Impact of anticholinergic load of medications on the length of stay of cancer patients in hospice care

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.

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.

Clinical outcomes associated with anticholinergic burden in older hospitalized patients with advanced cancer: a single-center database study

PURPOSE

Although anticholinergic burden has been known to be associated with adverse outcomes in older adults, its clinical importance has been less studied in patients with advanced cancer. We aimed to assess clinical impacts of using anticholinergic medications in older patients with cancer.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective database study. This study included patients with stage IV solid cancer aged 65 years or older who were hospitalized in a hospitalist-operated medical unit of a tertiary hospital. We calculated anticholinergic cognitive burden (ACB) scores on admission and during hospitalization by reviewing all medications during hospital stays and collected the following data: demographic, medical history and clinical severity, occurrence of delirium, location of discharge, in-hospital mortality, and after discharge mortality data.

RESULTS

When we divided the patients into two groups based on the change in ACB during hospitalization, the in-hospital mortality rate, incidence of delirium, frequency of transfers to long-term care hospitals, and length of hospital stay were higher in the ACB-increased group than those in the non-increased group. Even after excluding patients with clinically detected delirium, increased ACB were associated with increased in-hospital mortality. Patients in the ACB-increased group showed higher mortality risk after discharge than those in the non-increased group based on the Cox proportional hazard model.

CONCLUSION

Increased ACB during hospitalization is a predictor of worsening clinical features and higher mortality in older patients with cancer. Further studies investigating causal relationship between an increased ACB and poor prognosis are warranted.

Duration of palliative care before death in international routine practice: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Early provision of palliative care, at least 3-4 months before death, can improve patient quality of life and reduce burdensome treatments and financial costs. However, there is wide variation in the duration of palliative care received before death reported across the research literature. This study aims to determine the duration of time from initiation of palliative care to death for adults receiving palliative care across the international literature.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis that was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018094718). Six databases were searched for articles published between Jan 1, 2013, and Dec 31, 2018: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Global Health, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library, as well undertaking citation list searches. Following PRISMA guidelines, articles were screened using inclusion (any study design reporting duration from initiation to death in adults palliative care services) and exclusion (paediatric/non-English language studies, trials influencing the timing of palliative care) criteria. Quality appraisal was completed using Hawker's criteria and the main outcome was the duration of palliative care (median/mean days from initiation to death).

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-nine studies from 23 countries were included, involving 11,996,479 patients. Prior to death, the median duration from initiation of palliative care to death was 18.9 days (IQR 0.1), weighted by the number of participants. Significant differences between duration were found by disease type (15 days for cancer vs 6 days for non-cancer conditions), service type (19 days for specialist palliative care unit, 20 days for community/home care, and 6 days for general hospital ward) and development index of countries (18.91 days for very high development vs 34 days for all other levels of development). Forty-three per cent of studies were rated as 'good' quality. Limitations include a preponderance of data from high-income countries, with unclear implications for low- and middle-income countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Duration of palliative care is much shorter than the 3-4 months of input by a multidisciplinary team necessary in order for the full benefits of palliative care to be realised. Furthermore, the findings highlight inequity in access across patient, service and country characteristics. We welcome more consistent terminology and methodology in the assessment of duration of palliative care from all countries, alongside increased reporting from less-developed settings, to inform benchmarking, service evaluation and quality improvement.

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.