Aims As the potential impact of statins on cognitive decline and dementia is still debated, we conducted a meta-analysis of observational studies to examine the effect of statin use on the risk of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and dementia. Methods and results PubMed, Cochrane, and EMBASE were searched since inception to January 2021. Inclusion criteria were: (i) cohort or case–control studies; (ii) statin users compared to non-users; and (iii) AD and/or dementia risk as outcome. Estimates from original studies were pooled using restricted maximum-likelihood random-effect model. Measure of effects were reported as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). In the pooled analyses, statins were associated with a decreased risk of dementia [36 studies, OR 0.80 (CI 0.75–0.86)] and of AD [21 studies, OR 0.68 (CI 0.56–0.81)]. In the stratified analysis by sex, no difference was observed in the risk reduction of dementia between men [OR 0.86 (CI 0.81–0.92)] and women [OR 0.86 (CI 0.81–0.92)]. Similar risks were observed for lipophilic and hydrophilic statins for both dementia and AD, while high-potency statins showed a 20% reduction of dementia risk compared with a 16% risk reduction associated with low-potency statins, suggesting a greater efficacy of the former, although a borderline statistical significance (P = 0.05) for the heterogeneity between estimates. Conclusion These results confirm the absence of a neurocognitive risk associated with statin treatment and suggest a potential favourable role of statins. Randomized clinical trials with an ad hoc design are needed to explore this potential neuroprotective effect.

No abstract

The spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused a sudden and significant disruption in healthcare services, especially for patients suffering from chronic diseases. We aimed at evaluating the impact of the pandemic on adherence to chronic therapies through a systematic review of available studies. PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched since inception to June 2022. Inclusion criteria were: (1) observational studies or surveys; (2) studies on patients with chronic diseases; (3) reporting the effects of COVID-19 pandemic on adherence to chronic pharmacological treatment, as a comparison of adherence during the pandemic period vs. pre-pandemic period (primary outcome) or as rate of treatment discontinuation/delay specifically due to factors linked to COVID-19 (secondary outcome). Findings from 12 (primary outcome) and 24 (secondary outcome) studies showed that many chronic treatments were interrupted or affected by a reduced adherence in the pandemic period, and that fear of infection, difficulty in reaching physicians or healthcare facilities, and unavailability of medication were often reported as reasons for discontinuation or modification of chronic therapies. For other therapies where the patient was not required to attend the clinic, continuity of treatment was sometimes ensured through the use of telemedicine, and the adherence was guaranteed with drug stockpiling. While the effects of the possible worsening of chronic disease management need to be monitored over time, positive strategies should be acknowledged, such as the implementation of e-health tools and the expanded role of community pharmacists, and may play an important role in preserving continuity of care for people with chronic diseases.

Pharmacological intervention is one of the cornerstones in the treatment and prevention of disease in modern healthcare. However, a large number of drugs are often prescribed and used inappropriately, especially in elderly patients. We aimed at investigating the annual prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIPs) among older outpatients using administrative healthcare databases of the Piedmont Region (Italy) over a seven-year period (2012–2018). We included all Piedmont outpatients aged 65 years or older with at least one drug prescription per year. Polypharmacy and the prevalence of PIPs according to the ERD list explicit tool were measured on an annual basis. A range between 976,398 (in 2012) and 1,066,389 (in 2018) elderly were evaluated. Among them, the number of subjects with at least one PIP decreased from 418,537 in 2012 to 339,764 in 2018; the prevalence significantly reduced by ~25% over the study period. The stratified analyses by age groups and sex also confirmed the downward trend and identified several differences in the most prevalent inappropriately prescribed drugs. Overall, despite a reduction in PIP prevalence, one out of three older outpatients was still exposed to inappropriateness, highlighting the extensive need for intervention to improve prescribing.

No abstract