In this study, nearly half of the geriatric outpatients attending a diagnostic day clinic who were taking more than one drug were candidates for DDIs. One-quarter of these patients were found to have possible adverse events or diminished treatment effectiveness that may have been at least partly caused by these DDIs. These potential interactions can be identified through clinical evaluation. In the majority of patients (99 of 172) the potential interactions resulting in possible ADRs or diminished effectiveness were not present in the 'Top Ten' interactions described by a national database of public pharmacies, a finding that emphasizes that the particular characteristics of geriatric patients (e.g. frequent psychiatric co-morbidities) need to be considered when evaluating their drug use. At least 7% of all patients taking more than one drug, and 80% of those with possible drug interactions whose drug regimen was adjusted, benefited from changes made to their drug regimens.
Applying the NHG standard for appropriate prescription, and disregarding age as a risk factor or contraindication, in this population, 14 of 141 patients (9.9%) were inappropriately prescribed OAC, salicylates or no prophylaxis. Since only patient age was associated with not prescribing OAC in this study, higher age still seems to be considered the most important contraindication to anticoagulation therapy. Implementation of better models for stratifying bleeding risk in the frail elderly is needed. After 4 years, the cumulative rate of bleeding causing discontinuation of anticoagulation therapy in this usual-care study of frail older patients was not alarmingly higher than in other usual-care studies.
Meta-analyses showed that psychotropic drugs (antidepressants, neuroleptics, benzodiazepines, antiepileptic drugs) and some cardiac drugs (digoxin, type IA anti-arrhythmics, diuretics) are associated with increased fall risk. Because balance and gait disorders are the most consistent predictors of future falls, falls due to use of these so-called fall-risk-increasing drugs (FRIDs) might be partly caused by impairments of postural control that these drugs can induce. Therefore, the effects of FRIDs on postural control were examined by reviewing literature. Electronic databases and reference lists of identified papers were searched until June 2013. Only controlled research papers examining the effects of FRIDs on postural control were included. FRIDs were defined according to meta-analyses as antidepressants, neuroleptics, benzodiazepines, antiepileptic drugs, digoxin, type IA anti-arrhythmics, and diuretics. Ninety-four papers were included, of which study methods for quantifying postural control, and the effects of FRIDs on postural control were abstracted. Postural control was assessed with a variety of instruments, mainly evaluating aspects of body sway during quiet standing. In general, postural control was impaired, indicated by an increase in parameters quantifying body sway, when using psychotropic FRIDs. The effects were more pronounced when people were of a higher age, used psychotropics at higher daily doses, with longer half-lives, and administered for a longer period. From the present literature review, it can be concluded that psychotropic drugs cause impairments in postural control, which is probably one of the mediating factors for the increased fall risk these FRIDs are associated with. The sedative effects of these drugs on postural control are reversible, as was proven in intervention studies where FRIDs were withdrawn. The findings of the present literature review highlight the importance of using psychotropic drugs in the older population only at the lowest effective dose and for a limited period of time.
This review addresses recent developments in amyloid beta (Abeta), total tau (t-tau), and phosporylated tau (p-tau) protein analysis, in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma as biomarkers for dementia. Recent research focused on the protection of patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) into dementia and the differential diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease (AD). A combination of Abeta42 and t-tau in CSF can discriminate between patients with stable MCI and patients with progressive MCI into AD or other types of dementia with a sufficient sensitivity and specificity. Regression analyses demonstrated that pathological CSF (with decreased Abeta42 and and increased tau levels) is a very strong predictor for the progression of MCI into AD. Furthermore, CSF measurements of p-tau and Abeta42 can assist in diagnosing vascular dementia or frontotemporal dementia in the differential diagnosis of AD indicated by a reasonable sensitivity and specificity. Whether tau in combination with Abeta42 or in combination with the Abeta37/Abeta42 or Abeta38/Abeta42 ratio aids in the discrimination between AD and Lewy Body dementia remains to be elucidated. Cross-sectional research could not demonstrate significant differences for Abeta40 and Abeta42 in plasma between AD and controls. However, a recently published longitudinal study showed high baseline Abeta40 levels, especially when combined with low baseline Abeta 42 levels, are a strong risk factor for the development of dementia. This emphasizes the importance of performing longitudinal studies in addition to cross-sectional ones. The origin of plasma Abeta and its transport between CSF and plasma, however, needs further clarification. In conclusion, progress has been made regarding Abeta and tau as biomarkers for dementia, both for differentiation between stable MCI and progressive MCI patients and for the differential diagnosis of AD. Future research should aim to validate these recently published results, preferably in pathologically confirmed AD patients. In addition, it is important to standardise research in terms of study design (longitudinal, minimal follow-up period of 5 years), type of researched parameters ( total or p-tau, type of Abeta peptides), type of matrix (CSF and plasma) and data analysis (establishment of predefined cut-off values, type of ratio, type of marker combination).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.