Search

Objectives Oropharyngeal dysphagia is a geriatric syndrome that is usually underdiagnosed in older patients. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and identify the main risk factors of dysphagia in the oldest old patients admitted to an acute geriatric unit. Design Observational prospective study. Setting and Participants Older patients admitted to an acute geriatric unit of a university hospital. Measures 329 patients (mean age 93.5 years, range 81-106) were assessed for oropharyngeal dysphagia within 48 hours of hospital admission using the Volume-Viscosity Swallow Test. Demographic characteristics, geriatric assessment, geriatric syndromes, comorbidities, drug treatment, and complications were examined to determine their association with the presence of dysphagia. Results Oropharyngeal dysphagia was present in 271 (82.4%) of the participants. Multivariate logistic regression showed that malnutrition [odds ratio (OR) 3.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-12.93; P = .048], admission for respiratory infection (OR 2.89, 95% CI 1.40-5.94; P = .004), delirium (OR 2.89, 95% CI 1.40-5.94; P = .004), severe dependency (OR 3.23, 95% CI 1.23-8.87; P = .017), and age (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.01-1.21; P = .03) were significantly associated with dysphagia. The use of a calcium antagonist at the time of admission was associated with a reduced risk of dysphagia (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.16-0.92; P = .03). Conclusions and Implications The prevalence of oropharyngeal dysphagia is high in the oldest old patients admitted to an acute geriatric unit when assessed with an objective diagnostic method. Our findings suggest that objective swallowing assessment should be routinely performed on admission in order to start early interventions to avoid complications of dysphagia in this complex population.

Background Pressure ulcers (PUs) are frequent in older patients, and the healing process is usually challenging, therefore, prevention should be the first strategic line in PU management. Nonpharmacologic interventions may play a role in the prevention of PUs in older people, but most systematic reviews (SRs) have not addressed this specific population using convincing outcome measures. Objective To summarize and critically appraise the evidence from SRs of the primary studies on nonpharmacologic interventions to prevent PUs in older patients. Design SR and meta-analysis of comparative studies. Data sources PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, and CINHAL (from inception to October 2013) were searched. A new search for updates in the Cochrane Database was launched in July 2014. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies SRs that included at least 1 comparative study evaluating any nonpharmacologic intervention to prevent PUs in older patients, in any healthcare setting, were selected. Any primary study with experimental design was then identified and included. Data extraction From each primary study, quality assessment was undertaken as specified by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation working group. Interventions were identified and compared among different studies to explore the possibility of performing a meta-analysis, using the incidence of new pressure ulcers as the main outcome measure. Results One hundred ten SRs with 65 primary studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. The most frequent interventions explored in these trials were support surfaces (41 studies), repositioning (8), and nutrition interventions (5). High quality of evidence was not found for any intervention, mainly because of a high risk of bias and imprecision. There is moderate quality evidence to support the use of alternating pressure support mattresses over usual hospital mattresses in medical and surgical inpatients, low quality evidence to support constant low pressure devices and Australian medical sheepskin over usual mattresses, and very low quality evidence to support nutrition interventions in hospital settings. No recommendations on hydration, repositioning, standardized risk assessment, or multicomponent interventions can be done. Conclusions In older patients at high risk to suffer PUs, high-technology and low- technology support surfaces can significantly reduce the incidence of PUs. Nutrition intervention may also have a role in preventing PUs in hospital settings. More evidence is needed to support other recommendations, which is specially lacking for repositioning.

Background Pressure ulcers (PUs) are more frequent in older patients, and the healing process is usually challenging. Nonpharmacologic interventions may play a role in the treatment of older people with PUs, but most systematic reviews (SRs) have not addressed this specific population using convincing outcome measures. Objective To summarize and critically appraise the evidence from SRs of the primary studies on nonpharmacologic interventions to treat PUs in older patients. Design SR and meta-analysis of comparative studies. Methods PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, and CINHAL (from inception to October 2013) were searched. A new search for updates in the Cochrane Database was launched in July 2014. SRs that included at least 1 comparative study evaluating any nonpharmacologic intervention to treat PUs in older patients, in any health care setting, were included. Any primary study with experimental design was then identified and included. From each primary study, quality assessment was undertaken as specified by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation working group. Interventions were identified and compared among different studies to explore the possibility of performing a meta-analysis, using complete ulcer healing as the outcome measure. Results One hundred ten SRs with 45 primary studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. The most frequent interventions explored in these trials were support surfaces (13 studies), nutrition (8), and electrotherapy (6). High or moderate quality of evidence was found in none of the interventions, mainly because of the very serious risk of bias of most studies and imprecision in the treatment effect. Evidence grade is very low or insufficient to support the use of any support surface, nutrition intervention, multicomponent interventions, repositioning or other adjunctive therapy (ultrasound, negative pressure, laser, electromagnetic, light, shock wave, hydrotherapy, radiofrequency, or vibration therapy) to increase the rates of PU healing in older patients. Electrotherapy showed some beneficial effect in the treatment of PUs, although the quality of evidence is low. Conclusions In older patients with PUs, evidence to use any nonpharmacologic therapy to increase the rates of wound healing is inconclusive, except for low quality evidence that supports the use of electrotherapy. This situation is especially alarming for interventions that are usually standard clinical practice (repositioning, support surfaces). Although there is some evidence in younger populations and other types of ulcers, studies in older populations with PUs using sound methodology are needed.