Age, Sex, and Dose Effects of Nonbenzodiazepine Hypnotics on Hip Fracture in Nursing Home Residents

Comparative analysis of psychiatric medications and their association with falls and fractures: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

An association between psychiatric medications and falls and fractures in people taking them has been demonstrated, but which class or medication leads to the greatest risk of falls or fractures should be further investigated. The aim of this study was to compare and rank the magnitude of risk of falls and fractures due to different psychiatric medications. Eight databases were searched for this meta-analysis and evaluated using a frequency-based network meta-analysis. The results included a total of 28 papers with 14 medications from 5 major classes, involving 3,467,314 patients. The results showed that atypical antipsychotics were the class of medications with the highest risk of falls, and typical antipsychotics were the class of medications with the highest risk of resulting in fractures. Quetiapine ranked first in the category of 13 medications associated with risk of falls, and class Z drugs ranked first in the category of 6 medications associated with risk of fractures. The available evidence suggests that atypical antipsychotics and typical antipsychotics may be the drugs with the highest risk of falls and fractures, respectively. Quetiapine may be the medication with the highest risk of falls, and class Z drugs may be the medication with the highest risk of fractures.

Evaluating the use of methods to mitigate bias from non-transient medications in the case-crossover design: A systematic review

PURPOSE

The case-crossover design is a self-controlled study design used to compare exposure immediately preceding an event occurrence with exposure in earlier control periods. The design is most suitable for transient exposures in order to avoid biases that can be problematic when using the case-crossover design for non-transient (i.e., chronic) exposures. Our goal was to conduct a systematic review of case-crossover studies and its variants (case-time-control and case-case-time-control) in order to compare design and analysis choices by medication type.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search to identify recent case-crossover, case-time-control, and case-case-time-control studies focused on medication exposures. Articles indexed in MEDLINE and EMBASE using these study designs that were published between January 2015 and December 2021 in the English language were identified. Reviews, methodological studies, commentaries, articles without medications as the exposure of interest, and articles with no available full text were excluded. Study characteristics including study design, outcome, risk window, control window, reporting of discordant pairs, and inclusion of sensitivity analyses were summarized overall and by medication type. We further evaluated the implementation of recommended methods to account for biases introduced by non-transient exposures among articles that used the case-crossover design on a non-transient exposure.

RESULTS

Of the 2036 articles initially identified, 114 articles were included. The case-crossover was the most common study design (88%), followed by the case-time-control (17%), and case-case-time-control (3%). Fifty-three percent of the articles included only transient medications, 35% included only non-transient medications, and 12% included both. Across years, the proportion of case-crossover articles evaluating a non-transient medication ranged from 30% in 2018 to 69% in 2017. We found that 41% of the articles that evaluated a non-transient medication did not apply any of the recommended methods to account for biases and more than half of which were conducted by authors with no previous publication history of case-crossover studies.

CONCLUSION

Using the case-crossover design to evaluate a non-transient medication remains common in pharmacoepidemiology. Researchers should apply appropriate design and analysis choices when opting to use a case-crossover design with non-transient medication exposures.

Effects of anticholinergic and sedative medication use on fractures: A self-controlled design study

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Unintentional falls are a leading cause of injury for older adults, and evidence is needed to understand modifiable risk factors. We evaluated 1-year fall-related fracture risk and whether dispensing of medications with anticholinergic/sedating properties is temporally associated with an increased odds of these fractures.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study with nested self-controlled analyses conducted between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2016.

SETTING

Twenty percent nationwide, random sample of US Medicare beneficiaries.

PARTICIPANTS

New users of medications with anticholinergic/sedating properties who were 66+ years old and had Medicare Parts A, B, and D coverage but no claims for medications with anticholinergic/sedating properties in the year before initiation were eligible.

MEASUREMENTS

We followed new users of medications with anticholinergic/sedating properties until first non-vertebral, fall-related fracture (primary outcome), Medicare disenrollment, death, or end of study data. We estimated the 1-year risk with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of first fracture after new use. We applied the self-controlled case-crossover and case-time-control designs to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs by comparing anticholinergic and/or sedating medication exposure (any vs. none) during a 14-day hazard period preceding the fracture to exposure to these medications during an earlier 14-day control period.

RESULTS

A total of 1,097,989 Medicare beneficiaries initiated medications with anticholinergic/sedating properties in the study period. The 1-year cumulative incidence of fall-related fracture, accounting for death as a competing risk, was 5.0% (95% CI: 5.0%-5.0%). Using the case-crossover design (n = 41,889), the adjusted OR for the association between anticholinergic/sedating medications and fractures was 1.03 (95% CI: 0.99, 1.08). Accounting for the noted temporal trend using the case-time-control design (n = 209,395), the adjusted OR was 1.60 (95% CI: 1.52, 1.69).

CONCLUSION

Use of anticholinergic/sedating medication was temporally associated with an increased odds of fall-related fractures. Patients and their healthcare providers should consider pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatments for the target condition that are safer.

Adverse effects of Z-drugs for sleep disturbance in people living with dementia: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Sleep disturbance is common in dementia and often treated with Z-drugs (zopiclone, zaleplon, and zolpidem). While some observational studies suggest that Z-drugs are associated with adverse events such as falls and fracture risks in older people, this has not been studied in dementia.

METHODS

We used data from 27,090 patients diagnosed with dementia between January 2000 and March 2016 from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to Hospital Episodes Statistics data in England. We compared adverse events for 3532 patients newly prescribed Z-drugs by time-varying dosage to (1) 1833 non-sedative-users with sleep disturbance; (2) 10,214 non-sedative-users with proximal GP consultation matched on age, sex, and antipsychotic use; and (3) 5172 patients newly prescribed benzodiazepines. We defined higher dose Z-drugs and benzodiazepines as prescriptions equivalent to ≥ 7.5 mg zopiclone or > 5 mg diazepam daily. Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for incident fracture, hip fracture, fall, mortality, acute bacterial infection, ischaemic stroke/transient ischaemic attack, and venous thromboembolism over a 2-year follow-up, adjusted for demographic- and health-related covariates.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) age of patients was 83 (7.7) years, and 16,802 (62%) were women. Of 3532 patients prescribed Z-drugs, 584 (17%) were initiated at higher doses. For patients prescribed higher dose Z-drugs relative to non-users with sleep disturbance, the HRs (95% confidence interval) for fractures, hip fractures, falls, and ischaemic stroke were 1.67 (1.13-2.46), 1.96 (1.16-3.31), 1.33 (1.06-1.66), and 1.88 (1.14-3.10), respectively. We observed similar associations when compared to non-sedative-users with proximal GP consultation. Minimal or inconsistent excess risks were observed at ≤ 3.75 mg zopiclone or equivalent daily, and for mortality, infection, and venous thromboembolism. We observed no differences in adverse events for Z-drugs compared to benzodiazepines, except lower mortality rates with Z-drugs (HR [95% confidence interval] of 0.73 [0.64-0.83]).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher dose Z-drug use in dementia is associated with increased fracture and stroke risks, similar or greater to that for higher dose benzodiazepines. Higher dose Z-drugs should be avoided, if possible, in people living with dementia, and non-pharmacological alternatives preferentially considered. Prescriptions for higher dose Z-drugs in dementia should be regularly reviewed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ENCePP e-register of studies, EUPAS18006.

Non-Pharmacological Interventions towards Preventing the Triad Osteoporosis-Falls Risk-Hip Fracture, in Population Older than 65. Scoping Review

Osteoporosis leads to increased risk of falls, and thus an increase in fractures, highlighting here hip fractures, that result in high mortality, functional disability, and high medical expenditure. The aim is to summarise the available evidence on effective non-pharmacological interventions to prevent the triad osteoporosis/falls risk/hip fracture. A scoping review was conducted consulting the Scientific Electronic Library Online (Scielo), National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) y PubMed.databases. Inclusion criteria were articles published between 2013 and 2019, in Spanish or English. In addition, publications on a population over 65 years of age covering non-pharmacological interventions aimed at hip fracture prevention for both institutionalised patients in long-stay health centres or hospitals, and patients cared for at home, both dependent and non-dependent, were included. Sixty-six articles were selected and 13 non-pharmacological interventions were identified according to the Nursing Interventions Classification taxonomy, aimed at preventing osteoporosis, falls, and hip fracture. The figures regarding the affected population according to the studies are alarming, reflecting the importance of preventing the triad osteoporosis, falls risk, and hip fracture among the population over 65 years of age. The most effective interventions were focused on increasing Bone Mineral Density through diet, exercise, and falls prevention. As a conclusion, primary prevention should be applied to the entire adult population, with special emphasis on people with osteoporosis.

Predictors of Hip Fracture Despite Treatment with Bisphosphonates among Frail Older Adults

OBJECTIVES

Bisphosphonates are effective at preventing hip fractures among older adults, yet many patients still fracture while on treatment and may benefit from additional preventive interventions. Little data are specifically available to target such efforts among bisphosphonate users. We aimed to identify predictors of hip fracture unique to frail older adults initiating pharmacologic treatment for osteoporosis.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort using 2008-2013 linked national Minimum Data Set assessments, Medicare claims, and nursing home (NH) facility data.

SETTING

NHs in the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

Long-stay NH residents 65 years or older who initiated treatment with a bisphosphonate (N = 17 753). Estimates for bisphosphonate initiators were contrasted with those for calcitonin initiators (control group; N = 5348).

MEASUREMENTS

Hospitalized hip fracture outcomes were measured using Part A claims. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for 36 a priori selected potential predictors.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) age of the study population was 84 (8) years, 85% were women, and 51% had moderate to severe cognitive impairment. Predictors associated with a higher risk of hip fracture despite bisphosphonate use included age 75 years or older to 85 years (vs ≥65 to <75 y; HR = 1.25; 95% CI = 1.02-1.55), female sex (HR = 1.33; 95% CI = 1.06-1.67), white race (vs black race (HR = 1.87; 95% CI = 1.36-2.58), and body mass index = 18.5-24.9 (vs ≥30; HR = 1.93; 95% CI = 1.53-2.42). Independent ability to transfer (vs total dependence; HR = 3.11; 95% CI = 1.83-5.30) and occasional urinary incontinence (vs frequent; HR = 1.45; 95% CI = 1.18-1.78) were also important predictors. Dementia, diabetes, psychoactive drug use, and other characteristics were not associated with post-prescribing hip fracture. Predictors did not differ between bisphosphonate and calcitonin users.

CONCLUSION

Predictors of hip fracture among frail older adults did not differ between those who were new users of bisphosphonates vs calcitonin. Given the absence of risk factors unique to bisphosphonate users, targeting of fracture prevention efforts should extend beyond pharmacologic therapy to include existing nonpharmacologic therapies, particularly fall prevention strategies. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:256-260, 2020.

Effect of Bisphosphonates on Fracture Outcomes Among Frail Older Adults

BACKGROUND

Bisphosphonates are seldom used in frail, older adults, in part due to lack of direct evidence of efficacy in this population and increasing concerns about safety.

OBJECTIVE

We estimated the effects of bisphosphonates on hip fractures, nonvertebral fractures, and severe esophagitis among frail, older adults.

DESIGN

Population-based retrospective cohort using 2008 to 2013 linked national Minimum Data Set assessments; Online Survey Certification and Reporting System records; and Medicare claims.

SETTING

US nursing homes (NHs).

PARTICIPANTS

Long-stay NH residents 65 years and older without recent osteoporosis medication use (N = 24,571). Bisphosphonate initiators were 1:1 propensity score matched to calcitonin initiators (active comparator).

MEASUREMENTS

Hospitalized hip fracture, nonvertebral fracture, and esophagitis outcomes were measured using part A claims. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated, controlling for over 100 baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

The matched cohort included 5209 new bisphosphonate users and an equal number of calcitonin users (mean age [SD] = 85 [8] years; 87% female; 52% moderate-severe cognitive impairment). Over a mean follow-up of 2.5 (SD = 1.7) years, 568 residents (5.5%) had a hip fracture, 874 (8.4%) had a nonvertebral fracture, and 199 (1.9%) had a hospitalized esophagitis event. Users of bisphosphonates were less likely than calcitonin users to experience hip fracture (HR = 0.83; 95% CI = 0.71-0.98), with an average gain in time without fracture of 28.4 days (95% CI = 6.0-50.8 days). Bisphosphonate and calcitonin users had similar rates of nonvertebral fracture (HR = 0.91; 95% CI = 0.80-1.03) and esophagitis events (HR = 1.11; 95% CI = 0.84-1.47). The effects of bisphosphonates on fractures and esophagitis were generally homogeneous across subgroups, including those defined by age, sex, history of prior fracture, and baseline fracture risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of bisphosphonates is associated with a meaningful reduction in hip fracture among frail, older adults, but little difference in nonvertebral fracture or severe esophagitis. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:768-776, 2019.