Anticholinergic and Sedative Drug Burden and Functional Recovery after Cerebrovascular Accident: A Retrospective Descriptive Study

The Drug Burden Index Is Associated With Measures of Cognitive Function Among Older Adults in the Health, Aging, and Body Composition Study

BACKGROUND

Anticholinergic and sedative medications affect cognition among older adults. The Drug Burden Index (DBI) is a validated measure of exposure to these medications, with higher DBI scores indicating higher drug burden. This ancillary analysis investigated the association between DBI and cognition assessed by the Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MS) and the Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST).

METHODS

The Health, Aging, and Body Composition Study was a prospective study of community-dwelling adults aged 70-79 years at enrollment. Using data from years 1, 5, and 10, DBI was calculated using medication data per participant. Linear mixed modeling was used to assess cross-sectional and longitudinal effects of DBI on 3MS and DSST. Adjusted models included biological sex, race, education level, APOE status, and death. Sensitivity analyses included testing the strength of the associations for each year and testing attrition due to death as a possible confounding factor via Cox-Proportional Hazard models.

RESULTS

After adjustment, DBI was inversely associated with 3MS and DSST scores. These associations became stronger in each subsequent year. Neither DBI at year 1 nor within-person change in DBI were predictive of longitudinal declines in either cognitive measure. Sensitivity analyses indicated that DBI, 3MS, and DSST were associated with a greater risk of attrition due to death.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that in years when older adults had a higher DBI scores, they had significantly lower global cognition and slower processing speed. These findings further substantiate the DBI as a useful pharmacological tool for assessing the effect of medication exposure.

Association of the Drug Burden Index (DBI) exposure with outcomes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The Drug Burden Index (DBI) measures an individual's total exposure to anticholinergic and sedative medications. This systematic review aimed to investigate the association of the DBI with clinical and prescribing outcomes in observational pharmaco-epidemiological studies, and the effect of DBI exposure on functional outcomes in pre-clinical models.

METHODS

A systematic search of nine electronic databases, citation indexes and gray literature was performed (April 1, 2007-December 31, 2022). Studies that reported primary data on the association of the DBI with clinical or prescribing outcomes conducted in any setting in humans aged ≥18 years or animals were included. Quality assessment was performed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools and the Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory animal Experimentation risk of bias tool.

RESULTS

Of 2382 studies screened, 70 met the inclusion criteria (65 in humans, five in animals). In humans, outcomes reported included function (n = 56), cognition (n = 20), falls (n = 14), frailty (n = 7), mortality (n = 9), quality of life (n = 8), hospitalization (n = 7), length of stay (n = 5), readmission (n = 1), other clinical outcomes (n = 15) and prescribing outcomes (n = 2). A higher DBI was significantly associated with increased falls (11/14, 71%), poorer function (31/56, 55%), and cognition (11/20, 55%) related outcomes. Narrative synthesis was used due to significant heterogeneity in the study population, setting, study type, definition of DBI, and outcome measures. Results could not be pooled due to heterogeneity. In animals, outcomes reported included function (n = 18), frailty (n = 2), and mortality (n = 1). In pre-clinical studies, a higher DBI caused poorer function and frailty.

CONCLUSIONS

A higher DBI may be associated with an increased risk of falls and decreased function and cognition. Higher DBI was inconsistently associated with increased mortality, length of stay, frailty, hospitalization or reduced quality of life. Human observational findings with respect to functional outcomes are supported by preclinical interventional studies. The DBI may be used as a tool to identify older adults at higher risk of harm.

Stroke Recovery Is a Journey: Prediction and Potentials of Motor Recovery after a Stroke from a Practical Perspective

Stroke recovery is a journey. Stroke survivors can face many consequences that may last the rest of their lives. Assessment of initial impairments allows reasonable prediction of biological spontaneous recovery at 3 to 6 months for a majority of survivors. In real-world clinical practice, stroke survivors continue to improve their motor function beyond the spontaneous recovery period, but management plans for maximal recovery are not well understood. A model within the international classification of functioning (ICF) theoretical framework is proposed to systematically identify opportunities and potential barriers to maximize and realize the potentials of functional recovery from the acute to chronic stages and to maintain their function in the chronic stages. Health conditions of individuals, medical and neurological complications can be optimized under the care of specialized physicians. This permits stroke survivors to participate in various therapeutic interventions. Sufficient doses of appropriate interventions at the right time is critical for stroke motor rehabilitation. It is important to highlight that combining interventions is likely to yield better clinical outcomes. Caregivers, including family members, can assist and facilitate targeted therapeutic exercises for these individuals and can help stroke survivors comply with medical plans (medications, visits), and provide emotional support. With health optimization, comprehensive rehabilitation, support from family and caregivers and a commitment to a healthy lifestyle, many stroke survivors can overcome barriers and achieve potentials of maximum recovery and maintain their motor function in chronic stages. This ICF recovery model is likely to provide a guidance through the journey to best achieve stroke recovery potentials.

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.

Rehabilitation nutrition for individuals with frailty, disability, sarcopenic dysphagia, or sarcopenic respiratory disability

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We describe the recent advances in rehabilitation nutrition, which is especially important for disabled or frail older individuals.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent evidence pertaining to rehabilitation nutrition conducted in rehabilitation wards and acute care hospitals has been accumulating. The combination of rehabilitation nutrition and rehabilitation pharmacotherapy is important for eliciting higher functions. The 2020 update of the clinical practice guidelines for rehabilitation nutrition provides a weak recommendation for enhanced nutritional care for patients with cerebrovascular disease, hip fracture, cancer, or acute illness who are undergoing rehabilitation. Rehabilitation nutritional care process and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health-Dietetics are used to implement high-quality rehabilitation nutrition. Aggressive nutrition therapy incorporates the daily energy expenditure plus daily energy accumulation to increase body weight and muscle mass. Preventing and treating sarcopenic dysphagia should include iatrogenic sarcopenia prevention and aggressive nutrition therapy. The diagnosis criteria for respiratory sarcopenia and sarcopenic respiratory disability have been established.

SUMMARY

The International Association of Rehabilitation Nutrition and Total Nutrition Therapy Rehabilitation program may contribute to international expansion of rehabilitation nutrition. Improving evidence-practice gaps in rehabilitation nutrition and increasing national health insurance coverage of aggressive nutrition therapy and rehabilitation nutrition teams are warranted.