Validation of the ADFICE_IT Models for Predicting Falls and Recurrent Falls in Geriatric Outpatients

Objectives: Before being used in clinical practice, a prediction model should be tested in patients whose data were not used in model development. Previously, we developed the ADFICE_IT models for predicting any fall and recurrent falls, referred as Any_fall and Recur_fall. In this study, we externally validated the models and compared their clinical value to a practical screening strategy where patients are screened for falls history alone. Design: Retrospective, combined analysis of 2 prospective cohorts. Setting and Participants: Data were included of 1125 patients (aged ≥65 years) who visited the geriatrics department or the emergency department. Methods: We evaluated the models' discrimination using the C-statistic. Models were updated using logistic regression if calibration intercept or slope values deviated significantly from their ideal values. Decision curve analysis was applied to compare the models’ clinical value (ie, net benefit) against that of falls history for different decision thresholds. Results: During the 1-year follow-up, 428 participants (42.7%) endured 1 or more falls, and 224 participants (23.1%) endured a recurrent fall (≥2 falls). C-statistic values were 0.66 (95% CI 0.63-0.69) and 0.69 (95% CI 0.65-0.72) for the Any_fall and Recur_fall models, respectively. Any_fall overestimated the fall risk and we therefore updated only its intercept whereas Recur_fall showed good calibration and required no update. Compared with falls history, Any_fall and Recur_fall showed greater net benefit for decision thresholds of 35% to 60% and 15% to 45%, respectively.Conclusions and Implications: The models performed similarly in this data set of geriatric outpatients as in the development sample. This suggests that fall-risk assessment tools that were developed in community-dwelling older adults may perform well in geriatric outpatients. We found that in geriatric outpatients the models have greater clinical value across a wide range of decision thresholds compared with screening for falls history alone.</p

Interventions for preventing falls and fall-related fractures in community-dwelling older adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE To compare the effectiveness of single, multiple, and multifactorial interventions to prevent falls and fall-related fractures in community-dwelling older persons. METHODS MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of fall prevention interventions in community-dwelling adults aged ≥65 years, from inception until February 27, 2019. Two large RCTs (published in 2020 after the search closed) were included in post hoc analyses. Pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA) were conducted. RESULTS NMA including 192 studies revealed that the following single interventions, compared with usual care, were associated with reductions in number of fallers: exercise (risk ratio [RR] 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-0.89) and quality improvement strategies (e.g., patient education) (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.83-0.98). Exercise as a single intervention was associated with a reduction in falls rate (RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.73-0.86). Common components of multiple interventions significantly associated with a reduction in number of fallers and falls rate were exercise, assistive technology, environmental assessment and modifications, quality improvement strategies, and basic falls risk assessment (e.g., medication review). Multifactorial interventions were associated with a reduction in falls rate (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.80-0.95), but not with a reduction in number of fallers (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.89-1.01). The following single interventions, compared with usual care, were associated with reductions in number of fall-related fractures: basic falls risk assessment (RR 0.60; 95% CI 0.39-0.94) and exercise (RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.42-0.90). CONCLUSIONS In keeping with Tricco et al. (2017), several single and multiple fall prevention interventions are associated with fewer falls. In addition to Tricco, we observe a benefit at the NMA-level of some single interventions on preventing fall-related fractures

Deprescribing tool for STOPPFall (screening tool of older persons prescriptions in older adults with high fall risk) items

Background: Health care professionals are often reluctant to deprescribe fall-risk-increasing drugs (FRIDs). Lack of knowledge and skills form a significant barrier. To support clinicians in the management of FRIDs and to facilitate the deprescribing process, a deprescribing tool was developed by a European expert group for STOPPFall (Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions in older adults with high fall risk) items. Methods: STOPPFall was created using an expert Delphi consensus process in 2019 and in 2020, 24 panellists from EuGMS SIG on Pharmacology and Task and Finish on FRIDs completed deprescribing tool questionnaire. To develop the questionnaire, a Medline literature search was performed. The panellists were asked to indicate for every medication class a possible need for stepwise withdrawal and strategy for withdrawal. They were asked in which situations withdrawal should be performed. Furthermore, panellists were requested to indicate those symptoms patients should be monitored for after deprescribing and a possible need for follow-ups. Results: Practical deprescribing guidance was developed for STOPPFall medication classes. For each medication class, a decision tree algorithm was developed including steps from medication review to symptom monitoring after medication withdrawal. Conclusion: STOPPFall was combined with a practical deprescribing tool designed to optimize medication review. This practical guide can help overcome current reluctance towards deprescribing in clinical practice by providing an up-to-date and straightforward source of expert knowledge

Adverse cardiovascular events and mortality in men during testosterone treatment : an individual patient and aggregate data meta-analysis

Funding National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme. Acknowledgments This work was supported by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment (NIHR HTA) Programme (project no 17/68/01). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the National Health Service, the NIHR HTA Programme, or the Department of Health and Social Care, UK. The funders were not actively involved in the research process at any stage. The study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing of the manuscript; and decision to submit for publication were performed independent of the funders. The Health Services Research Unit at the University of Aberdeen is funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates. The Section of Endocrinology and Investigative Medicine at Imperial College London is funded by grants from the Medical Research Council, Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, NIHR, an Integrative Mammalian Biology Capacity Building Award, an FP7-HEALTH-2009-241592 EuroCHIP grant, and is supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre Funding Scheme. The following authors are also funded as follows: NIHR Research Professorship (WSD), NIHR post-doctoral fellowship (CNJ). SBhasin receives National Institutes of Health research grant funding. The authors are grateful to Prakash Abraham, Alison Avenell, Craig Ramsay, Graham Scotland, Neil Scott, and Finlay MacKenzie for their advice; and to the many individuals from academia and industry who helped in the conduct of this study.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Symptomatic benefits of testosterone treatment in patient subgroups : a systematic review, individual participant data meta-analysis, and aggregate data meta-analysis

Acknowledgments This work was supported by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR)'s Health Technology Assessment Programme (project number 17/68/01). The views expressed herein are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the National Health Service, the NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme, or the UK Department of Health and Social Care. The Health Services Research Unit at the University of Aberdeen is funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates. The Section of Endocrinology and Investigative Medicine at Imperial College London is funded by grants from the Medical Research Council, the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, NIHR, an Integrative Mammalian Biology Capacity Building Award, and an FP7-HEALTH-2009-241592 EuroCHIP grant, and is supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre Funding Scheme. WSD is funded by an NIHR Research Professorship. CNJ is funded by an NIHR Post-Doctoral Fellowship. ShB receives NIH research grant funding. The authors are grateful to the clinical and methodological experts and patient partners who contributed to the advisory group for this study.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Symptomatic benefits of testosterone treatment in patient subgroups: a systematic review, individual participant data meta-analysis, and aggregate data meta-analysis

Background Testosterone replacement therapy is known to improve sexual function in men younger than 40 years with pathological hypogonadism. However, the extent to which testosterone alleviates sexual dysfunction in older men and men with obesity is unclear, despite the fact that testosterone is being increasingly prescribed to these patient populations. We aimed to evaluate whether subgroups of men with low testosterone derive any symptomatic benefit from testosterone treatment. Methods We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate characteristics associated with symptomatic benefit of testosterone treatment versus placebo in men aged 18 years and older with a baseline serum total testosterone concentration of less than 12 nmol/L. We searched major electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and clinical trial registries for reports published in English between Jan 1, 1992, and Aug 27, 2018. Anonymised individual participant data were requested from the investigators of all identified trials. Primary (cardiovascular) outcomes from this analysis have been published previously. In this report, we present the secondary outcomes of sexual function, quality of life, and psychological outcomes at 12 months. We did a one-stage individual participant data meta-analysis with a random-effects linear regression model, and a two-stage meta-analysis integrating individual participant data with aggregated data from studies that did not provide individual participant data. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018111005. Findings 9871 citations were identified through database searches. After exclusion of duplicates and publications not meeting inclusion criteria, 225 full texts were assessed for inclusion, of which 109 publications reporting 35 primary studies (with a total 5601 participants) were included. Of these, 17 trials provided individual participant data (3431 participants; median age 67 years [IQR 60–72]; 3281 [97%] of 3380 aged ≥40 years) Compared with placebo, testosterone treatment increased 15-item International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-15) total score (mean difference 5·52 [95% CI 3·95–7·10]; τ²=1·17; n=1412) and IIEF-15 erectile function subscore (2·14 [1·40–2·89]; τ²=0·64; n=1436), reaching the minimal clinically important difference for mild erectile dysfunction. These effects were not found to be dependent on participant age, obesity, presence of diabetes, or baseline serum total testosterone. However, absolute IIEF-15 scores reached during testosterone treatment were subject to thresholds in patient age and baseline serum total testosterone. Testosterone significantly improved Aging Males’ Symptoms score, and some 12-item or 36-item Short Form Survey quality of life subscores compared with placebo, but it did not significantly improve psychological symptoms (measured by Beck Depression Inventory). Interpretation In men aged 40 years or older with baseline serum testosterone of less than 12 nmol/L, short-to-mediumterm testosterone treatment could provide clinically meaningful treatment for mild erectile dysfunction, irrespective of patient age, obesity, or degree of low testosterone. However, due to more severe baseline symptoms, the absolute level of sexual function reached during testosterone treatment might be lower in older men and men with obesity

Double blind randomized placebo-controlled trial on the effects of testosterone supplementation in elderly men with moderate to low testosterone levels: design and baseline characteristics [ISRCTN23688581]

In ageing men testosterone levels decline, while cognitive function, muscle and bone mass, sexual hair growth, libido and sexual activity decline and the risk of cardiovascular diseases increase. We set up a double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial to investigate the effects of testosterone supplementation on functional mobility, quality of life, body composition, cognitive function, vascular function and risk factors, and bone mineral density in older hypogonadal men. We recruited 237 men with serum testosterone levels below 13.7 nmol/L and ages 60–80 years. They were randomized to either four capsules of 40 mg testosterone undecanoate (TU) or placebo daily for 26 weeks. Primary endpoints are functional mobility and quality of life. Secondary endpoints are body composition, cognitive function, aortic stiffness and cardiovascular risk factors and bone mineral density. Effects on prostate, liver and hematological parameters will be studied with respect to safety. Measure of effect will be the difference in change from baseline visit to final visit between TU and placebo. We will study whether the effect of TU differs across subgroups of baseline waist girth (< 100 cm vs. ≥ 100 cm; testosterone level (<12 versus ≥ 12 nmol/L), age (< median versus ≥ median), and level of outcome under study (< median versus ≥ median). At baseline, mean age, BMI and testosterone levels were 67 years, 27 kg/m(2 )and 10.72 nmol/L, respectively

STOPPFall (Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions in older adults with high fall risk): a Delphi study by the EuGMS Task and Finish Group on Fall-Risk-Increasing Drugs.

To access publisher's full text version of this article, please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links field or click on the hyperlink at the top of the page marked DownloadBackground: Healthcare professionals are often reluctant to deprescribe fall-risk-increasing drugs (FRIDs). Lack of knowledge and skills form a significant barrier and furthermore, there is no consensus on which medications are considered as FRIDs despite several systematic reviews. To support clinicians in the management of FRIDs and to facilitate the deprescribing process, STOPPFall (Screening Tool of Older Persons Prescriptions in older adults with high fall risk) and a deprescribing tool were developed by a European expert group. Methods: STOPPFall was created by two facilitators based on evidence from recent meta-analyses and national fall prevention guidelines in Europe. Twenty-four panellists chose their level of agreement on a Likert scale with the items in the STOPPFall in three Delphi panel rounds. A threshold of 70% was selected for consensus a priori. The panellists were asked whether some agents are more fall-risk-increasing than others within the same pharmacological class. In an additional questionnaire, panellists were asked in which cases deprescribing of FRIDs should be considered and how it should be performed. Results: The panellists agreed on 14 medication classes to be included in the STOPPFall. They were mostly psychotropic medications. The panellists indicated 18 differences between pharmacological subclasses with regard to fall-risk-increasing properties. Practical deprescribing guidance was developed for STOPPFall medication classes. Conclusion: STOPPFall was created using an expert Delphi consensus process and combined with a practical deprescribing tool designed to optimise medication review. The effectiveness of these tools in falls prevention should be further evaluated in intervention studies. Keywords: accidental falls; adverse effects; aged; deprescribing; fall-risk-increasing drugs; older people.Amsterdam Public Health Aging and Later Life Innovation Price and Clementine Brigitta Maria Dalderup fund Amsterdam University fun

Frailty is associated with in-hospital mortality in older hospitalised COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands:the COVID-OLD study

BACKGROUND: During the first wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, older patients had an increased risk of hospitalisation and death. Reports on the association of frailty with poor outcome have been conflicting. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to investigate the independent association between frailty and in-hospital mortality in older hospitalised COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands. METHODS: This was a multicentre retrospective cohort study in 15 hospitals in the Netherlands, including all patients aged ≥70 years, who were hospitalised with clinically confirmed COVID-19 between February and May 2020. Data were collected on demographics, co-morbidity, disease severity and Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS). Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1,376 patients were included (median age 78 years (interquartile range 74-84), 60% male). In total, 499 (38%) patients died during hospital admission. Parameters indicating presence of frailty (CFS 6-9) were associated with more co-morbidities, shorter symptom duration upon presentation (median 4 versus 7 days), lower oxygen demand and lower levels of C-reactive protein. In multivariable analyses, the CFS was independently associated with in-hospital mortality: compared with patients with CFS 1-3, patients with CFS 4-5 had a two times higher risk (odds ratio (OR) 2.0 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3-3.0)) and patients with CFS 6-9 had a three times higher risk of in-hospital mortality (OR 2.8 (95% CI 1.8-4.3)). CONCLUSIONS: The in-hospital mortality of older hospitalised COVID-19 patients in the Netherlands was 38%. Frailty was independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality, even though COVID-19 patients with frailty presented earlier to the hospital with less severe symptoms