Search

Background: We aimed to summarize the published evidence on the fall risk reducing potential of cardiovascular diagnostics and treatments in older adults. Methods: Design: scoping review and evidence map. Data sources: Medline and Embase. Eligibility criteria: all available published evidence; Key search concepts: "older adults," "cardiovascular evaluation," "cardiovascular intervention," and "falls." Studies reporting on fall risk reducing effect of the diagnostic/treatment were included in the evidence map. Studies that investigated cardiovascular diagnostics or treatments within the context of falls, but without reporting a fall-related outcome, were included in the scoping review for qualitative synthesis. Results: Two articles on cardiovascular diagnostics and eight articles on cardiovascular treatments were included in the evidence map. Six out of ten studies concerned pacemaker intervention of which one meta-analyses that included randomized controlled trials with contradictory results. A combined cardiovascular assessment/evaluation (one study) and pharmacotherapy in orthostatic hypotension (one study) showed fall reducing potential. The scoping review contained 40 articles on cardiovascular diagnostics and one on cardiovascular treatments. It provides an extensive overview of several diagnostics (e.g., orthostatic blood pressure measurements, heart rhythm assessment) useful in fall prevention. Also, diagnostics were identified, that could potentially provide added value in fall prevention (e.g., blood pressure variability and head turning). Conclusion: Although the majority of studies showed a reduction in falls after the intervention, the total amount of evidence regarding the effect of cardiovascular diagnostics/treatments on falls is small. Our findings can be used to optimize fall prevention strategies and develop an evidence-based fall prevention care pathway. Adhering to the World guidelines on fall prevention recommendations, it is crucial to undertake a standardized assessment of cardiovascular risk factors, followed by supplementary testing and corresponding interventions, as effective components of fall prevention strategies. In addition, accompanying diagnostics such as blood pressure variability and head turning can be of added value. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pain treatment is important in older adults but may result in adverse events such as falls. Opioids are effective for nociceptive pain but the evidence for neuropathic pain is weak. Nevertheless, both pain and opioids may increase the risk of falls. This narrative literature review aims to summarize the existing knowledge on the opioid-related fall risk in older adults, including the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, and assist clinicians in prescribing and deprescribing opioids in older persons. We systematically searched relevant literature on opioid-related fall risk in older adults in PubMed and Scopus in December 2020. We reviewed the literature and evaluated fall-related adverse effects of opioids, explaining how to optimally approach deprescribing of opioids in older adults. Opioid use increases fall risk through drowsiness, (orthostatic) hypotension and also through hyponatremia caused by weak opioids. When prescribing, opioids should be started with low dosages if possible, keeping in mind their metabolic genetic variation. Falls are clinically significant adverse effects of all opioids, and the risk may be dose dependent and highest with strong opioids. The risk is most prominent in older adults prone to falls. To reduce the risk of falls, both pain and the need for opioids should be assessed on a regular basis, and deprescribing or changing to a lower dosage or safer alternative should be considered if the clinical condition allows. Deprescribing should be done by reducing the dosage gradually and by assessing and monitoring the pain and withdrawal symptoms at the same time. Weighing the risks and benefits is necessary before prescribing opioids, especially to older persons at high risk of falls. Clinical decision tools assist prescribers in clinical decisions regarding (de-) prescribing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]