A Novel Scale Linking Potency and Dosage to Estimate Anticholinergic Exposure in Older Adults: the Muscarinic Acetylcholinergic Receptor ANTagonist Exposure Scale

Development and Pilot Testing of an Algorithm-Based Approach to Anticholinergic Deprescribing in Older Patients

BACKGROUND

Adverse anticholinergic drug reactions are common, yet evidence on how to reduce exposure to anticholinergic activity and reliably measure successful deprescribing is still scant. This study proposes an algorithm-based approach to evaluate and reduce anticholinergic load, and reports the results of its pilot testing.

METHODS

Based on published evidence and expert opinion, a list of 85 anticholinergic drugs and 21 algorithms for reducing anticholinergic load, e.g., by recommending alternative drugs with lower risk, were developed. An accompanying test battery was assembled by focusing on instruments that sensitively reflect anticholinergic load and may be sensitive to depict changes (Neuropsychological Assessment Battery to measure memory and attention, validated assessments for constipation, urinary symptoms, and xerostomia, as well as blood biomarkers). The approach was pilot-tested in a geriatric rehabilitation unit, with clinician feedback as the primary outcome and characterization of anticholinergic symptoms as the secondary outcome. The intervention was delivered by a pharmacist and a clinical pharmacologist who used the algorithms to generate personalized recommendation letters.

RESULTS

We included a total of 20 patients, 13 with anticholinergic drugs and 7 without. Recommendations were made for 22 drugs in nine patients from the intervention group, of which seven letters (78%) were considered helpful and 8/22 (36%) anticholinergic drugs were discontinued, reducing anticholinergic load in seven patients. In contrast to patients without drug change, memory assessment in patients with reduced anticholinergic load improved significantly after 2 weeks (6 ± 3 vs. -1 ± 6 points).

CONCLUSIONS

The approach was well received by the participating physicians and might support standardized anticholinergic deprescribing.

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.

Development of the Swedish anticholinergic burden scale (Swe-ABS)

BACKGROUND

Drugs with anticholinergic properties are associated with cognitive adverse effects, especially in patients vulnerable to central muscarinic antagonism. A variety of drugs show weak, moderate or strong anticholinergic effects. Therefore, the cumulative anticholinergic burden should be considered in patients with cognitive impairment. This study aimed to develop a Swedish Anticholinergic Burden Scale (Swe-ABS) to be used in health care and research.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted in PubMed and Ovid Embase to identify previously published tools quantifying anticholinergic drug burden (i.e., exposure). Drugs and grading scores (0-3, no to high anticholinergic activity) were extracted from identified lists. Enteral and parenteral drugs authorized in Sweden were included. Drugs with conflicting scores in the existing lists were assessed by an expert group. Two drugs that were not previously assessed were also added to the evaluation process.

RESULTS

The systematic literature search identified the following nine anticholinergic burden scales: Anticholinergic Activity Scale, Anticholinergic Burden Classification, updated Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden scale, Anticholinergic Drug Scale, Anticholinergic Load Scale, Anticholinergic Risk Scale, updated Clinician-rated Anticholinergic Scale, German Anticholinergic Burden Scale and Korean Anticholinergic Burden Scale. A list of drugs with significant anticholinergic effects provided by The Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare was included in the process. The suggested Swe-ABS consists of 104 drugs scored as having weak, moderate or strong anticholinergic effects. Two hundred and fifty-six drugs were listed as having no anticholinergic effects based on evaluation in previous scales. In total, 62 drugs were assessed by the expert group.

CONCLUSIONS

Swe-ABS is a simplified method to quantify the anticholinergic burden and is easy to use in clinical practice. Publication of this scale might make clinicians more aware of drugs with anticholinergic properties and patients' total anticholinergic burden. Further research is needed to validate the Swe-ABS and evaluate anticholinergic exposure versus clinically significant outcomes.

Anticholinergic burden measures, symptoms, and fall-associated risk in older adults with polypharmacy: Development and validation of a prognostic model

BACKGROUND

Anticholinergic burden has been associated with adverse outcomes such as falls. To date, no gold standard measure has been identified to assess anticholinergic burden, and no conclusion has been drawn on which of the different measure algorithms best predicts falls in older patients from general practice. This study compared the ability of five measures of anticholinergic burden to predict falls. To account for patients' individual susceptibility to medications, the added predictive value of typical anticholinergic symptoms was further quantified in this context.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

To predict falls, models were developed and validated based on logistic regression models created using data from two German cluster-randomized controlled trials. The outcome was defined as "≥ 1 fall" vs. "no fall" within a 6-month follow-up period. Data from the RIME study (n = 1,197) were used in model development, and from PRIMUM (n = 502) for external validation. The models were developed step-wise in order to quantify the predictive ability of anticholinergic burden measures, and anticholinergic symptoms. In the development set, 1,015 patients had complete data and 188 (18.5%) experienced ≥ 1 fall within the 6-month follow-up period. The overall predictive value of the five anticholinergic measures was limited, with neither the employed anticholinergic variable (binary / count / burden), nor dose-dependent or dose-independent measures differing significantly in their ability to predict falls. The highest c-statistic was obtained using the German Anticholinergic Burden Score (0.73), whereby the optimism-corrected c-statistic was 0.71 after interval validation using bootstrapping and 0.63 in the external validation. Previous falls and dizziness / vertigo had the strongest prognostic value in all models.

CONCLUSIONS

The ability of anticholinergic burden measures to predict falls does not appear to differ significantly, and the added value they contribute to risk classification in fall-prediction models is limited. Previous falls and dizziness / vertigo contributed most to model performance.

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 High Postoperative Atropinic Burden is Associated with Postoperative Delirium in Elderly Patients with Hip Fracture: Results of the Prospective, Observational, ATROPAGE Trial

Background

Postoperative delirium frequently occurs in the elderly after hip fracture surgery and is associated with poor outcomes. Our aim was to identify a correlation between the atropinic burden (AB) due to drugs with clinical antimuscarinic effect and the occurrence of postoperative delirium.

Methods

We carried out a prospective, monocentric, observational study including 67 patients over 65 years of age who underwent hip fracture surgery. The addition of the anticholinergic weight of each drug was calculated at different time points to distinguish the prehospital, intra- and postoperative part of the AB. A multivariate analysis was carried out to identify the explanatory variables associated with postoperative delirium.

Results

Patients were 78 [71-86] years old. The time from admission to surgery was 12 [12-24] hours. The ADL and CIRS scores were 6 [5.5-6] and 6 [4-9], respectively. The total (prehospital plus intraoperative plus postoperative) AB was 5 [3-9]. The incidence of postoperative delirium was 54% (36/67). The demographic characteristics were comparable between delirium and no delirium groups. Univariate analysis showed statistically significant differences between no delirium and delirium groups concerning the number of prehospital atropinic drugs, prehospital AB, the number of postoperative atropinic drugs, postoperative AB, in-hospital AB and the MMSE calculated on postoperative day 5. Using multivariate analysis, postoperative AB, but not pre- and in-hospital ABs, was associated with postoperative delirium with an odds ratio of 1.84 (95% CI: 1.25-2.72; p = 0.002). A postoperative AB > 2 was associated with a postoperative delirium with an area under ROC curve of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.61-0.83; p = 0.0001).

Conclusion

Contrary to a prior exposure to atropinic drugs, a postoperative atropinic burden >2 was associated with postoperative delirium in elderly patients with hip fracture. Postoperative administration of (new) antimuscarinic drugs is a precipitating factor of delirium that could be avoided.

CRIDECO Anticholinergic Load Scale: An Updated Anticholinergic Burden Scale. Comparison with the ACB Scale in Spanish Individuals with Subjective Memory Complaints

The increase in life expectancy has also been accompanied by an increase in the use of medication to treat chronic diseases. Polypharmacy is associated with medication-related problems such as the increase in the anticholinergic burden. Older people are more susceptible to anticholinergic effects on the central nervous system and this, in turn, may be related to cognitive impairment. In this paper, we develop an updated anticholinergic burden scale, the CRIDECO Anticholinergic Load Scale (CALS) via a systematic review of the literature and compare it with the currently most used Anticholinergic Burden Scale (ACB). Our new scale includes 217 different drugs with anticholinergic properties, 129 more than the ACB. Given the effect that anticholinergic medications have on cognitive performance, we then used both scales to investigate the relationship between anticholinergic burden and cognitive impairment in adult Spanish subjects with subjective memory complaint. In our population, we observed an association between cognitive impairment and the anticholinergic burden when measured by the new CALS, but not when the ACB was applied. The use of a more comprehensive and upgraded scale will allow better discrimination of the risk associated with the use of anticholinergic medications on cognitive impairment. CALS can help raise awareness among clinicians of the problems associated with the use of medications, or combinations of them, with large anticholinergic effect, and promote a better personalized pharmacological approach for each patient.

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.

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.

Are Anticholinergic Symptoms a Risk Factor for Falls in Older General Practice Patients With Polypharmacy? Study Protocol for the Development and Validation of a Prognostic Model

Background: Cumulative anticholinergic exposure, also known as anticholinergic burden, is associated with a variety of adverse outcomes. However, studies show that anticholinergic effects tend to be underestimated by prescribers, and anticholinergics are the most frequently prescribed potentially inappropriate medication in older patients. The grading systems and drugs included in existing scales to quantify anticholinergic burden differ considerably and do not adequately account for patients’ susceptibility to medications. Furthermore, their ability to link anticholinergic burden with adverse outcomes such as falls is unclear. This study aims to develop a prognostic model that predicts falls in older general practice patients, to assess the performance of several anticholinergic burden scales, and to quantify the added predictive value of anticholinergic symptoms in this context.

Methods: Data from two cluster-randomized controlled trials investigating medication optimization in older general practice patients in Germany will be used. One trial (RIME, n = 1,197) will be used for the model development and the other trial (PRIMUM, n = 502) will be used to externally validate the model. A priori, candidate predictors will be selected based on a literature search, predictor availability, and clinical reasoning. Candidate predictors will include socio-demographics (e.g. age, sex), morbidity (e.g. single conditions), medication (e.g. polypharmacy, anticholinergic burden as defined by scales), and well-being (e.g. quality of life, physical function). A prognostic model including sociodemographic and lifestyle-related factors, as well as variables on morbidity, medication, health status, and well-being, will be developed, whereby the prognostic value of extending the model to include additional patient-reported symptoms will be also assessed. Logistic regression will be used for the binary outcome, which will be defined as “no falls” vs. “≥1 fall” within six months of baseline, as reported in patient interviews.

Discussion: As the ability of different anticholinergic burden scales to predict falls in older patients is unclear, this study may provide insights into their relative importance as well as into the overall contribution of anticholinergic symptoms and other patient characteristics. The results may support general practitioners in their clinical decision-making and in prescribing fewer medications with anticholinergic properties.

Association between anticholinergic burden and anticholinergic adverse outcomes in the elderly: Pharmacological basis of their predictive value for adverse outcomes

The use of anticholinergic drugs and other drugs with anticholinergic activity is highly prevalent in older people. Cumulative anticholinergic effects, known as anticholinergic burden, are associated with important peripheral and central adverse effects and outcomes. Several methods have been developed to quantify anticholinergic burden and to estimate the risk of adverse anticholinergic effects. Serum anticholinergic activity (SAA) and anticholinergic burden scoring systems are the most commonly used methods to predict the occurrence of important negative outcomes. These tools could guide clinicians in making more rational prescriptions to enhance patient safety, especially in older people. However, the literature has reported conflicting results about the predictive ability of these tools. The majority of these instruments ignore relevant pharmacologic aspects such as the doses used, differential muscarinic receptor subtype affinities, and blood-brain barrier permeability. To increase the clinical relevance of these tools, mechanistic and clinical pharmacology should collaborate. This narrative review describes the rational and pharmacological basis of anticholinergic burden tools and provides insight about their predictive value for adverse outcomes.

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.

Anticholinergic medications and risk of dementia in older adults: Where are we now?

INTRODUCTION

Anticholinergic medications are effective for a wide variety of indications, but are associated with significant central adverse effects, especially cognitive decline and dementia in older adults.

AREAS COVERED

We conducted a review of relevant literature in the past decade to address anticholinergic scales and evidence of anticholinergic-related dementia/cognitive decline in older adults. We discussed various anticholinergic scales used to classify anticholinergic medications. The review focused on the evidence from previous reviews and individual studies evaluating the anticholinergic-related risk of developing cognitive decline/dementia. This review also discussed clinical and methodological issues of studies along with recommendations for practice and research.

EXPERT OPINION

The review demonstrates moderate to strong risk of dementia with anticholinergic use in multiple studies involving older adults, irrespective of the study design, analytical approach, anticholinergic exposure and outcome definition. This risk is particularly significant with the cumulative burden and high-level anticholinergics. There also exists a dose-response relationship between anticholinergic use and increased risk for dementia. Therefore, anticholinergic agents can be considered as a modifiable risk factor for dementia and cognitive decline in older adults. Based on the current evidence, regular assessment and optimization of anticholinergic burden prior to prescribing these medications can minimize anticholinergic-related morbidity in older adults.

The Prognostic Value of Anticholinergic Burden Measures in Relation to Mortality in Older Individuals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Greater anticholinergic burden (ACB) increases the risk of mortality in older individuals, yet the strength of this association varies between studies. One possible explanation for this variance is the use of different approaches to quantify ACB. This systematic review (PROSPERO number CRD42019115918) assessed the prognostic utility of ACB-specific measures on mortality in older individuals.

Methods

Multiple cross-disciplinary databases were searched from 2006-2018. Observational studies assessing the association between ACB and mortality utilizing ≥1 ACB measure, involving persons aged ≥65 years were included. Screening and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers, with disagreements resolved by a third independent reviewer. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed using Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria. Meta-analysis was conducted where appropriate.

Results

Of 19,224 titles, 20 articles describing 18 cohort studies involving 498,056 older individuals were eligible. Eight anticholinergic-specific measures were identified; the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden Scale (ACBS, n=9) and Anticholinergic Risk scale (ARS, n=8) were most frequently reported. The evidence base was of poor quality, with moderate to high risk of bias. Meta-analysis showed increased mortality risk.

Conclusions

There was a modest association between some ACB measures and mortality, with most evidence derived from the ACBS. Studies comparing different measures within the same population were lacking. Analysis was limited by poor generalizability between studies, specifically regarding heterogeneity in methodology and reporting, as well as high risk of bias for most studies in the evidence base.

Association between anticholinergic drug burden and mortality in older people: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study is to conduct a systematic review of studies examining the association between anticholinergic burden and mortality in older individuals.

METHODS

A literature search was performed to identify relevant studies, using MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CENTRAL, from January 1990 to December 2018. We included studies of patients with a mean age of 65 years or older where the anticholinergic burden was estimated using anticholinergic risk assessment tools, and associations between anticholinergic load and mortality were investigated. The primary outcome of interest was the association between anticholinergic burden and mortality.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies were included. These were three cross-sectional, one nested case-control and 23 prospective or retrospective cohort studies. Most studies were determined to be of good quality. A total of 15 studies reported a positive correlation between anticholinergic burden and mortality, while the remaining 10 studies did not report a significant association. Eighteen out of 27 studies (80%) had a short follow-up period of 1 year or less. Among the five high-quality studies that met all the domains of the quality assessment criteria, four showed a positive association.

CONCLUSION

The variation in results could relate to the quality of the studies, follow-up period, anticholinergic risk assessment tool used and the study setting. Sixty-three percent (n = 17) of all the included studies, but almost all of the high-quality studies with an extended follow-up, reported a positive correlation between anticholinergic burden and mortality. Further high-quality research, using standardized measures and with adequate follow-up periods, is required to confirm the relationship between anticholinergic burden and mortality.

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.

Feasibility, acceptability and potential effectiveness of an information technology-based, pharmacist-led intervention to prevent an increase in anticholinergic and sedative load among older community-dwelling individuals

Background:

Anticholinergic/sedative medications are frequently used by older people, despite their negative impacts on cognitive and physical function. We explore the feasibility, acceptability and potential effectiveness of an innovative information technology (IT)-based intervention to prevent an increase in anticholinergic/sedative load in older people.

Methods:

This was a prospective study in 51 Dutch community pharmacies. Pharmacists used an IT-based tool to identify patients aged ⩾65 years, with existing high anticholinergic/sedative loads (drug burden index ⩾2) and a newly initiated anticholinergic/sedative medication. We determined the following. Feasibility: number of eligible patients identified. Acceptability: pharmacists’ satisfaction with the intervention, pharmacists’ time investment and patients’ willingness to reduce medication use. Potential effectiveness: number of recommendations, rate of agreement of general practitioners (GPs) with proposed recommendations and factors associated with agreement. To evaluate the latter, pharmacists conducted medication reviews and proposed recommendations to GPs for 5–10 patients selected by the IT-based tool.

Results:

We included 305 patients from 47 pharmacies. Feasibility: a mean of 17.0 (standard deviation, 8.8) patients were identified per pharmacy. Acceptability: 43 pharmacists (91.5%) were satisfied with the intervention. The median time investment per patient was 33 min (range 6.5–210). Of 35 patients, 30 (85.7%) were willing to reduce medication use. Potential effectiveness: pharmacists proposed 351 recommendations for 212 patients (69.5%). GPs agreed with recommendations for 108 patients (35.4%). Agreement to stop a medication was reached in 19.8% of recommendations for newly initiated medications (37 of 187) and for 15.2% of recommendations for existing medications (25 of 164). Agreement was more likely for recommendations on codeine [odds ratio (OR) 3.30; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14–9.57] or medications initiated by a specialist (OR 2.85; 95% CI 1.19–6.84) and less likely for pharmacies with lower level of collaboration with GPs (OR 0.15; 95% CI 0.02–0.97).

Conclusion:

This innovative IT-based intervention was feasible, acceptable and potentially effective. In one-third of patients an increase in anticholinergic/sedative load was prevented within reasonable time investment.

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.

Anticholinergic and sedative medication use in older community-dwelling people: A national population study in the Netherlands

Purpose

To identify the proportion of older adults with a high anticholinergic/sedative load and to identify patient subgroups based on type of central nervous system (CNS)‐active medication used.

Methods

A cross‐sectional study of a nationwide sample of patients with anticholinergic/sedative medications dispensed by 1779 community pharmacies in the Netherlands (90% of all community pharmacies) in November 2016 was conducted. Patients aged older than 65 years with a high anticholinergic/sedative load defined as having a drug burden index (DBI) greater than 1 were included. Proportion of patients with a high anticholinergic/sedative load was calculated by dividing the number of individuals in our study population by the 2.4 million older patients using medications dispensed from study pharmacies. Patient subgroups based on type of CNS‐active medications used were identified with latent class analysis.

Results

Overall, 8.7% (209 472 individuals) of older adults using medications had a DBI greater than 1. Latent class analysis identified four patient subgroups (classes) based on the following types of CNS‐active medications used: “combined psycholeptic/psychoanaleptic medication” (class 1, 57.9%), “analgesics” (class 2, 17.9%), “antiepileptic medication” (class 3, 17.8%), and “anti‐Parkinson medication” (class 4, 6.3%).

Conclusions

A large proportion of older adults in the Netherlands had a high anticholinergic/sedative load. Four distinct subgroups using specific CNS‐active medication were identified. Interventions aiming at reducing the overall anticholinergic/sedative load should be tailored to these subgroups.

[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.

Anticholinergic Exposure in a Cohort of Adults Aged 80 years and Over: Associations of the MARANTE Scale with Mortality and Hospitalization

Anticholinergics are frequently prescribed for older adults and can lead to adverse drug events. The novel MARANTE (Muscarinic Acetylcholinergic Receptor ANTagonist Exposure) scale measures the anticholinergic exposure by incorporating potency and dosages of each medication into its calculations. The aims were to assess prevalence and intensity of the anticholinergic exposure in a longitudinal cohort study of community-dwelling patients aged 80 years and over (n = 503) and to study the impact on mortality and hospitalization. Chronic medication use at baseline (November 2008-September 2009) was entered and codified with the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification. Time-to-event analysis until first hospitalization or death was performed at 18 months after inclusion, using Kaplan-Meier curves. Cox regression was performed to control for covariates. Mean age was 84 years (range 80-102), and mean number of medications was 5 (range 0-16). Prevalence of anticholinergic use was 31.8%, with 9% taking ≥2 anticholinergics (range 0-4). Main indications for anticholinergics were depression, pain and gastric dysfunction. Female gender, the level of multi-morbidity and the number of medications were associated with anticholinergic use. Mortality and hospitalization rate were 8.9% and 31.0%, respectively. After adjustment for the level of multi-morbidity and medication intake, multi-variable analysis showed increased risks of mortality (HR 2.3, 95% CI: 1.07-4.78) and hospitalization (HR 1.7; 95% CI: 1.13-2.59) in those with high anticholinergic exposure. The longitudinal study among Belgian community-dwelling oldest old demonstrated great anticholinergic exposure, which was associated with increased risk of mortality and hospitalization after 18 months.