IMPORTANCE Functional decline is prevalent among acutely hospitalized older patients. Exercise and early rehabilitation protocols applied during acute hospitalization can prevent functional and cognitive decline in older patients. OBJECTIVE To assess the effects of an innovative multicomponent exercise intervention on the functional status of this patient population. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A single-center, single-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted from February 1, 2015, to August 30, 2017, in an acute care unit in a tertiary public hospital in Navarra, Spain. A total of 370 very elderly patients undergoing acute-care hospitalization were randomly assigned to an exercise or control (usual-care) intervention. Intention-to-treat analysis was conducted. INTERVENTIONS The control group received usual-care hospital care, which included physical rehabilitation when needed. The in-hospital intervention included individualized moderate-intensity resistance, balance, and walking exercises (2 daily sessions). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary end point was change in functional capacity from baseline to hospital discharge, assessed with the Barthel Index of independence and the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB). Secondary end points were changes in cognitive and mood status, quality of life, handgrip strength, incident delirium, length of stay, falls, transfer after discharge, and readmission rate and mortality at 3 months after discharge. RESULTS Of the 370 patients included in the analyses, 209 were women (56.5%); mean (SD) age was 87.3 (4.9) years. The median length of hospital stay was 8 days in both groups (interquartile range, 4 and 4 days, respectively). Median duration of the intervention was 5 days (interquartile range, 0); there was a mean (SD) of 5 (1) morning and 4 (1) evening sessions per patient. No adverse effects were observed with the intervention. The exercise intervention program provided significant benefits over usual care. At discharge, the exercise group showed a mean increase of 2.2 points (95% CI, 1.7-2.6 points) on the SPPB scale and 6.9 points (95% CI, 4.4-9.5 points) on the Barthel Index over the usual-care group. Hospitalization led to an impairment in functional capacity (mean change from baseline to discharge in the Barthel Index of −5.0 points (95% CI, −6.8 to −3.2 points) in the usual-care group, whereas the exercise intervention reversed this trend (1.9 points; 95% CI, 0.2-3.7 points). The intervention also improved the SPPB score (2.4 points; 95% CI, 2.1-2.7 points) vs 0.2 points; 95% CI, −0.1 to 0.5 points in controls). Significant intervention benefits were also found at the cognitive level of 1.8 points (95% CI, 1.3-2.3 points) over the usual-care group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The exercise intervention proved to be safe and effective to reverse the functional decline associated with acute hospitalization in very elderly patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02300896

Background 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.

Purpose To investigate: (1) the cross-sectional association between polypharmacy, hyperpolypharmacy and presence of prefrailty or frailty; (2) the risk of incident prefrailty or frailty in persons with polypharmacy, and vice versa. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase from 01/01/1998 to 5/2/2018. Pooled estimates were obtained through random effect models and Mantel-Haenszel weighting. Homogeneity was assessed with the I 2 statistic and publication bias with Egger's and Begg's tests. Results Thirty-seven studies were included. The pooled proportion of polypharmacy in persons with prefrailty and frailty was 47% (95% CI 33-61) and 59% (95% CI 42-76), respectively. Increased odds ratio of polypharmacy were seen for prefrail (pooled OR = 1.52; 95% CI 1.32-1.79) and frail persons (pooled OR = 2.62, 95% CI 1.81-3.79). Hyperpolypharmacy was also increased in prefrail (OR = 1.95; 95% CI 1.41-2.70) and frail (OR = 6.57; 95% CI 9.57-10.48) persons compared to robust persons. Only seven longitudinal studies reported data on the risk of either incident prefrailty or frailty in persons with baseline polypharmacy. A significant higher odds of developing prefrailty was found in robust persons with polypharmacy (pooled OR = 1.30; 95% CI 1.12-1.51). We found no papers investigating polypharmacy incidence in persons with prefrailty/frailty. Conclusions Polypharmacy is common in prefrail and frail persons, and these individuals are also more likely to be on extreme drug regimens, i.e. hyperpolypharmacy, than robust older persons. More research is needed to investigate the causal relationship between polypharmacy and frailty syndromes, thereby identifying ways to jointly reduce drug burden and prefrailty/frailty in these individuals. Prospero registration number CRD42018104756.