Sedative load among long-term care facility residents with and without dementia: a cross-sectional study

Daytime Sleepiness Predicts Mortality in Nursing Home Residents: Findings from the Frailty in Residential Aged Care Sector Over Time (FIRST) Study

OBJECTIVES

Excessive daytime sleepiness is an increasingly frequent condition among older adults with comorbidities and living in nursing homes (NHs). This study investigated associations between participants' characteristics and excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS); the ability of the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) scores, EDS, and EDS severity levels to predict mortality at 12 months of follow-up; and the optimal cut-off for ESS to predict mortality among NH residents.

DESIGN

Prospective and cross-sectional analysis in a prospective study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Older adults permanently residing in 12 NHs from South Australia.

METHODS

Baseline characteristics including the ESS were collected and mortality at 12 months was assessed. Logistic regression analyzed associations between participants' characteristics and EDS (ESS >10). Kaplan-Meier cumulative survival estimates followed by log-rank and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models explored associations of ESS scores, EDS, and EDS severity levels with time-to-incident death. Receiver operator curve analysis assessed the best cut-off for ESS to predict mortality risk.

RESULTS

A total of 550 participants [mean (SD) age, 87.7 (7.2) years; 968 (50.9%) female]. Malnutrition [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13‒3.61], myocardial infarction (aOR 1.91, 95% CI 1.20‒3.03), heart failure (aOR 2.85, 95% CI 1.68‒4.83), Parkinson's disease (aOR 2.16, 95% CI 1.04‒4.47) and severe dementia (aOR 8.57, 95% CI 5.25‒14.0) were associated with EDS. Kaplan-Meier analyses showed reduced survival among participants with EDS (log-rank test: χ2 = 25.25, P < .001). EDS predicted increased mortality risk (HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.07-2.51, P = .023). ESS score of 10.5 (>10) was the best cut point predicting mortality risk (area under the curve = 0.62).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

EDS predicts mortality risk and is associated with age-related comorbidities in NH residents. Screening for EDS is a simple strategy to identify NH residents at higher risk of adverse outcomes, triggering an assessment for reversibility or conversations about end-of-life care.

Psychosis as a Treatment Target in Dementia: A Roadmap for Designing Interventions

Psychotic phenomena are among the most severe and disruptive symptoms of dementias and appear in 30% to 50% of patients. They are associated with a worse evolution and great suffering to patients and caregivers. Their current treatments obtain limited results and are not free of adverse effects, which are sometimes serious. It is therefore crucial to develop new treatments that can improve this situation. We review available data that could enlighten the future design of clinical trials with psychosis in dementia as main target. Along with an explanation of its prevalence in the common diseases that cause dementia, we present proposals aimed at improving the definition of symptoms and what should be included and excluded in clinical trials. A review of the available information regarding the neurobiological basis of symptoms, in terms of pathology, neuroimaging, and genomics, is provided as a guide towards new therapeutic targets. The correct evaluation of symptoms is transcendental in any therapeutic trial and these aspects are extensively addressed. Finally, a critical overview of existing pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments is made, revealing the unmet needs, in terms of efficacy and safety. Our work emphasizes the need for better definition and measurement of psychotic symptoms in dementias in order to highlight their differences with symptoms that appear in non-dementing diseases such as schizophrenia. Advances in neurobiology should illuminate the development of new, more effective and safer molecules for which this review can serve as a roadmap in the design of future clinical trials.

Quantifying Anticholinergic Burden and Sedative Load in Older Adults with Polypharmacy: A Systematic Review of Risk Scales and Models

BACKGROUND

Patients taking medication with high anticholinergic and sedative properties are at increased risk of experiencing poor cognitive and physical outcomes. Therefore, precise quantification of the cumulative burden of their drug regimen is advisable. There is no agreement regarding which scale to use to simultaneously quantify the burden associated with medications.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the strengths and limitations of available tools to quantify medication-related anticholinergic burden and sedative load in older adults. We discuss specific limitations and agreements between currently available scales and models and propose a comprehensive table combining drugs categorized as high, moderate, low, or no anticholinergic or sedative activity as excerpted from the selected studies.

METHODS

A targeted search was carried out using the National Library of Medicine through PubMed using medical subject heading terms and text words around the following search terms: (anticholinergic OR sedative) AND (load OR burden OR scale) for studies published between 1 January 1945 and 5 June 2021. In addition, the following databases were searched using the same terms: MEDLINE-EBSCO, APA PsycInfo, CINAHL Plus, Cochrane Library, Scopus, OAIster, OVID-MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Screening by titles was followed by an abstract and full-text review. After blind evaluation, agreement between reviewers was reached to establish drug characteristics and categories.

RESULTS

After 3163 articles were identified, 13 were included: 11 assigned risk scores to anticholinergic drugs and two to sedative drugs. Considerable variability between anticholinergic scales was observed; scales included between 27 and 548 drugs. We generated a comprehensive table combining the anticholinergic and sedative activities of drugs evaluated and proposed a categorization of these drugs based on available scientific and clinical evidence. Our table combines information about 642 drugs and categorizes 44, 25, 99, and 474 drugs as high, moderate, low, or no anticholinergic and sedative activity, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Variability and inconsistency exists among scales used to categorize drugs with anticholinergic or sedative burden. In this review, we provide a comprehensive table that proposes a new categorization of these drugs. A longitudinal study will be required to validate the new proposed anticholinergic and sedative burden catalog in an evidence-based manner.

Sedative Load in Community-Dwelling Older Adults with Mild-Moderate Alzheimer's Disease: Longitudinal Relationships with Adverse Events, Delirium and Falls

BACKGROUND

Older adults are frequently prescribed medications with sedative effects, which are associated with numerous adverse consequences. However, the prevalence and longitudinal associations of sedative medication use in community-dwelling older adults with mild-moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD) has not been explored to date.

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to assess the prevalence of sedative medication use in community-dwelling older adults with mild-moderate AD and examine the longitudinal association between sedative medication use and adverse events (AEs).

METHODS

The association between baseline sedative load (SL) and AEs, unscheduled healthcare utilisation, delirium and falls was assessed in older adults with mild-moderate AD over 18 months using secondary analysis of NILVAD trial data (collected from 2014 to 2016). Baseline medication use was assessed, and the SL model was applied to each participant's medication individually. The SL model classifies medications into one of four categories: (1) primary sedatives, (2) medications with a sedating component or prominent side effect, (3) medications with sedation as a potential adverse reaction and (4) all other medications with no known sedative side effects. Medications in group 1 were assigned an SL score of 2, those in group 2 were assigned an SL score of 1, and those in categories 3 and 4 an SL score of 0. SL scores for each medication participants were taking were summed and the total SL calculated as an arithmetic sum of individual medications score. A total SL score ≥ 3 was classed as high. Statistical analysis was conducted using Poisson regression and mixed-effects linear regression, with adjustment for important clinical covariates. We also assessed the impact of SL on dementia progression and cognitive decline.

RESULTS

Over half (55.7% [284/510]) of those with mild-moderate AD (age 72.8 ± 8.3 years, 61.9% female) were prescribed a regular medication with sedation as a primary effect or prominent side effect, with 22.2% (113/510) having a high SL (≥ 3). The most common medications contributing to SL were antidepressants, antipsychotics, anxiolytics and hypnotics. Over 18 months, increasing baseline SL was associated with incident AEs (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-1.19; p < 0.001), serious AEs (IRR 1.23; 95% CI 1.11-1.36; p < 0.001) and unscheduled general practitioner visits (IRR 1.23; 95% CI 1.13-1.34; p < 0.001). Further, increasing SL was associated with a greater likelihood of incident delirium (IRR 1.30; 95% CI 1.11-1.53; p < 0.001) and falls (IRR 1.20; 95% CI 1.03-1.42; p = 0.02). Associations persisted after robust covariate adjustment. SL was not associated with accelerated cognitive decline or AD progression.

CONCLUSIONS

In the current study, over half of older adults with mild-moderate AD were prescribed at least one drug with a sedative effect, and a significant minority had a high SL. Increasing baseline SL was associated with a greater likelihood of incident AEs, delirium and falls, highlighting the need for optimal prescribing in this potentially vulnerable cohort.

Insomnia symptoms among old people in nursing homes

BACKGROUND

Insomnia symptoms are common among old people, and hypnotics and sedative drugs are often prescribed in spite of small benefits. The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of insomnia symptoms and to analyze the association between insomnia symptoms, cognitive level, and prescription of hypnotics and sedatives among old people living in nursing homes.

METHODS

The study comprised 2,135 people living in nursing homes in the county of Västerbotten, Sweden. Data concerning hypnotic and sedative drugs, cognitive function, and prevalence of insomnia symptoms were collected, using the Multi-Dimensional Dementia Assessment Scale (MDDAS).

RESULTS

The three most common insomnia symptoms were "sleeps for long periods during the day," "interrupted night-time sleep," and "wakes up early in the morning" with 57.8%, 56.4%, and 48.0%, respectively, of the residents exhibiting the symptoms at least once a week. Different insomnia symptoms showed different association patterns with sex and age. Most insomnia symptoms were more common among people with cognitive impairment compared to those with no cognitive impairment and seemed to reach their peak prevalence in people with moderate to severe cognitive impairment, subsequently decreasing with further cognitive decline. Of the study population, 24.0% were prescribed hypnotics and sedatives. Prescriptions were more common among those without cognitive impairment, and among those exhibiting the symptom "difficulty initiating sleep."

CONCLUSIONS

Insomnia symptoms and prescription of hypnotics and sedatives are common among old people living in nursing homes. Considering the risk of adverse effects, it is important to regularly re-evaluate the need for these drugs.

Antipsychotic Use in Dementia

Antipsychotics are necessary for many older adults to treat major mental illnesses or reduce distressing psychiatric symptoms. Current controversy exists over the role of antipsychotics in the management of neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) in persons with dementia. Although some NPS may be appropriately and safely treated with antipsychotics, a fine balance must be achieved between the benefits of these medications, which are often modest, and adverse events, which may have significant consequences. Approximately one-third of all persons with dementia are currently prescribed antipsychotic medications, and there is significant variation in the use of antipsychotics across care settings and providers. Reducing the inappropriate or unnecessary use of antipsychotics among persons with dementia has been the focus of increasing attention owing to better awareness of the potential problems associated with these medications. Several approaches can be used to curb the use of antipsychotics among persons with dementia, including policy or regulatory changes, public reporting, and educational outreach. Recently, there has been encouraging evidence of a downward trend in the use of antipsychotics in many long-term care settings, although prescribing rates are still higher than what is likely optimal. Although reducing the inappropriate use of antipsychotics is a complex task, psychiatrists can play an important role via the provision of clinical care and research evidence, contributing to improved care of persons with dementia in Canada and elsewhere.

Eight-Year Trends in the Use of Opioids, Other Analgesics, and Psychotropic Medications Among Institutionalized Older People in Finland

IMPORTANCE

It is recognized that pain has been undertreated and psychotropic medications overused in institutional settings.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the change in prevalence of opioids, other analgesics, and psychotropic medications in institutional settings over an 8-year period.

SETTINGS

Institutional settings in Helsinki, Finland.

PARTICIPANTS

Older residents in nursing homes in 2003 (n = 1987) and 2011 (n = 1576) and in assisted living facilities in 2007 (n = 1377) and 2011 (n = 1586).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Comparable audits of medication use were conducted among institutionalized residents at 3 time points over 8 years. The prevalence of regular opioid, other analgesic, and psychotropic medications was compared across the 3 time periods.

RESULTS

Nursing home and assisted living facility residents were older; more disabled, had a higher prevalence of dementia, and greater comorbidity in the latter cohorts. The prevalence of regular opioid use was 11.8% and 22.9% in nursing homes in 2003 and 2011 (P < .001), and 8.6% and 17.3% in assisted living facilities in 2007 and 2011 (P < .001), respectively. The prevalence of regular acetaminophen and pregabalin/gabapentin increased and NSAIDs decreased in both nursing homes and assisted living facilities. The prevalence of regular antipsychotic use decreased from 42.6% to 27.8% in nursing homes (P < .001) but increased from 26.9% to 32.0% in assisted living facilities (P = .0017). The mean number of psychotropic medications (antipsychotics, antidepressants, anxiolytics, hypnotics) per resident decreased from 1.9 in 2003 to 1.0 in 2011 in nursing homes (P < .001) but increased from 1.1 to 1.2 in assisted living facilities (P = .040).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of opioid use in institutional settings has doubled during the past decade. The prevalence of psychotropic medications has decreased in nursing homes but increased in assisted living facilities. The increase in opioid use may reflect improved recognition and treatment of pain. However, initiatives are needed to monitor opioid-related adverse drug events and ensure appropriate use of psychotropic medications, particularly in assisted living facilities.

Managing agitation using nonpharmacological interventions for seniors with dementia

Approximately 36 million people have Alzheimer's disease worldwide, and many experience behavioral issues such as agitation. The purpose of this study was to investigate the perceptions of long-term care (LTC) staff regarding the current use of nonpharmacological interventions (NPIs) for reducing agitation in seniors with dementia and to identify facilitators and barriers that guide NPI implementation. Qualitative methods were used to gather data from interviews and focus groups. A total of 44 staff from 5 LTC facilities participated. Findings showed that both medications and NPIs are used for the management of agitation. The use of NPIs was facilitated by consistency in staffing, and the ability of all the staff members to implement them. Common barriers to NPI use included the perceived lack of time, low staff-to-resident ratios, and the unpredictable and short-lasting effectiveness of NPIs. This study offers insight into perceived factors that influence implementation of NPIs and the perceived effectiveness of NPIs.

Sedative load among community-dwelling people aged 75 years and older: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Drugs with sedative properties are among the most widely used drugs in community-dwelling older people. Use of sedative drugs has been associated with falls and fractures, cognitive and memory impairment and impaired physical function among older people. The sedative load model has been developed to quantify the cumulative effect of taking multiple drugs with sedative properties.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to investigate factors associated with sedative load among community-dwelling older people, using data collected as part of the Finnish Geriatric Multidisciplinary Strategy for the Good Care of the Elderly (GeMS) study.

METHODS

The GeMS study was a randomized, comparative study that evaluated a model for geriatric assessment, care and rehabilitation using a study sample of 1000 persons aged≥75 years who were living in Kuopio, Finland. Of these, 700 people consented to participate and were community-dwelling. Demographic, diagnostic and drug use data (both regular and when-required drugs) were elicited during nurse interviews. For the current analysis, sedative load was computed using a previously published model, in which drugs taken on a regular and when-required basis were classified into one of four groups according to their sedative potential. Group 1 included primary sedatives (sedative rating 2) and group 2 included drugs with sedation as a prominent side effect (sedative rating 1). Each participant's sedative load was calculated by summing the sedative ratings of group 1 and 2 drugs. Logistic regression models were used to investigate factors associated with sedative load.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine percent of participants (n=205) had a sedative load of ≥1 (i.e. used one or more drugs with sedative properties), and 22% (n=158) had a sedative load of ≥2 (i.e. used either one primary sedative or two drugs with sedation as a prominent adverse effect or preparations with a sedating component) when considering regularly used drugs. A sedative load of ≥2 that related to regularly used drugs was associated with female sex (odds ratio [OR] 1.65; 95% CI 1.02, 2.67), poor self-perceived health (OR 2.06; 95% CI 1.25, 3.38), impaired instrumental activities of daily living [IADL] (OR 1.89; 95% CI 1.18, 3.01) and often feeling lonely (OR 4.72; 95% CI 2.15, 10.40). The same factors remained significantly associated with a sedative load of ≥2 after drugs used on a when-required basis were included in the analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

The advantages of the sedative load model were that it included drugs with sedative properties prescribed for somatic diseases, described cumulative exposure to drugs that exert sedative effects through multiple mechanisms in the CNS, and incorporated a sedative rating for each drug. In an older population, female sex, impaired IADL, poor self-perceived health, and loneliness were associated with higher sedative load. Clinicians should remain cognizant of these factors when reviewing drug regimens and targeting interventions to optimize sedative use.

Antipsychotic-induced somnolence in mothers with schizophrenia

Although it is known that many antipsychotic drugs, at the doses prescribed for schizophrenia, are sedative and cause daytime drowsiness, the effect of potentially diminished vigilance on parenting parameters has not been studied. The aim of this paper is to advise clinicians about sedative load in mothers who are prescribed antipsychotic medication. A Medline search was conducted into the sedative effects of antipsychotics, with the following search terms: sleep; sedation; somnolence; wakefulness; antipsychotics; schizophrenia, parenting, maternal behavior, and custody. The results showed that antipsychotic drugs differ in their propensity to induce sedation and do so via their effects on a variety of neurotransmitter systems. It is important to note that mothers with schizophrenia risk losing custody of their infants if they are perceived as potentially neglectful because of excessive daytime sleepiness. Clinicians must choose antipsychotic medications carefully and monitor for sedative effects whenever the patient has important responsibilities that require the maintenance of vigilance.

Sedative load of medications prescribed for older people with dementia in care homes

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to determine the sedative load and use of sedative and psychotropic medications among older people with dementia living in (residential) care homes.

METHODS

Medication data were collected at baseline and at two further time-points for eligible residents of six care homes participating in the EVIDEM-End Of Life (EOL) study for whom medication administration records were available. Regular medications were classified using the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification system and individual sedative loads were calculated using a previously published model.

RESULTS

At baseline, medication administration records were reviewed for 115 residents; medication records were reviewed for 112 and 105 residents at time-points 2 and 3 respectively. Approximately one-third of residents were not taking any medications with sedative properties at each time-point, while a significant proportion of residents had a low sedative load score of 1 or 2 (54.8%, 59.0% and 57.1% at baseline and time-points 2 and 3 respectively). More than 10% of residents had a high sedative load score (≥ 3) at baseline (12.2%), and this increased to 14.3% at time-points 2 and 3. Approximately two-thirds of residents (66.9%) regularly used one or more psychotropic medication(s). Antidepressants, predominantly selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (SSRIs), were most frequently used, while antipsychotics, hypnotics and anxiolytics were less routinely administered. The prevalence of antipsychotic use among residents was 19.0%, lower than has been previously reported for nursing home residents. Throughout the duration of the study, administration of medications recognised as having prominent sedative adverse effects and/or containing sedative components outweighed the regular use of primary sedatives.

CONCLUSIONS

Sedative load scores were similar throughout the study period for residents with dementia in each of the care homes. Scores were lower than previously reported in studies conducted in long-term care wards which have on-site clinical support. Nevertheless, strategies to optimise drug therapy for care home residents with dementia which rely on clinicians external to the care home for support and medication review are required.

Concomitant use of SSRIs, NSAIDs/aspirin and gastroprotective drugs among residents of long-term care facilities: a medical record review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Concomitant use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) [including aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid)] may potentiate the likelihood of upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage (UGIH). The objectives of this study were to determine the prevalence and factors associated with concomitant SSRI/NSAID use among residents of long-term care facilities, and to investigate the use of gastroprotective drugs among concomitant SSRI/NSAID users.

METHODS

The study sample comprised 1087 out of 1444 residents of all 53 long-term care wards in Helsinki, Finland, in September 2003. Data were extracted from residents' medication charts and medical records by trained nurses. Medication, diagnostic and mortality data were available for 1004 residents.

RESULTS

Among the 1004 residents (mean ± SD age 81.3 ± 10.9 years), 28% used an SSRI, 38% used an NSAID and 24% used a gastroprotective drug. Thirteen percent of residents were concomitant users of SSRIs/NSAIDs. Concomitant use was associated with diabetes mellitus (p < 0.001), previous stroke (p < 0.001) and a higher degree of co-morbidity (p < 0.001). Gastroprotective drugs were used by 27% of concomitant users of SSRIs/NSAIDs compared with 37%, 20% and 22% of SSRI users, NSAID users and non-users of SSRIs/NSAIDs, respectively. One-year all-cause mortality was similar among all groups.

CONCLUSION

The long-term facility residents in this study sample were frequently exposed to drug-drug interactions that potentiate the risk of UGIH. Only about one-quarter of concomitant users of SSRIs/NSAIDs were prescribed a gastroprotective drug. Further initiatives are needed to optimize the use of SSRIs, NSAIDs and gastroprotective drugs.

Second-generation antipsychotics in dementia: beyond safety concerns. A clinical, systematic review of efficacy data from randomised controlled trials

RATIONALE

Antipsychotic drugs are widely used as a first-line pharmacological approach to treat dementia-related psychiatric symptoms. However, in this population of patients, such drugs have been associated with severe safety concerns. Hence, the aim of this review is to asses systematically the efficacy of second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) in treating dementia-related neuropsychiatric symptoms in order to establish if the potential clinical benefits of such treatment outweigh the hypothesised risks related to pharmacological intervention.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO were searched (from 1980 to June 22, 2010) using terms for included drugs (aripiprazole, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, ziprasidone, SGAs) and indications (elderly, dementia, Alzheimer's disease). Electronic database search were supplemented with hand search of references lists of electronically identified articles. Peer-reviewed, randomised, controlled trials published in English and investigating the efficacy of SGAs in patients with different forms of dementia were included in the review process. Information was drawn from the 30 articles that met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Nearly all reviewed studies suffer from methodological limitations too severe to draw definitive conclusions that may inform the decision-making process. Moreover, studies conducted with similar methodological design show conflicting efficacy results.

CONCLUSIONS

Because of their undemonstrated effectiveness, SGAs should be avoided in patients with dementia complicated by psychotic and/or behavioural symptoms. Hence, further researches are urgently needed to identify useful pharmacological strategies that can be used to improve the clinical condition of such patients and to reduce burden to caregivers when behavioural interventions are ineffective.

Anticholinergic drug use and mortality among residents of long-term care facilities: a prospective cohort study

Few studies have investigated the possible association between use of anticholinergic drugs and mortality. The objectives of this study were to investigate the prevalence and determinants of anticholinergic drug use and the possible association between anticholinergic drug use and mortality. Data were obtained from 53 long-term care wards in Helsinki, Finland, in 2003. Medication, diagnostic, and mortality data were available for 1004 residents. Each resident's anticholinergic load was calculated using the Anticholinergic Risk Scale (ARS). Cox proportional hazards models were used to investigate the risk of death among users with a mild anticholinergic load (ARS score 1-2) and high load (ARS score ≥3) compared with nonusers of anticholinergic drugs. Age, sex, and nutritional status were used as covariates. Among the 1004 residents, 455 (45%) were nonusers of anticholinergic drugs, 363 (36%) had a mild anticholinergic load, and 186 (19%) had a high anticholinergic load. One-year all-cause mortality rates were 28%, 29%, and 27%, respectively. Higher ARS scores were not associated with mortality (ARS score 1-2: hazard ratio 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.41; ARS score ≥3: hazard ratio 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-1.46). Anticholinergic drug use was common; however, high ARS scores were not associated with mortality. Further research is needed using alternative models and among different resident populations.