Anticholinergic drug burden tools/scales and adverse outcomes in different clinical settings: a systematic review of reviews

Background: Cumulative anticholinergic exposure (anticholinergic burden) has been linked to a number of adverse outcomes. To conduct research in this area, an agreed approach to describing anticholinergic burden is needed. Objective: This review set out to identify anticholinergic burden scales, to describe their rationale, the settings in which they have been used and the outcomes associated with them. Methods: A search was performed using the Healthcare Databases Advanced Search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL and PsycINFO from inception to October 2016 to identify systematic reviews describing anticholinergic burden scales or tools. Abstracts and titles were reviewed to determine eligibility for review with eligible articles read in full. The final selection of reviews was critically appraised using the ROBIS tool and pre-defined data were extracted; the primary data of interest were the anticholinergic burden scales or tools used. Results: Five reviews were identified for analysis containing a total of 62 original articles. Eighteen anticholinergic burden scales or tools were identified with variation in their derivation, content and how they quantified the anticholinergic activity of medications. The Drug Burden Index was the most commonly used scale or tool in community and database studies, while the Anticholinergic Risk Scale was used more frequently in care homes and hospital settings. The association between anticholinergic burden and clinical outcomes varied by index and study. Falls and hospitalisation were consistently found to be associated with anticholinergic burden. Mortality, delirium, physical function and cognition were not consistently associated. Conclusions: Anticholinergic burden scales vary in their rationale, use and association with outcomes. This review showed that the concept of anticholinergic burden has been variably defined and inconsistently described using a number of indices with different content and scoring. The association between adverse outcomes and anticholinergic burden varies between scores and has not been conclusively established

Group A Streptococcus Secreted Esterase Hydrolyzes Platelet-Activating Factor to Impede Neutrophil Recruitment and Facilitate Innate Immune Evasion

The innate immune system is the first line of host defense against invading organisms. Thus, pathogens have developed virulence mechanisms to evade the innate immune system. Here, we report a novel means for inhibition of neutrophil recruitment by Group A Streptococcus (GAS). Deletion of the secreted esterase gene (designated sse) in M1T1 GAS strains with (MGAS5005) and without (MGAS2221) a null covS mutation enhances neutrophil ingress to infection sites in the skin of mice. In trans expression of SsE in MGAS2221 reduces neutrophil recruitment and enhances skin invasion. The sse deletion mutant of MGAS5005 (ΔsseMGAS5005) is more efficiently cleared from skin than the parent strain. SsE hydrolyzes the sn-2 ester bond of platelet-activating factor (PAF), converting biologically active PAF into inactive lyso-PAF. KM and kcat of SsE for hydrolysis of 2-thio-PAF were similar to those of the human plasma PAF acetylhydrolase. Treatment of PAF with SsE abolishes the capacity of PAF to induce activation and chemotaxis of human neutrophils. More importantly, PAF receptor-deficient mice significantly reduce neutrophil infiltration to the site of ΔsseMGAS5005 infection. These findings identify the first secreted PAF acetylhydrolase of bacterial pathogens and support a novel GAS evasion mechanism that reduces phagocyte recruitment to sites of infection by inactivating PAF, providing a new paradigm for bacterial evasion of neutrophil responses

Development and pilot testing of the revised Patients’ Attitudes Towards Deprescribing questionnaire for people with cognitive impairment

Objectives: 1) To develop a version of the revised Patients’ Attitude Towards Deprescribing (rPATD) questionnaire for people with mild cognitive impairment and mild-to-moderate dementia (rPATDcog) and 2) capture the beliefs and attitudes of this population and their carers about deprescribing through a pilot study. Methods: Firstly, the rPATDcog was modified from the rPATD and tested in a small group of participants with mild cognitive impairment, then we conducted a pilot study of the rPATDcog and the carers’ rPATD. Results: Twenty-one participants with cognitive impairment and 11 carer participants (forming dyads) participated in this study. Eighty-one percent (17/21) of participants said that they would stop one or more of their medications if their doctor said it was possible. There was excellent agreement of corresponding questions between dyads. Conclusions: The rPATDcog was feasible to administer in this study. Further work is required to provide generalisable results and determine utility in practice