Search

Background/objectives: Available metrics for characterizing cumulative anticholinergic exposure over time may not be well suited for use across all US data sources. In this review, the properties of existing anticholinergic scales and measures were evaluated to determine their suitability for implementation in observational studies relying on administrative data., Methods: A targeted literature review was conducted to identify available anticholinergic scales and measures. Suitability of the identified scales and measures for quantification of anticholinergic exposure was evaluated based on pre-defined criteria. Agreement between selected scales was characterized by the percentage overlap of included drugs and inter-scale Spearman's correlation of scores., Results: Sixteen scales were identified; six were relevant and suitable for the quantification of anticholinergic exposure. When implemented on administrative data the Anticholinergic Drug Scale and Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden scale demonstrated the most agreement, with an inter-scale correlation coefficient of 0.82. Scale performance varied by outcome of interest, and underlying disease profile of the population of interest. Variability across the two measures ("average daily dose" and "cumulative dose") was observed, with neither considering both dose and anticholinergic potency in score calculations., Conclusions: Accurate quantification of anticholinergic burden is important in assessing relative risks versus benefits of prescribing anticholinergic medications. In this review, the Anticholinergic Drug Scale and the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden scale and the average daily dose and cumulative dose measures, were determined to be well suited for the quantification of anticholinergic exposure, particularly in the context of administrative data analyses; however, methods to characterize anticholinergic burden through consideration of both anticholinergic dose and potency are needed., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Osteoporosis and overactive bladder (OAB) are prevalent conditions in older adults and are independent risk factors for falls and fractures. A paucity of evidence exists examining the impact of coexisting OAB in patients with osteoporosis., Objective: To examine the impact of OAB on healthcare resource utilization (HRU), clinical outcomes, and healthcare costs among older adult patients with osteoporosis., Methods: This retrospective analysis compared patients with osteoporosis with and without OAB. Patients with an osteoporosis diagnosis, enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan, and aged 65-89 inclusive were eligible. Incident OAB among patients with prevalent osteoporosis was identified. A comparison group of patients with osteoporosis but no evidence of OAB was propensity score matched on baseline characteristics. Fall and/or fracture outcomes, HRU and healthcare costs were evaluated during 12 months of follow-up. Bivariate comparisons of outcomes were conducted. Ordinary least squared regression was used to examine the relationship between OAB and total healthcare costs., Results: After matching, 5,526 patients in each group were included. Patients with osteoporosis and OAB demonstrated greater all-cause HRU across all encounter types compared to patients without OAB (all P values<0.001). Patients with osteoporosis and OAB had a greater frequency of any fall/fracture (17.7% vs. 14.9%, P<0.001). Patients with osteoporosis and OAB had 35% greater all-cause total healthcare costs than patients without OAB (P<0.001)., Conclusions: Patients with OAB and osteoporosis had significantly greater all-cause HRU and costs. Falls and fractures were significantly more common in patients with osteoporosis and OAB compared to patients with osteoporosis without OAB., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)