Essential Medicines (Brazil). In addition to reporting the therapeutic alternatives and clinical management proposed by explicit screening tools to identify PIMs, we suggested our own alternatives for the PIMs most frequently reported.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight tools reported 614 PIMs and 747 PIMs-interactions. Limited overlap between the tools was observed: 123 (69.1%) of 178 therapeutic alternatives proposed by the tools were considered inappropriate by other tools, and 222 (36.1%) of the 614 PIMs identified were named as being inappropriate only once. Only 21 tools were developed by a Delphi panel technique associated with systematic review. The PIMs listed as essential medication in Brazil and by the WHO were 30.6% and 23.3% of the total reported, respectively. For the most-cited PIMs, such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, tricyclic antidepressants and benzodiazepines, we suggested the use of non-opioid and opioid analgesics; agomelatine, bupropion or moclobemide; and melatonin, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The next stages in the development of explicit screening tools to identify PIMs include achieving more consensus between them and improving their applicability across countries. Further, it is recommended that tools include PIMs risks and advice on therapeutic alternatives.

Predicting the risk of drug-drug interactions in psychiatric hospitals: a retrospective longitudinal pharmacovigilance study

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to use routine data available at a patient's admission to the hospital to predict polypharmacy and drug-drug interactions (DDI) and to evaluate the prediction performance with regard to its usefulness to support the efficient management of benefits and risks of drug prescriptions.

DESIGN

Retrospective, longitudinal study.

SETTING

We used data from a large multicentred pharmacovigilance project carried out in eight psychiatric hospitals in Hesse, Germany.

PARTICIPANTS

Inpatient episodes consecutively discharged between 1 October 2017 and 30 September 2018 (year 1) or 1 January 2019 and 31 December 2019 (year 2).

OUTCOME MEASURES

The proportion of rightly classified hospital episodes.

METHODS

We used gradient boosting to predict respective outcomes. We tested the performance of our final models in unseen patients from another calendar year and separated the study sites used for training from the study sites used for performance testing.

RESULTS

A total of 53 909 episodes were included in the study. The models' performance, as measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic, was 'excellent' (0.83) and 'acceptable' (0.72) compared with common benchmarks for the prediction of polypharmacy and DDI, respectively. Both models were substantially better than a naive prediction based solely on basic diagnostic grouping.

CONCLUSION

This study has shown that polypharmacy and DDI can be predicted from routine data at patient admission. These predictions could support an efficient management of benefits and risks of hospital prescriptions, for instance by including pharmaceutical supervision early after admission for patients at risk before pharmacological treatment is established.