The anticholinergic impregnation scale: Towards the elaboration of a scale adapted to prescriptions in French psychiatric settings

Assessing the feasibility of anticholinergic burden scales and measures in administrative data: A systematic review

AIM

This systematic review aimed to identify and evaluate the quality and adaptability of existing anticholinergic burden scales and measures by using administrative dispensing data.

METHOD

A comprehensive literature search was conducted using the Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Google Scholar databases from 2001 to 2022. Studies that introduced, updated, or modified anticholinergic burden scales and measures were included in this review. Quality assessment considered various aspects, including scoring systems, tool development criteria, and specific requirements tailored for administrative data.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight anticholinergic burden scales and measures were identified in 14 countries. The Modified Anticholinergic Risk Scale excelled in the scoring system, while the German Anticholinergic Burden Scale stood out in the scale development process. However, significant variability was observed in methodologies, medication listings, and adaptability to administrative data. Quality assessment considers aspects such as potency, dose, exposure duration, longitudinal measurement, clinical interpretation, and compatibility with administrative data variables. The evaluation also considered tool development criteria including evidence for medication selection, panel expertise, relevance, updating methods, international applicability, validation, and clinical guidance.

CONCLUSION

This review emphasizes the importance of adaptable and robust tools that can work well with administrative data to ensure patient safety and better health outcomes, given the ongoing evolution of anticholinergic medications. The findings of this systematic review provide valuable insights for clinicians and researchers in selecting the most appropriate anticholinergic burden scale or measure according to their specific needs and data sources. This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (registration ID CRD42023423959).

What about the relevance of PIP of psychotropics in older psychiatric inpatients?

OBJECTIVE

In 2019, a regional survey of potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIP) of psychotropic drugs in elderly psychiatric inpatients was carried out highlighting their inappropriate use in this population. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical relevance - defined as the provision of an appropriate and necessary treatment, chosen from other alternatives as being the most likely to produce the expected results for a given patient - of these prescriptions considered inappropriate according to current established criteria.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

Patients aged over 75, or 64 to 75 and polypathological with at least one PIP of psychotropic drugs or drugs with a high anticholinergic burden, identified by an audit grid established on the basis of STOPP/STARTv2 criteria and the Laroche list on the prescription at 48h of hospitalization, were included. The weighing of the inappropriateness nature of the prescription (resistance to treatment, period of crisis, comorbidities…) was established by a pharmacist-psychiatrist pair on the entire computerized record of the current episode. The clinical relevance of the PIP and the overall prescription was rated as 0 (irrelevant), 1 (partially relevant) or 2 (relevant).

RESULTS

Thirty-four patients were included. One hundred and twenty-five PIP of psychotropic drugs were noted: 50.4% concerned benzodiazepines and non-benzodiazepines anxiolytics (BZD/Z), 25.6% neuroleptics (NL), 12% antidepressants (ATD) and 12% drugs with a high anticholinergic burden. On one hand, 49.2% of PIP of BZD/Z, 50% of PIP of NL and 20% of PIP of ATD were considered irrelevant. On the other hand, 49.2% of PIP of BZD/Z, 31.3% of PIP of NL and 13.3% of PIP of ATD were considered partially relevant. Furthermore, 1.6% of PIP of BZD/Z, 18.8% of PIP of NL and 66.7% of PIP of ATD were considered relevant. For PIPs of drugs with a high anticholinergic burden, 80% were deemed irrelevant, 13.3% partially relevant and 6.7% relevant. In all, of the 34 drug prescriptions studied, three (8.8%) were considered irrelevant, 11 (32.4%) partially relevant and 20 (58.8%) clinically relevant.

CONCLUSION

This study highlighted the clinical relevance of more than half the prescriptions considered inappropriate according to current PPI criteria in the elderly. It underlines the interest of a new PPI detection tool for elderly patients with psychiatric disorders.

Constipation-associated factors in outpatients with schizophrenia: A multicenter questionnaire survey

Constipation is a prevalent gastrointestinal disorder that affects people globally, decreasing their quality of life and life expectancy. Individuals with schizophrenia often suffer from constipation, which could be a result of the illness itself or the side effects of psychotropic medications. However, little research has been conducted on factors contributing to constipation in individuals with schizophrenia. To address this issue, we conducted a survey using self-administered questionnaires and medical records to identify factors associated with constipation in psychiatric outpatients. This study included 399 patients with schizophrenia, resulting in a high prevalence of constipation (43.4%). The analysis suggested that female gender, the doses of antiparkinsonian medications, and benzodiazepine sleeping pills may be associated with constipation.

Comparative analysis of anticholinergic burden scales to explain iatrogenic cognitive impairment in schizophrenia: results from the multicenter FACE-SZ cohort

Aim

The anticholinergic properties of medications are associated with poorer cognitive performance in schizophrenia. Numerous scales have been developed to assess anticholinergic burden and yet, there is no consensus indicating which anticholinergic burden scale is more relevant for patients with schizophrenia. We aimed to identify valid scales for estimating the risk of iatrogenic cognitive impairment in schizophrenia.

Methods

We identified 27 scales in a literature review. The responses to neuropsychological tests of 839 individuals with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder in the FACE-SZ database were collected between 2010 and 2021. We estimated the association between objective global cognitive performance and the 27 scales, the number of psychotropic drugs, and chlorpromazine and lorazepam equivalents in bivariable regressions in a cross-sectional design. We then adjusted the bivariable models with covariates: the predictors significantly associated with cognitive performance in multiple linear regressions were considered to have good concurrent validity to assess cognitive performance.

Results

Eight scales, the number of psychotropic drugs, and drug equivalents were significantly associated with cognitive impairment. The number of psychotropic drugs, the most convenient predictor to compute, was associated with worse executive function (Standardized β = -0.12, p = .004) and reasoning (Standardized β = -0.08, p = .037).

Conclusion

Anticholinergic burden, the number of psychotropic drugs, and drug equivalents were weakly associated with cognition, thus suggesting that cognitive impairment in schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder is explained by factors other than medication. The number of psychotropic drugs was the most parsimonious method to assess the risk of iatrogenic cognitive impairment.

Drugs with a negative impact on cognitive functions (Part 2): drug classes to consider while prescribing in CKD patients

There is growing evidence that chronic kidney disease (CKD) is an independent risk factor for cognitive impairment, especially due to vascular damage, blood-brain barrier disruption and uremic toxins. Given the presence of multiple comorbidities, the medication regimen of CKD patients often becomes very complex. Several medications such as psychotropic agents, drugs with anticholinergic properties, GABAergic drugs, opioids, corticosteroids, antibiotics and others have been linked to negative effects on cognition. These drugs are frequently included in the treatment regimen of CKD patients. The first review of this series described how CKD could represent a risk factor for adverse drug reactions affecting the central nervous system. This second review will describe some of the most common medications associated with cognitive impairment (in the general population and in CKD) and describe their effects.

Comparative analysis of anticholinergic burden scales to explain iatrogenic cognitive impairment and self-reported side effects in the euthymic phase of bipolar disorders: Results from the FACE-BD cohort

Bipolar disorders (BD) are characterized by cognitive impairment during the euthymic phase, to which treatments can contribute. The anticholinergic properties of medications, i.e., the ability of a treatment to inhibit cholinergic receptors, are associated with cognitive impairment in elderly patients and people with schizophrenia but this association has not been well characterized in individuals with remitted BD. Moreover, the validity of only one anticholinergic burden scale designed to assess the anticholinergic load of medications has been tested in BD. In a literature review, we identified 31 existing scales. We first measured the associations between 27 out of the 31 scales and objective cognitive impairment in bivariable regressions. We then adjusted the bivariable models with covariates: the scales significantly associated with cognitive impairment in bivariable and multiple logistic regressions were defined as having good concurrent validity to assess cognitive impairment. In a sample of 2,031 individuals with euthymic BD evaluated with a neuropsychological battery, two scales had good concurrent validity to assess cognitive impairment, whereas chlorpromazine equivalents, lorazepam equivalents, the number of antipsychotics, or the number of treatments had not. Finally, similar analyses with subjective anticholinergic side-effects as outcome variables reported 14 scales with good concurrent validity to assess self-reported peripheral anticholinergic side-effects and 13 to assess self-reported central anticholinergic side-effects. Thus, we identified valid scales to monitor the anticholinergic burden in BD, which may be useful in estimating iatrogenic cognitive impairment in studies investigating cognition in BD.

The Prognostic Utility of Anticholinergic Burden Scales: An Integrative Review and Gap Analysis

BACKGROUND

Anticholinergic drugs are commonly prescribed, especially to older adults. Anticholinergic burden scales (ABS) have been used to evaluate the cumulative effects of multiple anticholinergics. However, studies have shown inconsistent results regarding the association between anticholinergic burden assessed with ABS and adverse clinical outcomes such as cognitive impairment, functional decline, and frailty. This review aims to identify gaps in research on the development, validation, and evaluation of ABS, and provide recommendations for future studies.

METHOD

A comprehensive search of five databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsychInfo, CINAHL, CENTRAL) was conducted for relevant studies published from inception until 25 May 2023. Two reviewers screened for eligibility and assessed the quality of studies using different tools based on the study design and stage of the review framework. Research evidence was evaluated, and gaps were identified and grouped into evidence, knowledge, and methodological gaps, using evidence tables to summarize data.

RESULTS

Several evidence, knowledge, and methodological gaps in existing development, validation, and evaluation studies of ABS were identified. There is no universally accepted scale, and there is a need to define a clinically relevant threshold for measuring total anticholinergic burden. The current evidence has limitations, underrepresenting low- and middle-income countries, younger individuals, and populations with cognitive disabilities. The impact of anticholinergic burden on frailty is also understudied. Existing evaluation studies provide limited evidence on the benefit of reducing anticholinergic burden on clinical outcomes or the safety of anticholinergic deprescribing. There is also uncertainty regarding optimal reduction, clinically significant anticholinergic burden thresholds, and cost effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Future research recommendations to bridge knowledge gaps include developing a risk assessment framework, refining ABS scales, establishing a standardized consensus scale, and creating a longitudinal measure of cumulative anticholinergic risk. Strategies to minimize bias, consider frailty, and promote multidisciplinary and multinational collaborations are also necessary to improve patient outcomes.

Anticholinergic burden in middle and older age is associated with lower cognitive function, but not with brain atrophy

AIMS

The aim of this study is to estimate the association between anticholinergic burden, general cognitive ability and various measures of brain structural MRI in relatively healthy middle-aged and older individuals.

METHODS

In the UK Biobank participants with linked health-care records (n = 163,043, aged 40-71 at baseline), of whom about 17 000 had MRI data available, we calculated the total anticholinergic drug burden according to 15 different anticholinergic scales and due to different classes of drugs. We then used linear regression to explore the associations between anticholinergic burden and various measures of cognition and structural MRI, including general cognitive ability, 9 separate cognitive domains, brain atrophy, volumes of 68 cortical and 14 subcortical areas and fractional anisotropy and median diffusivity of 25 white-matter tracts.

RESULTS

Anticholinergic burden was modestly associated with poorer cognition across most anticholinergic scales and cognitive tests (7/9 FDR-adjusted significant associations, standardised betas (β) range: -0.039, -0.003). When using the anticholinergic scale exhibiting the strongest association with cognitive functions, anticholinergic burden due to only some classes of drugs exhibited negative associations with cognitive function, with β-lactam antibiotics (β = -0.035, PFDR < 0.001) and opioids (β = -0.026, PFDR < 0.001) exhibiting the strongest effects. Anticholinergic burden was not associated with any measure of brain macrostructure or microstructure (PFDR > 0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

Anticholinergic burden is weakly associated with poorer cognition, but there is little evidence for associations with brain structure. Future studies might focus more broadly on polypharmacy or more narrowly on distinct drug classes, instead of using purported anticholinergic action to study the effects of drugs on cognitive ability.

Effects of antipsychotic and anticholinergic medications on cognition in chronic patients with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Patients with psychosis frequently use a variety of psychotropic medicines, many of which have anticholinergic effects that can impair cognition. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate whether there is an association between medications used for neuropsychological disorders/symptoms and cognition in patients with schizophrenia, focusing on their anticholinergic load and antipsychotic doses.

STUDY DESIGN

A cross-sectional study between July 2019 and Mars 2020 at the Psychiatric Hospital of the Cross-Lebanon enrolled 120 inpatients diagnosed with schizophrenia. The total anticholinergic burden was calculated based on the Anticholinergic Drug Scale (ADS), and the chlorpromazine equivalent dose was calculated using the Andreasen method to assess the relative antipsychotic dose. Also, the objective cognition was assessed using the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS) tool.

STUDY RESULTS

A significantly higher BACS total score (r = -0.33, p < 0.001), higher verbal memory (r = -0.26, p = 0.004), higher working memory (r = -0.20, p = 0.03), higher motor speed (r = -0.36, p < 0.001), and higher attention and speed of information processing (r = -0.27, p = 0.003) were significantly associated with lower chlorpromazine equivalent dose. Higher ADS (Standardized Beta (SB) = -.22; p = .028), higher chlorpromazine equivalent dose (SB = -.30; p = .001), and taking mood stabilizer medications (SB = -.24; p = .004) were significantly associated with lower cognition.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms that the cognitive functions of chronic patients with schizophrenia may be affected by medications and their anticholinergic burden. More studies are needed to explain the role of cholinergic neurotransmission and general neurochemical mechanisms in the cognitive impairment of patients with schizophrenia.

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.

Evaluation of the association of anticholinergic burden and delirium in older hospitalised patients - A cohort study comparing 19 anticholinergic burden scales

AIMS

A recent review identified 19 anticholinergic burden scales (ABSs) but no study has yet compared the impact of all 19 ABSs on delirium. We evaluated whether a high anticholinergic burden as classified by each ABS is associated with incident delirium.

METHOD

We performed a retrospective cohort study in a Swiss tertiary teaching hospital using data from 2015-2018. Included were patients aged ≥65, hospitalised ≥48 hours with no stay >24 hours in intensive care. Delirium was defined twofold: (i) ICD-10 or CAM and (ii) ICD-10 or CAM or DOSS. Patients' cumulative anticholinergic burden score, calculated within 24 hours after admission, was classified using a binary (<3: low, ≥3: high burden) and a categorical approach (0: no, 0.5-3: low, ≥3: high burden). Association was analysed using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Over 25 000 patients (mean age 77.9 ± 7.6 years) were included. Of these, (i) 864 (3.3%) and (ii) 2770 (11.0%) developed delirium. Depending on the evaluated ABS, 4-63% of the patients were exposed to at least one anticholinergic drug. Out of 19 ABSs, (i) 14 and (ii) 16 showed a significant association with the outcomes. A patient with a high anticholinergic burden score had odds ratios (ORs) of 1.21 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03-1.42) to 2.63 (95% CI: 2.28-3.03) for incident delirium compared to those with low or no burden.

CONCLUSION

A high anticholinergic burden within 24 hours after admission was significantly associated with incident delirium. Although prospective studies need to confirm these results, discontinuing or substituting drugs with a score of ≥3 at admission might be a targeted intervention to reduce incident delirium.

The anticholinergic burden is not associated with cognitive impairments in patients treated by electroconvulsive therapy for treatment-resistant depression

BACKGROUND

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is the most effective non-pharmacological treatment for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) but can expose to transient cognitive impairments. Understanding factors underlying these cognitive side effects is important. This study investigated the impact of anticholinergic treatments on cognitive performances after ECT courses for TRD in naturalistic condition.

METHODS

Impact of anticholinergic burden (Anticholinergic Impregnation Scale, AIS) on cognitive changes (Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA) adjusted on depression level (Montgomery and Asberg Depression Scale, MADRS) was investigated in 42 patients who received an ECT course between 2017 and 2020 for unipolar or bipolar TRD. Collection of daily treatments given during ECT was carried out via the computerized traceability of treatments validated by nurses.

RESULTS

Among the 31 treatments identified with an anticholinergic score, which represent only 38% of total treatments, the three most frequently given treatments were Lorazepam (47%), Venlafaxine (36%) and Cyamemazine (26%). Delayed recall was the most frequently impaired cognitive function after ECT courses. Using logistic regression, we found no association between the anticholinergic burden and the decrease in cognitive scores after ECT courses, adjusted on MADRS score evolution (p > 0.1). Conversely, improvement in MADRS scores were correlated with improvement in attention MoCA subscores.

LIMITATIONS

This is a retrospective monocentric study with a moderate sample size using anticholinergic scales to calculate the anticholinergic burden without plasma dosage.

CONCLUSION

Anticholinergic treatments did not seem to explain ECT-related cognitive impairments. This warrants further large prospective investigations including different measures of anticholinergic burden.

Clinical Utility of Medication-Based Risk Scores to Reduce Polypharmacy and Potentially Avoidable Healthcare Utilization

The management of multiple chronic health conditions often requires patients to be exposed to polypharmacy to improve their health and enhance their quality of life. However, exposure to polypharmacy has been associated with an increased risk for adverse effects, drug-drug interactions, inappropriate prescribing, medication nonadherence, increased healthcare utilization such as emergency department visits and hospitalizations, and costs. Medication-based risk scores have been utilized to identify patients who may benefit from deprescribing interventions and reduce rates of inappropriate prescribing. These risk scores may also be utilized to prompt targeted discussions between patients and providers regarding medications or medication classes contributing to an individual’s risk for harm, eventually leading to the deprescribing of the offending medication(s). This opinion will describe existing medication-based risk scores in the literature, their utility in identifying patients at risk for specific adverse events, and how they may be incorporated in healthcare settings to reduce rates of potentially inappropriate polypharmacy and avoidable healthcare utilization and costs.

Association between anticholinergic burden and dementia in UK Biobank

Background

Previous studies on the relationship between anticholinergic drugs and dementia have reported heterogeneous results. This variability could be due to different anticholinergic scales and differential effects of distinct classes of drugs.

Methods

Using Cox proportional hazards models, we computed the association between annual anticholinergic burden (AChB) and the risk of dementia in UK Biobank with linked general practitioner prescription records between the years 2000 and 2015 (n = 171,775).

Results

AChB according to most anticholinergic scales (standardized odds ratio range: 1.027-1.125) and the slope of the AChB trajectory (hazard ratio = 1.094; 95% confidence interval: 1.068-1.119) were predictive of dementia. However, the association between AChB and dementia held only for some classes of drugs, especially antidepressants, antiepileptics, and antidiuretics.

Discussion

The heterogeneity in previous findings may partially be due to different effects for different classes of drugs. Future studies should establish differences in more detail and further examine the practicality of a general measure of AChB relating to the risk of dementia.

Development of a decision tree for the pharmacy-led consultation of elderly patients with haematological malignancies

INTRODUCTION

Elderly patients with haematological malignancies are a population at risk of iatrogenic for whom these activities could optimize therapeutic management. However, the limitation of human resources requires optimization of the process in order to improve the efficiency of pharmaceutical activities. The objective was to build a decision tree to optimize the pharmaceutical consultation in these population within a multidisciplinary team in haematology.

METHOD

Pharmaceutical consultations were proposed to elderly subjects with haematological malignancies followed up in a haematology day hospitalization at the University Hospital of Limoges. Risk factors for prescribing risky drugs in this population were determined by logistic regression models. A decision tree was constructed based on these results and by agreement between pharmacist, geriatrician and hematologist.

RESULTS

Female gender (aOR[CI95%] = 1.71 [1.14-2.57]), polypharmacy (aOR[CI95%] = 1.89 [1.14-3.13]), hyper-polypharmacy (aOR[CI95%] = 5.73 [3.03-10.84]) and moderate cholinergic load (aOR[CI95%] = 2.15 [1.04-4.45]) were risk factors for the prescription of inappropriate medicine. Female gender (aOR[CI95%] = 1.55 [1.02-2.35]) and hyper-polypharmacy (aOR[CI95%] = 6.19 [1-1.28]) were risk factors for prescribing anticholinergic drugs or anticoagulants; in contrast, frailty status was a protective factor for prescribing anticholinergics (aOR[CI95%] = 0.51 [0.33-0.81]). Prioritization of pharmaceutical consultations is based on frailty status, prescription of a target drug and polypharmacy.

DISCUSSION

Pharmaceutical consultations during the day hospitalization of elderly subjects with hematological diseases allow to propose therapeutic optimizations. The prioritization proposed in our study would increase the efficiency of pharmaceutical activities in order to improve quality and safety throughout the care pathway of these patients.

DOTA: Deep Learning Optimal Transport Approach to Advance Drug Repositioning for Alzheimer's Disease

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the leading cause of age-related dementia, affecting over 5 million people in the United States and incurring a substantial global healthcare cost. Unfortunately, current treatments are only palliative and do not cure AD. There is an urgent need to develop novel anti-AD therapies; however, drug discovery is a time-consuming, expensive, and high-risk process. Drug repositioning, on the other hand, is an attractive approach to identify drugs for AD treatment. Thus, we developed a novel deep learning method called DOTA (Drug repositioning approach using Optimal Transport for Alzheimer's disease) to repurpose effective FDA-approved drugs for AD. Specifically, DOTA consists of two major autoencoders: (1) a multi-modal autoencoder to integrate heterogeneous drug information and (2) a Wasserstein variational autoencoder to identify effective AD drugs. Using our approach, we predict that antipsychotic drugs with circadian effects, such as quetiapine, aripiprazole, risperidone, suvorexant, brexpiprazole, olanzapine, and trazadone, will have efficacious effects in AD patients. These drugs target important brain receptors involved in memory, learning, and cognition, including serotonin 5-HT2A, dopamine D2, and orexin receptors. In summary, DOTA repositions promising drugs that target important biological pathways and are predicted to improve patient cognition, circadian rhythms, and AD pathogenesis.

[Anticholinergic scales: Use in psychiatry and update of the anticholinergic impregnation scale]

Anticholinergic properties are well known to prescribers, notably in mental health, as a therapeutic strategy for i.e. extrapyramidal syndrome but also as a source of numerous adverse side effects. Herein, we propose a narrative literature review describing: (i) cholinergic pharmacology and anticholinergic properties; (ii) the importance of anticholinergic therapeutic properties in psychiatry; (iii) the existing anticholinergic drug scales and their usage limitations in Psychiatry and; last (iv) an update to the anticholinergic drug impregnation scale, designed for the French psychiatry practice. The anticholinergic side effects can appear both in the peripheral level (dry mouth, constipation, etc.) and in the central level (especially as cognitive deficits). Many of the so called « anticholinergic » drugs are in fact entirely or mostly antimuscarinic and act essentially as parasympathetic system antagonists. Overall, anticholinergic/antimuscarinic side effects are usually attributed to psychotropic medications: to certain antipsychotics, notably classical neuroleptics such as phenothiazine and also to tricyclic antidepressants. In practice, the impact of anticholinergic toxicity treatments is often highlighted due to their excessively prolonged use in patients on antipsychotics. Interestingly, these antipsychotic treatments are better known for their anticholinergic side effects, especially cognitive ones, with an early onset specially in elder patients and/or in the case of polymedication. In order to evaluate anticholinergic side effects, metrics known as anticholinergic burden scales were created in the last few decades. Nowadays, 13 different scales are documented and accepted by the international academic community, but only three of them are commonly used: the Anticholinergic Drug Scale (ADS), the Anticholinergic Risk Scale (ARS) and the Anticholinergic Burden Scale (ACB). All of them are based on a similar principle, consisting of grading treatments individually, and they are normally scored from 0 - no presence of side effects - to 3 - anticholinergic effects considered to be strong or very strong. Using these scales enables the calculation of the so-called "anticholinergic burden", which corresponds to the cumulative effect of using multiple medications with anticholinergic properties simultaneously. The application of anticholinergic scales to patients with psychiatric disorders has revealed that schizophrenic patients seem to be especially sensitive to anticholinergic cognitive side effects, while elder and depressed patients were more likely to show symptoms of dementia when exposed to higher anticholinergic burden. Unfortunately, these tools appear to have a low parallel reliability, and so they might induce large differences when assessing side effects predictability. In addition, the capacity of these scales to predict central adverse effects is limited due to the fact they poorly or do not differentiate, the ability of treatments to cross the blood-brain barrier. Finally, one last limitation on the validity of these scales is prescription posology is not accounted for side effects considered to be dose dependent. Recently, the MARANTE (Muscarinic Acetylcholine Receptor ANTagonist Exposure) scale has incorporated an anticholinergic burden weighting by posology. Nevertheless, this new model can be criticized, due to the limited number of medications included and due to testing a limited number of potency ranges and dosages for each treatment. Herein, we propose an update to the Anticholinergic Impregnation Scale, developed specifically for the French Psychiatry practice. The scale validation was based on an evaluation of the prescriptions correcting anticholinergic peripheral side effects (constipation, xerostomia and xeropthalmia). This indirect evaluation allowed us to show patients with an anticholinergic impregnation score higher than 5 received significantly more treatments for constipation and xerostomia. This strategy bypasses the bias of a cognitive evaluation in patients with severe mental health disorders. Moreover, the relevance of a tool developed specifically for French psychiatry is justified by the fact that some highly prescribed treatments for mental illness in France (cyamemazine and tropatemine) are strong anticholinergics, and also by the fact they are rarely included in the existing anticholinergic scales. This update of the original scale, published in 2017, includes information whether prescribed drugs cross the blood-brain barrier and thus makes possible a more accurate assessment when evaluating anticholinergic central side effects. Finally, the anticholinergic impregnation scale will soon be integrated into a prescription help software, which is currently being developed to take into consideration dose dependent adverse effects.

Psychotropics and COVID-19: An analysis of safety and prophylaxis

The use of psychotropics during the COVID-19 pandemic has raised two questions, in order of importance: first, what changes should be made to pharmacological treatments prescribed to mental health patients? Secondly, are there any positive side effects of these substances against SARS-CoV-2? Our aim was to analyze usage safety of psychotropics during COVID-19; therefore, herein, we have studied: (i) the risk of symptomatic complications of COVID-19 associated with the use of these drugs, notably central nervous system activity depression, QTc interval enlargement and infectious and thromboembolic complications; (ii) the risk of mistaking the iatrogenic impact of psychotropics with COVID-19 symptoms, causing diagnostic error. Moreover, we provided a summary of the different information available today for these risks, categorized by mental health disorder, for the following: schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorder, ADHD, sleep disorders and suicidal risk. The matter of psychoactive substance use during the pandemic is also analyzed in this paper, and guideline websites and publications for psychotropic treatments in the context of COVID-19 are referenced during the text, so that changes on those guidelines and eventual interaction between psychotropics and COVID-19 treatment medication can be reported and studied. Finally, we also provide a literature review of the latest known antiviral properties of psychotropics against SARS-CoV-2 as complementary information.

High anticholinergic burden at admission associated with in-hospital mortality in older patients: A comparison of 19 different anticholinergic burden scales

Although no gold standard exists to assess a patient's anticholinergic burden, a review identified 19 anticholinergic burden scales (ABSs). No study has yet evaluated whether a high anticholinergic burden measured with all 19 ABSs is associated with in‐hospital mortality and length of stay (LOS). We conducted a cohort study at a Swiss tertiary teaching hospital using patients' electronic health record data from 2015–2018. Included were patients aged ≥65 years, hospitalised ≥48 h without stays and >24 h in intensive care. Patients' cumulative anticholinergic burden score was classified using a binary (<3: low, ≥3: high) and categorical approach (0: no, 0.5–3: low, ≥3: high). In‐hospital mortality and LOS were analysed using multivariable logistic and linear regression, respectively. We included 27,092 patients (mean age 78.0 ± 7.5 years, median LOS 6 days). Of them, 913 died. Depending on the evaluated ABS, 1370 to 17,035 patients were exposed to anticholinergics. Patients with a high burden measured by all 19 ABSs were associated with a 1.32‐ to 3.03‐fold increase in in‐hospital mortality compared with those with no/low burden. We obtained similar results for LOS. To conclude, discontinuing drugs with anticholinergic properties (score ≥3) at admission might be a targeted intervention to decrease in‐hospital mortality and LOS.

Association between Anticholinergic Burden and Constipation: A Systematic Review

The association between anticholinergic burden and constipation is not well defined and documented; for this reason, a systematic review was carried out in five databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, and Scopus), including studies assessing the correlation between anticholinergic burden, and constipation between January 2006 and December 2020. Data extraction was conducted independently by two researchers. Abstracts and titles were reviewed to determine eligibility for review with eligible articles read in full. From 2507 identified articles, 11 were selected for this review: six cross-sectional studies, four retrospective cohort studies, and a post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial. Overall, nine studies reported at least one statistical association between anticholinergic burden and constipation, finding 13 positive results out of 24 association measurements. A total of 211,921 patients were studied. The association between constipation and anticholinergic burden could be demonstrated in studies including 207,795 patients. Most studies were not designed to find differences in constipation prevalence and did not adjust the results by confounding factors. Our findings suggest that a correlation between anticholinergic burden and constipation exists. Higher quality-evidence studies are needed, including analysis that considers confounding factors, such as other non-pharmacological causes of constipation.

Quality of anticholinergic burden scales and their impact on clinical outcomes: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Older people are at risk of anticholinergic side effects due to changes affecting drug elimination and higher sensitivity to drug's side effects. Anticholinergic burden scales (ABS) were developed to quantify the anticholinergic drug burden (ADB). We aim to identify all published ABS, to compare them systematically and to evaluate their associations with clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search in MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify all published ABS and a Web of Science citation (WoS) analysis to track validation studies implying clinical outcomes. Quality of the ABS was assessed using an adapted AGREE II tool. For the validation studies, we used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane tool Rob2.0. The validation studies were categorized into six evidence levels based on the propositions of the Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine with respect to their quality. At least two researchers independently performed screening and quality assessments.

RESULTS

Out of 1297 records, we identified 19 ABS and 104 validations studies. Despite differences in quality, all ABS were recommended for use. The anticholinergic cognitive burden (ACB) scale and the German anticholinergic burden scale (GABS) achieved the highest percentage in quality. Most ABS are validated, yet validation studies for newer scales are lacking. Only two studies compared eight ABS simultaneously. The four most investigated clinical outcomes delirium, cognition, mortality and falls showed contradicting results.

CONCLUSION

There is need for good quality validation studies comparing multiple scales to define the best scale and to conduct a meta-analysis for the assessment of their clinical impact.

Enhancing the role played by clinical pharmacists in psychiatric settings to better integrate clinical psychopharmacology into the decision-making process

The importance of clinical psychopharmacological knowledge for modern psychiatric care is both well-established and underdeveloped. Although psychiatric pharmacists are identified as experts in psychopharmacotherapy based on pharmacists' overall expertise in pharmacotherapy, in real-life health settings, such is not necessarily the case. As a matter of fact, (1) pharmacists' real expertise in pharmacotherapy is mainly seen as useful to patients (as part of therapeutic education), (2) pharmacists' practice methods are usually circumscribed to the framework of quality processes (e.g. comprehensive medication management) which are not particularly useful to clinicians who have a greater need for pharmacotherapeutic skills, (3) the difficulties in terms of collaboration between pharmacists and physicians are well-known. We describe here the implementation of an alternative system of pharmacotherapy counselling inspired by case by cases in which the remote expertise of pharmacists in psychopharmacology guided prescribers towards the implementation of recommendations from the literature. This shared decision-making process integrates both the clinical elements provided by the psychiatrist and the pharmacotherapeutic information provided by the clinical psychopharmacist, to promote evidence-based medicine (algorithmic data in recommendations) and tailor-made solutions (drug-drug and drug-disease interactions) for patients. In our experience, the success of such an initiative is likely to promote the development of clinical psychopharmacology in psychiatric settings. Importantly, within this framework, the pharmacovigilance unit and psychopharmacologist are useful resources to guide the decision-making process of the pharmacist-psychiatrist duo.

[Accountability of anti-cholinergic drugs in increase of psychotic episodes: A case of tropatepine overdose]

INTRODUCTION

Corrective treatments for some neurological side effects due to antipsychotic treatments can induce anticholinergic adverse effects. However, the risk of triggering or increasing psychotic symptoms induced by these drugs is unknown with only one case-report concerning the tropatepine. In addition, recommendations for the use of these drugs remain imprecise regarding the management of this type of adverse effect.

CASE REPORT

We report the case of a psychotic episode in an 18-year-old patient potentially acutised after an auto-intoxication with tropatepine.

CONCLUSION

At high doses, anticholinergic treatments, including tropatepine, might increase psychotic episodes. In addition, the available epidemiological data reveal an inappropriate and excessive prescription of these drugs. Their use and risks should be better known and need an update of the available recommendations.

Towards a pharmacochemical hypothesis of the prophylaxis of SARS-CoV-2 by psychoactive substances

An increasing body of evidence suggests a protective effect of some psychoactive substances against SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus type 2). Recent findings suggest that patients with psychiatric disorders are less affected by SARS-CoV-2 than their caregivers, which may seem surprising given some of the frequent risk factors for an unfavorable course of the disease (e.g., obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases). We propose here a mixed pharmacoepidemiological and pharmacochemical hypothesis to explain these findings. A number of psychotropic drugs exhibit activities against coronaviruses (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-1) and the Infectious Bronchitis Virus (IBV)) and have been put forward as potentially anti-SARS-CoV-2. These treatments include numerous mee-too drugs (chemically and pharmacologically linked to those which have demonstrated anti-SARS-CoV-2 efficacy) which are frequently prescribed in psychiatric settings. Taken alone or in polypharmacy, these drugs could have a prophylactic anti-SARS-CoV-2 effect, explaining the unexpectedly low proportion of patients with psychiatric disorders and COVID-19. Associated factors such as nicotine can also be considered in the context of a broad chemoprophylactic hypothesis in patients with psychiatric disorders taking different psychoactive substances.

Quality of anticholinergic burden scales and their impact on clinical outcomes: a systematic review

Purpose

Older people are at risk of anticholinergic side effects due to changes affecting drug elimination and higher sensitivity to drug’s side effects. Anticholinergic burden scales (ABS) were developed to quantify the anticholinergic drug burden (ADB). We aim to identify all published ABS, to compare them systematically and to evaluate their associations with clinical outcomes.

Methods

We conducted a literature search in MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify all published ABS and a Web of Science citation (WoS) analysis to track validation studies implying clinical outcomes. Quality of the ABS was assessed using an adapted AGREE II tool. For the validation studies, we used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane tool Rob2.0. The validation studies were categorized into six evidence levels based on the propositions of the Oxford Center for Evidence-Based Medicine with respect to their quality. At least two researchers independently performed screening and quality assessments.

Results

Out of 1297 records, we identified 19 ABS and 104 validations studies. Despite differences in quality, all ABS were recommended for use. The anticholinergic cognitive burden (ACB) scale and the German anticholinergic burden scale (GABS) achieved the highest percentage in quality. Most ABS are validated, yet validation studies for newer scales are lacking. Only two studies compared eight ABS simultaneously. The four most investigated clinical outcomes delirium, cognition, mortality and falls showed contradicting results.

Conclusion

There is need for good quality validation studies comparing multiple scales to define the best scale and to conduct a meta-analysis for the assessment of their clinical impact.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00228-020-02994-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

[Informations on psychotropics and their adaptations for patients suffering from mental disorders in France during the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic]

The 2019-20 coronavirus pandemic (SARS-CoV-2; severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) has dramatic consequences on populations in terms of morbidity and mortality and in social terms, the general confinement of almost half of the world's population being a situation unprecedented in history, which is difficult today to measure the impact at the individual and collective levels. More specifically, it affects people with various risk factors, which are more frequent in patients suffering from psychiatric disorders. Psychiatrists need to know: (i) how to identify, the risks associated with the prescription of psychotropic drugs and which can prove to be counterproductive in their association with COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019), (ii) how to assess in terms of benefit/risk ratio, the implication of any hasty and brutal modification on psychotropic drugs that can induce confusion for a differential diagnosis with the evolution of COVID-19. We carried out a review of the literature aimed at assessing the specific benefit/risk ratio of psychotropic treatments in patients suffering from COVID-19. Clinically, symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 (fever, cough, dyspnea, digestive signs) can be caused by various psychotropic drugs and require vigilance to avoid false negatives and false positives. In infected patients, psychotropic drugs should be used with caution, especially in the elderly, considering the pulmonary risk. Lithium and Clozapine, which are the reference drugs in bipolar disorder and resistant schizophrenia, warrant specific attention. For these two treatments the possibility of a reduction in the dosage - in case of minimal infectious signs and in a situation, which does not allow rapid control - should ideally be considered taking into account the clinical response (even biological; plasma concentrations) observed in the face of previous dose reductions. Tobacco is well identified for its effects as an inducer of CYP1A2 enzyme. In a COVID+ patient, the consequences of an abrupt cessation of smoking, particularly related with the appearance of respiratory symptoms (cough, dyspnea), must therefore be anticipated for patients receiving psychotropics metabolized by CYP1A2. Plasma concentrations of these drugs are expected to decrease and can be related to an increase risk of relapse. The symptomatic treatments used in COVID-19 have frequent interactions with the most used psychotropics. If there is no curative treatment for infection to SARS-CoV-2, the interactions of the various molecules currently tested with several classes of psychotropic drugs (antidepressants, antipsychotics) are important to consider because of the risk of changes in cardiac conduction. Specific knowledge on COVID-19 remains poor today, but we must recommend rigor in this context in the use of psychotropic drugs, to avoid adding, in patients suffering from psychiatric disorders, potentially vulnerable in the epidemic context, an iatrogenic risk or loss of efficiency.

Assessing Risks of Polypharmacy Involving Medications With Anticholinergic Properties

PURPOSE

Anticholinergic burden (ACB), the cumulative effect of anticholinergic medications, is associated with adverse outcomes in older people but is less studied in middle-aged populations. Numerous scales exist to quantify ACB. The aims of this study were to quantify ACB in a large cohort using the 10 most common anticholinergic scales, to assess the association of each scale with adverse outcomes, and to assess overlap in populations identified by each scale.

METHODS

We performed a longitudinal analysis of the UK Biobank community cohort (502,538 participants, baseline age: 37-73 years, median years of follow-up: 6.2). The ACB was calculated at baseline using 10 scales. Baseline data were linked to national mortality register records and hospital episode statistics. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE). Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, MACE, hospital admission for fall/fracture, and hospital admission with dementia/delirium. Cox proportional hazards models (hazard ratio [HR], 95% CI) quantified associations between ACB scales and outcomes adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic status, body mass index, smoking status, alcohol use, physical activity, and morbidity count.

RESULTS

Anticholinergic medication use varied from 8% to 17.6% depending on the scale used. For the primary outcome, ACB was significantly associated with all-cause mortality/MACE for each scale. The Anticholinergic Drug Scale was most strongly associated with mortality/MACE (HR = 1.12; 95% CI, 1.11-1.14 per 1-point increase in score). The ACB was significantly associated with all secondary outcomes. The Anticholinergic Effect on Cognition scale was most strongly associated with dementia/delirium (HR = 1.45; 95% CI, 1.3-1.61 per 1-point increase).

CONCLUSIONS

The ACB was associated with adverse outcomes in a middle- to older-aged population. Populations identified and effect size differed between scales. Scale choice influenced the population identified as potentially requiring reduction in ACB in clinical practice or intervention trials.

Anticholinergic Drugs and Oral Health-related Quality of Life in Patients with Schizophrenia: A Pilot Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to explore, in a sample population of people with schizophrenia (PWS), the role of the anticholinergic burden on the perception of oral health-related quality of life (OHrQoL) in France.

METHODS

A pilot study was performed between March 2014 and January 2016. PWS were recruited from a population in Côte d'Or department in France. Dental status was investigated using the Decayed, Missing, or Filled Teeth (DMFT) index, the Xerostomia Index (XI), and the Global Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI) for OHrQoL. The anticholinergic impregnation score was recorded using the anticholinergic impregnation scale (AIS).

RESULTS

A sample of 62 people was selected. The DMFT score was 16.5± 8.7, the XI score was 22.9±7.8, the GOHAI score was 43.0±8.8, and the AIS score was 3.1±2.8. In total, 169 drugs were prescribed to the people of our sample, and 114 different anticholinergic drugs were observed. The most frequently used anticholinergic drugs (51.40%), in the study had a low antimuscarinic potency (1 point according to AIS scale). The multiple linear regression model showed that the OHrQoL scores were significantly lower when the DMFT scores, XI score, and anticholinergic scores were high.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot study highlighted the potential role of the anticholinergic burden on the OHrQoL of PWS. A study with a validated specific scale for the OHrQoL and a standard anticholinergic burden scale should be conducted to clarify the role of anticholinergic drugs on the OHrQoL for PWS.

Anticholinergic Drugs in Geriatric Psychopharmacology

Drugs with anticholinergic action are widely prescribed in the elderly population due to their potential clinical benefits. However, these benefits are limited by adverse effects which may be serious in particular circumstances. This review presents different aspects of the use of anticholinergics in old age with a focus in psychogeriatric patients. We critically review published data on benefits and disadvantages of anticholinergics, which are often controversial. Prevalence, pathophysiology and measurement methods of the anticholinergic action of drugs are discussed. We also present the most important drawbacks resulting from its use, including effects on cognition in healthy and cognitively impaired people, in aged schizophrenia patients, emergence of delirium and psychiatric symptoms, influence in functionality, hospitalization, institutionalization and mortality, and the potential benefits and limitations of their discontinuation. Finally, we suggest practical recommendations for the safe use of anticholinergics in clinical conditions affecting elderly patients, such as dementia, schizophrenia and acute hallucinatory episodes, depression, anxiety, Parkinson's disease, cardiovascular conditions and urinary incontinence.

Anticholinergic burden and fractures: a protocol for a methodological systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Medications with anticholinergic activity are used in the treatment of many diseases common in old age, including depression, psychosis, Parkinson's disease, allergies, pain and urinary incontinence. A high anticholinergic burden (ACB) is considered a major risk factor for fractures in older adults but recent studies reported inconsistent results. These inconsistencies may partly be due to differences in methodological aspects. However, no systematic review so far has addressed this association and considered study methods. Thus, we aim to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies addressing the association of ACB with fractures and to provide a methodological appraisal of the included studies.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Science Citation Index, CENTRAL and grey literature using a strategy that combines the terms anticholinergic and fractures. We will hand search reference lists of articles. Two reviewers will independently screen all identified abstracts for eligibility and evaluate the risk of bias of the included studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale and RTI item bank. Discrepancies will be resolved by consensus or consultation with a third researcher. We will conduct a meta-analysis, either for the overall population or for specific and more homogeneous subgroups, if the number of studies retrieved and their heterogeneity allows it.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

No ethics approval will be sought, as no original data will be collected for this review. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018116737.

Development of a Brazilian anticholinergic activity drug scale

Objective

To develop a scale of anticholinergic activity drugs used in Brazil, to be applied in health care and pharmacoepidemiology research.

Methods

We performed a literature review on PubMed/MEDLINE^® to identify previously published scales of anticholinergic drugs. This scale started with anticholinergic drugs, and those with known anticholinergic activity as per the 4^th level, chemical-therapeutic subgroup, of the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification. We also included drugs with high anticholinergic activity, as described in a list of potentially inappropriate medications for use in older adults, according to the 2015 American Geriatrics Society Beers Criteria. Drugs listed in at least two anticholinergic scales were added. Then we verified which drugs in the previous steps were marketed in Brazil. We assigned a score of 1, 2 and 3, based on their anticholinergic action.

Results

A total of 273 anticholinergic drugs were identified, of which 125 were included in the scale. We identified 45 (36.0%) drugs with a score of 3, 13 (10.4%) with a score of 2, and 67 (53.6%) with a score of 1. Drugs for the nervous and respiratory systems were the most frequent in the scale. Eight drugs were not present in previous scales.

Conclusion

The methodology used for development of the Brazilian anticholinergic activity scale is simple, systematized, reproducible and easy to update. The scale allows evaluating the impact of anticholinergic burden on health outcomes, and can potentially contribute to pharmacoepidemiology research, leading to more accurate measurements of anticholinergic activity.

[Atropinic burden and anticholinergic drugs: Interest and application in clinical practice in the elderly]

Anticholinergic drugs (also called antimuscarinics or atropinics) increase the risk of falls, cognitive impairment and/or mortality in older patients. These drugs belong to the lists of potentially inappropriate medications in the elderly. The aim of this review was to present and discuss the different tools available to measure the atropinic risk in drug exposure of older patients. Several scales, developed from biological and/or clinical criteria, allow to classify anticholinergic drugs according to their atropinic potency and to assign to them an atropinic burden. Total atropinic burden of patient drug exposure can be calculated as the sum of atropinic score of each drug. Other tools include drug daily doses to better estimate the atropinic risk. These different methods are a precious help to decrease atropinic exposure in the elderly. Nevertheless, they have to be considered as upgradable and it is necessary to adapt them regularly according to the introduction of new drugs in clinical practice.