Search

Background the prevalence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in hospitalised older patients, their clinical presentations, causative drugs, severity, preventability and measurable outcomes are unclear, ADRs being an increasing challenge to older patient safety. Methods we systematically searched PubMed, Embase, EBSCO-CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, 'rey' literature and relevant systematic review bibliographies, published from database inception to March 2020. We included any study reporting occurrence of in-hospital ADRs as primary or secondary outcomes in hospitalised older adults (mean age ≥ 65 years). Two authors independently extracted relevant information and appraised studies for bias. Study characteristics, ADR clinical presentations, causative drugs, severity, preventability and clinical outcomes were analysed. Study estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analytic models. Results from 2,399 abstracts, we undertook full-text screening in 286, identifying 27 studies (29 papers). Final analysis yielded a pooled ADR prevalence of 16% (95%CI 12–22%, I 2 98%, τ 2 0.8585), in a population of 20,153 hospitalised patients aged ≥65 years of whom 2,479 patients experienced ≥ one ADR. ADR ascertainment was highly heterogeneous. Almost 48.3% of all ADRs involved five presentations: fluid/electrolyte disturbances (17.3%), gastrointestinal motility/defaecation disorders (13.3%), renal disorders (8.2%), hypotension/blood pressure dysregulation disorders/shock (5.5%) and delirium (4.1%). Four drug classes accounted for 57.8% of causative medications i.e. diuretics (19.8%), anti-bacterials (14.8%), antithrombotic agents (12.2%) and analgesics (10.9%). Pooled analysis of severity was not feasible. Four studies reported the majority of ADRs as preventable (55–95%). Conclusions on average, 16% of hospitalised older patients experience significant ADRs, varying in severity and mostly preventable, with commonly prescribed drug classes accounting for most ADRs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scope: it has been suggested that overweight/obesity as a risk factor for incident dementia differs between mid-life and later life. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis ofthe up-to-date current literature to assess this. Search Methods: inclusion criteria included epidemiological longitudinal studies published up to September 2014, in participants without cognitive impairment based on evidence of cognitive assessment and aged 30 or over at baseline assessment with at least 2 years of follow-up. Pubmed, Medline, EMBASE, PsychInfo and the Cochrane Library were searched using combinations of the search terms: Dementia, Alzheimer disease, Vascular Dementia, Multi-Infarct Dementia, Cognitive decline, Cognitive impairment, Mild Cognitive Impairment/Obesity, Overweight, Adiposity, Waist circumference (limits: humans, English language). Handsearching of all papers meeting the inclusion criteria was performed. A random-effects model was used for the meta-analysis. Results: ofthe 1,612 abstracts identified and reviewed, 21 completely met the inclusion criteria. Being obese below the age of 65 years had a positive association on incident dementia with a risk ratio (RR) 1.41 (95% confidence interval, CI: 1.20-1.66), but the opposite was seen in those aged 65 and over, RR 0.83 (95% CI: 0.74-0.94). Conclusions: this systematic review and meta-analysis suggests a positive association between obesity in mid-life and later dementia but the opposite in late life. Whether weight reduction in mid-life reduces risk is worthy of further study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: the worldwide population is ageing. One expected consequence of this is an increase in morbidity and an associated increased demand for long-term care. Physical rehabilitation is beneficial in older people, but relatively little is known about effects in residents of long-term care facilities.Objective: to examine the effects of physical rehabilitation on activities of daily living (ADL) in elderly residents of long-term care facilities.Methods: systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. We included studies that compared the effect of a physical rehabilitation intervention on independence in ADL with either no intervention or an alternative intervention in older people (over 60 years) living in long-term care facilities. We searched 19 databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar. Two researchers independently screened papers and extracted data. Outcomes of included studies were combined in a standardised mean difference random-effects meta-analysis.Results: thirteen of 14 studies identified were included in the meta-analysis. Independence in ADL was improved by 0.24 standard units (95% CI: 0.11–0.38; P = 0.0005). This is equivalent to 1.3 points on the Barthel Index (0–20 scale). No significant differences in effect were found based on participant or intervention characteristics. Larger sample size and low attrition were associated with smaller estimates of effect. All studies were assessed to be at risk of bias.Conclusions: physical rehabilitation may improve independence for elderly long-term care facility residents, but mean effects are small. It is unclear which interventions are most appropriate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]