Comparison of drug-related problem risk assessment tools for older adults : a systematic review

Purpose This study aims to systematically review studies describing screening tools that assess the risk for drug-related problems (DRPs) in older adults (>= 60 years). The focus of the review is to compare DRP risks listed in different tools and describe their development methods and validation. Methods The systematic search was conducted using evidence-based medicine, Medline Ovid, Scopus, and Web of Science databases from January 1, 1985, to April 7, 2016. Publications describing general DRP risk assessment tools for older adults written in English were included. Disease, therapy, and drug-specific tools were excluded. Outcome measures included an assessment tool's content, development methods, and validation assessment. Results The search produced 15 publications describing 11 DRP risk assessment tools. Three major categories of risks for DRPs included (1) patient or caregiver related risks; (2) pharmacotherapy-related risks; and (3) medication use process-related risks. Of all the risks included in the tools only 8 criteria appeared in at least 4 of the tools, problems remembering to take the medication being the most common (n=7). Validation assessments varied and content validation was the most commonly conducted (n = 9). Reliability assessment was conducted for 6 tools, most commonly by calculating internal consistency (n = 3) and inter-rater reliability (n = 2). Conclusions The considerable variety between the contents of the tools indicates that there is no consensus on the risk factors for DRPs that should be screened in older adults taking multiple medicines. Further research is needed to improve the accuracy and timeliness of the DRP risk assessment tools.Peer reviewe

Psykoosilääkkeiden käyttö iäkkäillä : järjestelmällinen katsaus

VertaisarvioituLÄHTÖKOHDAT Psykoosilääkkeitä määrätään psykoosien lisäksi muistisairaiden käytöshäiriöihin. Tarkastelemme tässä järjestelmällisessä katsauksessa, mitä suomalaisten ikäihmisten psykoosilääkkeiden käytöstä tiedetään. MENETELMÄT Medline-tietokannasta valikoitui 27 artikkelia vuosilta 2000–2015. Selvitimme lääkkeiden käytön laajuutta ja riskejä sekä interventioita käytön järkeistämiseksi. TULOKSET Kotona asuvista iäkkäistä 3–14 % käytti psykoosilääkkeitä, muistisairaista 22–32 %. Laitoshoidossa käyttäjien osuus oli noin 40 % eikä muistisairaudella ollut vaikutusta. Lääkkeen aloittaneista noin 40 %:sta tuli pitkäaikaiskäyttäjiä. Perinteisistä psykoosilääkkeistä on siirrytty atyyppisiin. Käytöllä oli yhteys lisääntyneeseen kuolemanriskiin, mutta tulokset olivat ristiriitaisia. Lääkityksen arviointi kerran vuodessa ei kotona asuvilla vaikuttanut käyttöön. Laitoshoidossa hoitajien koulutus vähensi käyttöä. PÄÄTELMÄT Psykoosilääkkeitä määrätään iäkkäille yleisesti ja pitkinä jaksoina muuhun kuin varsinaisiin indikaatioihin.Peer reviewe

Can Practical Nurses Identify Older Home Care Clients at Risk of Drug-Related Problems-Geriatricians' Appraisal of Their Risk Screenings: A Pilot Study

Background: Home care (HC) clients are increasingly older, have many chronic diseases, and use multiple medicines and thus are at high risk for drug-related problems (DRPs). Objective: Establish the sensitivity of practical nurse (PN) administered DRP risk assessment tool (DRP-RAT) compared with geriatrician's assessment of the medical record. Identify the clinically most significant DRPs needing action. Methods: Twenty-six PNs working in HC of Harkatie Health Center in Lieto, Finland, 46 HC clients (>= 65 years), and a geriatrician participated in this pilot study. The geriatrician reviewed HC clients' medications using 3 different methods. The reviews were based on the following: (1) the PN's risk screening (ie, PN-completed DRP-RAT) and medication list, (2) health center's medical records, and (3) methods 1 and 2 together. The main outcome was the number of "at-risk patients" (ie, the patient is at risk of clinically significant DRPs) by using each review method. Secondary outcomes were clinically most significant DRP-risk predicting factors identified by the geriatrician. Results: The geriatrician reviewed 45 clients' medications using all 3 methods. Based on PN-completed DRP-RAT and medication list, 93% (42/45) of the clients were classified as "at-risk patients." Two other review methods resulted in 45/45 (100%) "at-risk patients." Symptoms suggestive of adverse drug reactions were the most significant risk predicting factors. Small sample size limits the generalizability of the results. Conclusions: The PN-completed DRP-RAT was able to provide clinically important timely patient information for clinical decision making. DRP-RAT could make it possible to more effectively involve PNs in medication risk management among older HC clients

Identification of a variant hotspot in MYBPC3 and of a novel CSRP3 autosomal recessive alteration in a cohort of Polish patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

INTRODUCTION Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a heart disorder caused by autosomal dominant alterations affecting both sarcomeric genes and other nonsarcomeric loci in a minority of cases. However, in some patients, the occurrence of the causal pathogenic variant or variants in homozygosity, compound heterozygosity, or double heterozygosity has also been described. Most of the HCM pathogenic variants are missense and unique, but truncating mutations of the MYBPC3 gene have been reported as founder pathogenic variants in populations from Finland, France, Japan, Iceland, Italy, and the Netherlands. OBJECTIVES This study aimed to assess the genetic background of HCM in a cohort of Polish patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS Twenty–nine Polish patients were analyzed by a next–generation sequencing panel including 404 cardiovascular genes. RESULTS Pathogenic variants were found in 41% of the patients, with ultra–rare MYBPC3 c.2541C>G (p.Tyr847Ter) mutation standing for a variant hotspot and correlating with a lower age at HCM diagnosis. Among the nonsarcomeric genes, the CSRP3 mutation was found in a single case carrying the novel c.364C>T (p.Arg122Ter) variant in homozygosity. With this finding, the total number of known HCM cases with human CSRP3 knockout cases has reached 3

Quantitative assessment of harmonic power doppler myocardial perfusion imaging with intravenous levovist™ in patients with myocardial infarction: comparison with myocardial viability evaluated by coronary flow reserve and coronary flow pattern of infarct-related artery

BACKGROUND: Myocardial contrast echocardiography and coronary flow velocity pattern with a rapid diastolic deceleration time after percutaneous coronary intervention has been reported to be useful in assessing microvascular damage in patients with acute myocardial infarction. AIM: To evaluate myocardial contrast echocardiography with harmonic power Doppler imaging, coronary flow velocity reserve and coronary artery flow pattern in predicting functional recovery by using transthoracic echocardiography. METHODS: Thirty patients with anterior acute myocardial infarction underwent myocardial contrast echocardiography at rest and during hyperemia and were quantitatively analyzed by the peak color pixel intensity ratio of the risk area to the control area (PIR). Coronary flow pattern was measured using transthoracic echocardiography in the distal portion of left anterior descending artery within 24 hours after recanalization and we assessed deceleration time of diastolic flow velocity. Coronary flow velocity reserve was calculated two weeks after acute myocardial infarction. Left ventricular end-diastolic volumes and ejection fraction by angiography were computed. RESULTS: Pts were divided into 2 groups according to the deceleration time of coronary artery flow pattern (Group A; 20 pts with deceleration time ≧ 600 msec, Group B; 10 pts with deceleration time < 600 msec). In acute phase, there were no significant differences in left ventricular end-diastolic volume and ejection fraction (Left ventricular end-diastolic volume 112 ± 33 vs. 146 ± 38 ml, ejection fraction 50 ± 7 vs. 45 ± 9 %; group A vs. B). However, left ventricular end-diastolic volume in Group B was significantly larger than that in Group A (192 ± 39 vs. 114 ± 30 ml, p < 0.01), and ejection fraction in Group B was significantly lower than that in Group A (39 ± 9 vs. 52 ± 7%, p < 0.01) at 6 months. PIR and coronary flow velocity reserve of Group A were higher than Group B (PIR, at rest: 0.668 ± 0.178 vs. 0.248 ± 0.015, p < 0.0001: during hyperemia 0.725 ± 0.194 vs. 0.295 ± 0.107, p < 0.0001; coronary flow velocity reserve, 2.60 ± 0.80 vs. 1.31 ± 0.29, p = 0.0002, respectively). CONCLUSION: The preserved microvasculature detecting by myocardial contrast echocardiography and coronary flow velocity reserve is related to functional recovery after acute myocardial infarction