Search

Background: A large proportion of nursing home (NH) residents suffer from dementia and effects of conventional anti-dementia drugs on their health is poorly known. We aimed to investigate the associations between exposure to anti-dementia drugs and mortality among NH residents., Methods: This retrospective longitudinal observational study involved 329 French NH and the residents admitted in these facilities since 2014 and having major neurocognitive disorder. From their electronic health records, we obtained their age, sex, level of dependency, Charlson comorbidity index, and Mini mental examination score at admission. Exposure to anti-dementia drugs was determined using their prescription into 4 categories: none, exposure to acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (AChEI) alone, exposure to memantine alone, exposure to AChEI and memantine. Survival until the end of 2019 was studied in the entire cohort by Cox proportional hazards. To alleviate bias related to prescription of anti-dementia drugs, we formed propensity-score matched cohorts for each type of anti-dementia drug exposure, and studied survival by the same method., Results: We studied 25,358 NH residents with major neurocognitive disorder. Their age at admission was 87.1 + 7.1 years and 69.8% of them were women. Exposure to anti-dementia drugs occurred in 2,550 (10.1%) for AChEI alone, in 2,055 (8.1%) for memantine alone, in 460 (0.2%) for AChEI plus memantine, whereas 20,293 (80.0%) had no exposure to anti-dementia drugs. Adjusted hazard ratios for mortality were significantly reduced for these three groups exposed to anti-dementia drugs, as compared to reference group: HR: 0.826, 95%CI 0.769 to 0.888 for AChEI; 0.857, 95%CI 0.795 to 0.923 for memantine; 0.742, 95%CI 0.640 to 0.861 for AChEI plus memantine. Results were consistent in propensity-score matched cohorts., Conclusion: The use of conventional anti-dementia drugs is associated with a lower mortality in nursing home residents with dementia and should be widely used in this population., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objectives: A Stroke care Pathway dedicated to the ELders (SPEL) for patients with acute stroke was created in 2013 at the hospitals Pitié-Salpêtrière-Charles Foix (Paris, France). It is characterized by a stroke unit dedicated to emergency stroke care, and a post stroke geriatric unit (PSGU) including rehabilitation and management of geriatric syndromes. The aim of the study was to compare the functional recovery of patients transferred to PSGU versus other rehabilitation care in patients over 70 years of age after stroke., Design: A cohort observational study over a 4-year period., Setting: Hospitals Pitié-Salpêtrière and Charles Foix (Paris, France)., Participants: We studied patients over 70 years admitted to the participating stroke unit for acute stroke consecutively hospitalized from January 1, 2013, to January 1, 2017., Intervention: Patients transferred in the PSGU were compared to those admitted in other rehabilitation units., Measurements: The primary outcome was 3-month functional recovery after stroke. The secondary outcomes were the hospital length of stay and the returning home rate. A multivariable logistic regression was applied to adjust for confounding variables (age, sex, NIHSS score and Charlson's comorbidity score)., Results: Among the 262 patients included in the study, those in the PGSU were significantly older, had a higher Charlson's comorbidity score and a higher initial NIHSS severity score. As compared to the other patients, functional recovery at 3 months was better in the PSGU (Rankin's score decreased by 0.80 points versus 0.41 points, p = 0.01). The average total length of stay was reduced by 16 days in the patients referred to the PSGU (p = 0.002). There was no significant difference in the returning home rate between the two groups (p = 0.88)., Conclusion: The SPEL which includes a post-stroke geriatric unit (PSGU) has been associated with improved recovery and had a positive impact in the management of older post-stroke patients., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Frailty assessment is a major issue in geriatric medicine. The Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 (VES-13) is a simple and practical tool that identifies frailty through a 13-item questionnaire completed by older adults or their family caregivers by self-administration (pencil and paper) or by telephone interview. The VES-13 provides a 10-point score that is also a recognized mortality predictor., Objective: This study aims to design an electronic version of the Echelle de Vulnérabilité des Ainés-13, the French version of the VES-13 (eEVA-13) for use on a digital tablet and validate it., Methods: The scale was implemented as a web App in 3 different screens and used on an Android tablet (14.0× 25.6 cm). Participants were patients attending the outpatient clinic of a French geriatric hospital or hospitalized in a rehabilitation ward and family caregivers of geriatric patients. They completed the scale twice, once by a reference method (self-administered questionnaire or telephone interview) and once by eEVA-13 using the digital tablet. Agreement for diagnosis of frailty was assessed with the κ coefficient, and scores were compared by Bland and Altman plots and interclass correlation coefficients. User experience was assessed by a self-administered questionnaire., Results: In total, 86 participants, including 40 patients and 46 family caregivers, participated in the study. All family caregivers had previously used digital devices, while 13 (32.5%) and 10 (25%) patients had no or infrequent use of them previously. We observed no failure to complete the eEVA-13, and 70% of patients (28/40) and no family caregivers needed support to complete the eEVA-13. The agreement between the eEVA-13 and the reference method for the diagnosis of frailty was excellent (κ=0.92) with agreement in 83 cases and disagreement in 3 cases. The mean difference between the scores provided by the 2 scales was 0.081 (95% CI-1.263 to 1.426). Bland and Altman plots showed a high level of agreement between the eEVA-13 and the reference methods and interclass correlation coefficient value was 0.997 (95% CI 0.994-0.998) for the paper and tablet group and 0.977 (95% CI 0.957-0.988) for the phone and tablet groups. The tablet assessment was found to be easy to use by 77.5% (31/40) of patients and by 96% (44/46) of caregivers. Finally, 85% (39/46) of family caregivers and 50% (20/40) of patients preferred the eEVA-13 to the original version., Conclusions: The eEVA-13 is an appropriate digital tool for diagnosing frailty and can be used by older adults and their family caregivers. The scores obtained with eEVA-13 are highly correlated with those obtained with the original version. The use of health questionnaires on digital tablets is feasible in frail and very old patients, although some patients may need help to use them., (©Victoria Zolnowski-Kolp, Nathavy Um Din, Charlotte Havreng-Théry, Sylvie Pariel, Jacques-Henri Veyron, Carmelo Lafuente-Lafuente, Joel Belmin. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 02.08.2023.)

Background:  Although a growing number of very elderly patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), multiple conditions, and polypharmacy receive direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), few studies specifically investigated both apixaban/rivaroxaban pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in such patients., Aims:  To investigate: (1) DOAC concentration-time profiles; (2) thrombin generation (TG); and (3) clinical outcomes 6 months after inclusion in very elderly AF in-patients receiving rivaroxaban or apixaban., Methods:  Adage-NCT02464488 was an academic prospective exploratory multicenter study, enrolling AF in-patients aged ≥80 years, receiving DOAC for at least 4 days. Each patient had one to five blood samples at different time points over 20 days. DOAC concentrations were determined using chromogenic assays. TG was investigated using ST-Genesia (STG-ThromboScreen, STG-DrugScreen)., Results:  We included 215 patients (women 71.1%, mean age: 87 ± 4 years), 104 rivaroxaban and 111 apixaban, and 79.5% receiving reduced-dose regimen. We observed important inter-individual variabilities (coefficient of variation) whatever the regimen, at C max [49-46%] and C min [75-61%] in 15 mg rivaroxaban and 2.5 mg apixaban patients, respectively. The dose regimen was associated with C max and C min plasma concentrations in apixaban ( p =  0.0058 and p =  0.0222, respectively), but not in rivaroxaban samples (multivariate analysis). Moreover, substantial variability of thrombin peak height (STG-ThromboScreen) was noticed at a given plasma concentration for both xabans, suggesting an impact of the underlying coagulation status on TG in elderly in-patients. After 6-month follow-up, major bleeding/thromboembolic event/death rates were 6.7%/1.0%/17.3% in rivaroxaban and 5.4%/3.6%/18.9% in apixaban patients, respectively., Conclusion:  Our study provides original data in very elderly patients receiving DOAC in a real-life setting, showing great inter-individual variability in plasma concentrations and TG parameters. Further research is needed to understand the potential clinical impact of these findings., Competing Interests: V.S., I.G.-T., E.Pa, E.Pu, F.M., M.D., and P.G. have received honoraria for participating in expert meetings on dabigatran (from Boehringer Ingelheim), rivaroxaban (from Bayer Healthcare AG), or apixaban (Bristol Myers Squibb-Pfizer). G.F. and E.Pu received a grant from Bayer. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).)

Background: Little is known about risk factors for mortality in older patients with COVID-19 and neuropsychiatric conditions., Methods: We conducted a multicentric retrospective observational study at Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris. We selected inpatients aged 70 years or older, with COVID-19 and preexisting neuropsychiatric comorbidities and/or new neuropsychiatric manifestations. We examined demographics, comorbidities, functional status, and presentation including neuropsychiatric symptoms and disorders, as well as paraclinical data. Cox survival analysis was conducted to determine risk factors for mortality at 40 days after the first symptoms of COVID-19., Results: Out of 191 patients included (median age 80 [interquartile range 74-87]), 135 (71%) had neuropsychiatric comorbidities including cognitive impairment (39%), cerebrovascular disease (22%), Parkinsonism (6%), and brain tumors (6%). A total of 152 (79%) patients presented new-onset neuropsychiatric manifestations including sensory symptoms (6%), motor deficit (11%), behavioral (18%) and cognitive (23%) disturbances, gait impairment (11%), and impaired consciousness (18%). The mortality rate at 40 days was 19.4%. A history of brain tumor or Parkinsonism or the occurrence of impaired consciousness were neurological factors associated with a higher risk of mortality. A lower Activities of Daily Living score (hazard ratio [HR] 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-0.82), a neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio ≥ 9.9 (HR 5.69, 95% CI 2.69-12.0), and thrombocytopenia (HR 5.70, 95% CI 2.75-11.8) independently increased the risk of mortality (all p < .001)., Conclusion: Understanding mortality risk factors in older inpatients with COVID-19 and neuropsychiatric conditions may be helpful to neurologists and geriatricians who manage these patients in clinical practice., (© 2022 The Authors. Brain and Behavior published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background and Objectives: Cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) have cardiovascular effects in addition to their neurologic activity and might alter mortality. We wanted to know whether treatment with ChEIs modifies mortality in patients with dementia., Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICRTP, from their inception to November 2021, and screened bibliographies of reviews, guidelines, and included studies. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized controlled studies at lower risk of bias comparing ChEI treatment with placebo or usual treatment, for 6 months or longer, in patients with dementia of any type. Two investigators independently assessed studies for inclusion, assessed their risk of bias, and extracted data using predefined forms. Any discordance between investigators was solved by discussion and consensus. Data on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, measured as either crude death rates or multivariate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs), were pooled using a random-effect model. Information size achieved was assessed using trial sequential analysis (TSA). We followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines., Results: Twenty-four studies (12 RCTs, 12 cohorts, mean follow-up 6-120 months), cumulating 79,153 patients with Alzheimer (13 studies), Parkinson (1), vascular (1), or any type (9) dementia, fulfilled inclusion criteria. Pooled all-cause mortality in control patients was 15.1 per 100 person-years. Treatment with ChEIs was associated with lower all-cause mortality (unadjusted risk ratio [RR] 0.74, 95% CI 0.66-0.84; adjusted HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.70-0.84, moderate-quality to high-quality evidence). This result was consistent between randomized and nonrandomized studies and in several sensitivity analyses. No difference appeared between subgroups by type of dementia, age, individual drug, or dementia severity. Less data were available for cardiovascular mortality (3 RCTs, 2 cohorts, 9,182 patients, low-quality to moderate-quality evidence), which was also lower in patients treated with ChEIs (unadjusted RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40-0.93, adjusted HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.32-0.68). In TSA analysis, the results for all-cause mortality were conclusive but not those for cardiovascular mortality., Discussion: There is moderate-quality to high-quality evidence of a consistent association between long-term treatment with ChEIs and a reduction in all-cause mortality in patients with dementia. These findings may influence decisions to prescribe ChEIs in those patients., Trial Registration Information: This systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews with the number CRD42021254458 (June 11, 2021)., (© 2022 American Academy of Neurology.)

Background: Few data are available on the prognosis of older patients who received corticosteroids for COVID-19. We aimed to compare the in-hospital mortality of geriatric patients hospitalized for COVID-19 who received corticosteroids or not., Methods: We conducted a multicentric retrospective cohort study in 15 acute COVID-19 geriatric wards in the Paris area from March to April 2020 and November 2020 to May 2021. We included all consecutive patients aged 70 years and older who were hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 in these wards. Propensity score and multivariate analyses were used., Results: Of the 1 579 patients included (535 received corticosteroids), the median age was 86 (interquartile range 81-91) years, 56% of patients were female, the median Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was 2.6 (interquartile range 1-4), and 64% of patients were frail (Clinical Frailty Score 5-9). The propensity score analysis paired 984 patients (492 with and without corticosteroids). The in-hospital mortality was 32.3% in the matched cohort. On multivariate analysis, the probability of in-hospital mortality was increased with corticosteroid use (odds ratio [OR] = 2.61 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.63-4.20]). Other factors associated with in-hospital mortality were age (OR = 1.04 [1.01-1.07], CCI (OR = 1.18 [1.07-1.29], activities of daily living (OR = 0.85 [0.75-0.95], oxygen saturation < 90% on room air (OR = 2.15 [1.45-3.17], C-reactive protein level (OR = 2.06 [1.69-2.51], and lowest lymphocyte count (OR = 0.49 [0.38-0.63]). Among the 535 patients who received corticosteroids, 68.3% had at least one corticosteroid side effect, including delirium (32.9%), secondary infections (32.7%), and decompensated diabetes (14.4%)., Conclusions: In this multicentric matched-cohort study of geriatric patients hospitalized for COVID-19, the use of corticosteroids was significantly associated with in-hospital mortality., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: It is not known if widespread vaccination can prevent the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in subpopulations at high risk, like older adults in nursing homes (NH)., Objective: The objective of the study was to know if coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreaks can occur in NH with high vaccination coverage among its residents., Methods: We identified, using national professional networks, NH that suffered COVID-19 outbreaks despite having completed a vaccination campaign, and asked them to send data, using predefined collecting forms, on the number of residents exposed, their vaccination status and the number, characteristics, and evolution of patients infected. The main outcome was to identify outbreaks occurring in NH with high vaccine coverage. Secondary outcomes were residents' risk of being infected, developing severe disease, or dying from COVID-19 during the outbreak. SARS-CoV-2 infection was defined by a positive reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. All residents were serially tested whenever cases appeared in a facility. Unadjusted secondary attack rates, relative risks, and vaccine effectiveness during the outbreak were estimated., Results: We identified 31 NH suffering an outbreak during March-April 2021, of which 27 sent data, cumulating 1,768 residents (mean age 88.4, 73.4% women, 78.2% fully vaccinated). BNT162b2 was the vaccine employed in all NH. There were 365 cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Median secondary attack rates were 20.0% (IQR 4.4%-50.0%) among unvaccinated residents and 16.7% (IQR 9.5%-29.2%) among fully vaccinated ones. Severe cases developed in 42 of 80 (52.5%) unvaccinated patients, compared with 56 of 248 (22.6%) fully vaccinated ones (relative risks [RR] 4.17, 95% CI: 2.43-7.17). Twenty of the unvaccinated patients (25.0%) and 16 of fully vaccinated ones (6.5%) died from COVID-19 (RR 5.11, 95% CI: 2.49-10.5). Estimated vaccine effectiveness during the outbreak was 34.5% (95% CI: 18.5-47.3) for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection, 71.8% (58.8-80.7) for preventing severe disease, and 83.1% (67.8-91.1) for preventing death., Conclusions: Outbreaks of COVID-19, including severe cases and deaths, can still occur in NH despite full vaccination of a majority of residents. Vaccine remains highly effective, however, for preventing severe disease and death. Prevention and control measures for SARS-CoV-2 should be maintained in NH at periods of high incidence in the community., (© 2022 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: We wanted to better understand the frequency and temporal distribution of symptoms of COVID-19 in very old patients, which are currently not well defined., Methods: In an observational, descriptive study, we followed all patients being at three geriatric convalescence and rehabilitation units when a COVID-19 outbreak emerged in those units in March 2020. For those who developed the disease, we recorded any new symptom occurring at diagnosis, in the previous 14 and the following 21 days. A group of SARS-Cov-2-negative patients served as controls., Results: Sixty-nine of the 176 inpatients (mean age: 86 years) were infected by SARS-Cov-2 during the outbreak. At the moment of diagnosis, a majority of patients had fever (71.0%), malaise-asthenia (24.6%), or respiratory symptoms (66.7%). However, 48 patients (69.6% of all SARS-Cov-2 positive patients) also presented, usually several days before, other symptoms: (a) gastrointestinal symptoms (39.1% of all patients, median onset eight days before diagnosis, IQR -9 to +3 days); (b) neurological symptoms (30.4% of all patients, median onset five days before diagnosis, IQR -11 to -3 days), notably delirium (24.6%); and (c) other symptoms, like falls and unexplained decompensation of chronic conditions (29.0% of all patients, median onset four days before diagnosis, IQR -10 to 0). None of those symptoms were observed in similar proportion in 25 control SARS-CoV-2-negative patients, hospitalized during the same period., Conclusions: Diarrhea, nausea-vomiting, delirium, falls, and unexplained decompensation of chronic conditions were the first symptoms of COVID-19 in a majority of older patients in this cohort, preceding typical symptoms by several days. Recognizing those early symptoms could hasten the diagnosis of COVID-19 in this population.

Objectives: The Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused a considerable mortality in long-term care facilities (LTCFs), including residential care setting and nursing homes. This study aimed to estimate COVID-19 incidence and mortality in residential care facilities and to compare them with those recorded in nursing homes., Design: Nationwide observational study conducted by French health authorities., Settings and Participants: Since March 1, 2020, all LTCFs in France reported all COVID-19 cases and COVID-19-related deaths among their residents., Methods: Possible cases were those with COVID-19-related symptoms without laboratory confirmation and confirmed cases those with a reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction test or serology positive for SARS-CoV-2. We included facilities with at least 1 confirmed case of COVID-19 and estimated the cumulative incidence of COVID-19 cases and mortality due to COVID-19 reported until June 30, 2020, using the maximum bed capacity as a denominator., Results: Of the 2288 residential care facilities, 310 (14%) and, of the 7688 nursing homes, 3110 (40%) reported COVID-19 cases among residents (P < .001). The cumulative incidence of COVID-19 was significantly lower in residential care facilities as compared with nursing homes (1.10 vs 9.97 per 100 beds, P < .001). Mortality due to COVID-19 was also lower in residential care facilities compared with nursing homes (0.07 vs 1.29 per 100 beds, P < .001). Case fatality was lower in residential care facilities (6.49% vs 12.93%, P < .001)., Conclusion and Implications: French residential care facilities experienced a much lower burden from COVID-19 than nursing homes. Our findings may inform the implementation of better infection control practices in these settings., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To summarize the research literature describing the outcomes of computerized decision support systems (CDSSs) implemented in nursing homes (NHs)., Design: Scoping review., Methods: Search of relevant articles published in the English language between January 1, 2000, and February 29, 2020, in the Medline database. The quality of the selected studies was assessed according to PRISMA guidelines and the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool., Results: From 1828 articles retrieved, 24 studies were selected for review, among which only 6 were randomized controlled trials. Although clinical outcomes are seldom studied, some studies show that CDSSs have the potential to decrease pressure ulcer incidence and malnutrition prevalence. Improvement of process outcomes such as increased compliance with practice guidelines, better documentation of nursing assessment, improved teamwork and communication, and cost saving, also are reported., Conclusions and Implications: Overall, the use of CDSSs in NHs may be effective to improve patient clinical outcomes and health care delivery; however, most of the retrieved studies were observational studies, which significantly weakens the evidence. High-quality studies are needed to investigate CDSS effects and limitations in NHs., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Competing Interests: Prof Belmin reports participation to boards and conferences for Novartis, Pfizer and Sanofi, all outside of the submitted work. Dr Lafuente has nothing to disclose.

Background: Although evidence-based practice (EBP) has been spreading since the 1990s, it has not yet been sufficiently implemented., Aim: Following the reform of initial training for healthcare professions in France 2012, we sought to determine whether the new curriculum was associated with more frequent use of EBP., Methods: We performed an online, cross-sectional survey of nurses, occupational therapists, and podiatrists (divided into pre- and post-reform groups) in June 2018. The questionnaire covered demographic data, use of EBP, and the perception of EBP. As holding a master's degree may enhance knowledge and use of EBP, we adjusted for this variable. Categories to analyze qualitative data were created regarding the five steps in EBP and its definition., Results: The total sample was N = 595 (pre-reform group n = 301; post-reform group n = 294). The proportion of respondents who frequently read the professional literature was lower in the post-reform group than in the pre-reform group (33% vs. 54%, respectively; OR [95% CI] = .52 [.37-.73]; p < .001). The main stated reasons for reading the professional literature were "keeping up to date with practice" and "making clinical decisions." Respondents in both groups mentioned a lack of time as the most frequent barrier to reading the literature (82%), a lack of access to bibliographical resources, and that EBP was not encouraged. Most professionals limited their definition of EBP to reading the literature and implementing research results., Linking Evidence to Action: There is a need to teach the five steps of EBP more explicitly and to embed its position into daily practice, for example, through reflective analysis practice. Professional trainings about EBP should be offered on a regular basis. Guidance coming from the healthcare directorate should include expected daily practice time for reading and journal club and giving more access to international healthcare literature., (© 2020 Sigma Theta Tau International.)

Background: Age-associated decline in nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD) tissue levels has emerged as potential driving mechanism in the establishment of energy metabolism perturbations in the context of chronic diseases, notably heart failure., Objective: The aim of this study was to measure the blood NAD levels in a healthy blood donor population and in a population of elderly patients hospitalized for decompensated heart failure., Method: Whole blood sample was collected from 151 healthy voluntary blood donors, aged 19 to 68 years, and from 19 patients aged 75 to 101 years and hospitalized for decompensated heart failure in a geriatric ward. Metabolites were extracted by the hot buffered ethanol procedure and NAD was quantified in triplicate for each sample., Results: The mean concentration of NAD in blood of healthy donors was 23.4 (SD 4.05) μmol/L. There was no significant correlation between NAD levels and donors' age nor sex in the healthy population when studied as a whole. However, the linear regression curves of NAD concentration plotted against age differed between males and females (p = 0.0283) with a trend in males to decline with age that was not observed in females. The mean concentration of NAD in whole blood samples of the geriatric population was 20.7 (SD 3.6) μmol/L (p = 0.007 versus the healthy blood donor population). There were no differences between males and females (p = 0.7) nor between patients with ejection fraction inferior or superior to 50% (p = 0.86) in the geriatric population., Conclusion: This study highlighted a diminution of NAD blood levels for elderly patients hospitalized for decompensated heart failure in comparison to a healthy population, suggesting that new therapeutics to restore NAD stock and energy metabolism would be a major progress in the management of this type of geriatric patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The Coronarovirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) outbreak strongly affected nursing and was responsible for a high mortality rate. During the pandemic of March-May 2020, 17 French nursing homes organized staff confinement periods with residents 24 hours a day and 7 days a week, to reduce the risk of entry of the SARS-CoV-2 virus into their facilities, in a context where visits to residents were prohibited. By means of a telephone survey of their directors, we observed that 16 nursing homes (94%) had no cases of COVID-19 among the residents, and that mortality from COVID-19 was very low compared to that recorded at the national level by Santé publique France (p<10 -4 ). Moreover, the number of cases of Covid-19 among the staff of these nursing homes was also lower than that recorded by Santé publique France (p<10 -4 ). These establishments experienced certain difficulties which the directors managed to overcome and the investment of these teams was widely appreciated by the families of the residents and through the press.

Importance: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a major threat to nursing homes. During the COVID-19 pandemic wave that hit France in March and April 2020, staff members of some French nursing homes decided to confine themselves with their residents on a voluntary basis to reduce the risk of entry of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 into the facility., Objective: To investigate COVID-19-related outcomes in French nursing homes that implemented voluntary staff confinement with residents., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study was conducted in French nursing homes from March 1 to May 11, 2020. Participants included residents and staff members of the nursing homes where staff participated in voluntary self-confinement as well as those of the facilities for elderly people where staff did not practice self-confinement. Rates of COVID-19 cases and mortality in the cohort of nursing homes with self confinement were compared with those derived from a population-based survey of nursing homes conducted by French health authorities., Exposures: Nursing homes with staff who self-confined were identified from the media and included if the confinement period of staff with residents was longer than 7 days., Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality related to COVID-19 among residents and COVID-19 cases among residents and staff members. COVID-19 was diagnosed by primary care or hospital physicians on the basis of fever and respiratory signs (eg, cough, dyspnea) or a clinical illness compatible with COVID-19; COVID-19 diagnoses were considered confirmed if real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 on nasopharyngeal swab was positive and considered possible if the test had not been performed or results were negative. Cases of COVID-19 were recorded by a telephone interview with the directors of nursing homes with staff who self-confined and by a nationwide declaration survey to health authorities for all facilities., Results: This study included 17 nursing homes in which 794 staff members confined themselves to the facility with their 1250 residents. The national survey included 9513 facilities with 385 290 staff members and 695 060 residents. Only 1 nursing home with staff who self-confined (5.8%) had cases of COVID-19 among residents, compared with 4599 facilities in the national survey (48.3%) (P < .001). Five residents (0.4%) in the nursing homes with staff who self-confined had confirmed COVID-19, compared with 30 569 residents (4.4%) with confirmed COVID-19 in the national survey (P < .001); no residents of facilities with self-confinement had possible COVID-19, compared with 31 799 residents (4.6%) with possible COVID-19 in the national survey (P < .001). Five residents (0.4%) in the nursing homes with staff who self-confined died of COVID-19, compared with 12 516 (1.8%) in the national survey (odds ratio, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.09-0.53; P < .001). Twelve staff members (1.6%) from the facilties with self-confinement had confirmed or possible COVID-19, compared with 29 463 staff members (7.6%) in the national survey (P < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of French nursing homes during the COVID-19 pandemic, mortality rates related to COVID-19 were lower among nursing homes that implemented staff confinement with residents compared with those in a national survey. These findings suggest that self-confinement of staff members with residents may help protect nursing home residents from mortality related to COVID-19 and residents and staff from COVID-19 infection.

The world population is dramatically ageing, resulting in an increase of the prevalence of older dependent adults living in nursing homes (NHs). Because of insufficient resources in NHs, and nurses' lack of time and knowledge, adverse events, most of them being preventable, are often reported. Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) have proven to improve the quality of care in various healthcare settings such as hospitals and primary care centers. However, the use of CDSSs in NHs is still limited and little is known about their influence on nursing practices and NH residents' clinical outcomes. We conducted a scoping review of the literature to evaluate CDSS use in NHs. Out of 1,231 retrieved papers, 15 studies were retrieved which assess 10 CDSSs applied to pressure ulcers and malnutrition prevention, drug prescription, and disease management. This review showed CDSSs could be effective in NHs for improving routine clinical practice and patient outcomes, but research is still needed to implement effective CDSSs in NHs.

Background: Chronic peripheral oedema is frequent in old patients, and very often results from multiple causes., Aim: To investigate whether determination of B-type natriuretic peptide plasma concentration helps with the diagnosis of chronic peripheral oedema aetiologies., Methods: This was a cross-sectional observational study conducted in geriatric hospital wards (intermediate and long-term care) on consecutive in-hospital patients aged>75 years with chronic peripheral oedema and no dyspnoea. From medical history, physical examination, routine biological tests and chest radiography, two investigators determined the aetiologies of oedema, with special attention paid to recognizing chronic heart failure. This reference diagnosis was compared with the clinical diagnosis mentioned in the medical chart. Brain natriuretic peptide plasma concentrations were measured soon after the investigators' visit., Results: Among the 141 patients (113 women and 28 men) aged 86±6 years, a single aetiology was identified in 53 (38%), and multiple aetiologies in 84 (60%). The main aetiologies were venous insufficiency (69%), chronic heart failure (43%), hypoproteinaemia (38%) and drug-induced oedema (26%). Chronic heart failure was frequently misdiagnosed by attending clinicians (missed in 18 cases and wrongly diagnosed in 14 cases). Brain natriuretic peptide concentration was significantly higher in patients with chronic heart failure than in those without: median (interquartile range) 490 (324-954) versus 137 (79-203) pg/mL, respectively (P<0.0001). The receiver operating characteristic curve showed that a concentration of 274pg/mL was appropriate for diagnosing chronic heart failure, with a specificity of 0.89 and a sensitivity of 0.82. Brain natriuretic peptide concentrations above this cut-off were significantly and independently associated with the diagnosis of chronic heart failure., Conclusions: Chronic heart failure is frequently misdiagnosed in old patients with chronic peripheral oedema, and B-type natriuretic peptide plasma concentration helped to improve the diagnosis of this condition and identify chronic heart failure., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Background: Identifying and assessing degree and type of frailty among older persons is a major challenge when targeting high risk populations to identify preventive interventions. The Vulnerable Elders Survey-(VES-13) is a simple instrument to identify frailty defined as risk for death, functional decline or institutionalization., Objective: Translate VES-13 into French and validate it., Methods: The French version of VES-13 was developed by forward-backward translation of the VES-13 survey instrument. The authors assessed its feasibility, construct validity, and ability to predict the combined outcomes of admission to institution or death at 18 months, in 135 persons over 70 years of age living in the community. Subjects were recruited from three settings: Group 1 - a health prevention center (n = 45); Group 2 - an ambulatory care geriatric clinic (n = 40); and Group 3 - an intermediate care hospital unit (n = 50). The combined outcomes data were recorded by telephone interview with participants or a proxy., Results: Feasibility of the French version, named Echelle de Vulnérabilité des Ainés-13 or EVA-13, was excellent. The scale classified 5 (11%) persons as vulnerable (score of 3 or more) in Group 1, 23 (58%) in Group 2 and 45 (90%) in Group 3 (p < 0.001) with scores of 0.91 +/- 1.16, 4.27 +/- 3.17 and 6.90 +/- 3.17, respectively (p < 0.001). At follow-up, among the 60 non-vulnerable subjects, 58 (96%) were alive and living at home, whereas 46 (65%) of the 70 vulnerable subjects were alive and living at home (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: EVA-13 was determined to be valid and reliable.

Background: Health professionals working with older persons are not sufficiently aware of the sensory and functional difficulties experienced by older patients. Innovative educational activities, such as the aging-simulation experience, can facilitate this awareness. This study describes the effects of an aging-simulation experience on health professionals' representations towards age-related limitations., Methods: 306 health professionals, enrolled in university training in geriatrics/gerontology in the 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 academic years, experienced an aging-simulation session wearing a special suit according to a predefined scenario. Before and after the aging-simulation experience, participants completed free association tests, with the inductive words vision, hearing, movement, fine dexterity and balance. Semantic categories were created from participants' free evocations using a correspondence table manually produced in Excel 2013 for Windows (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington). Moreover, participants' opinions on difficulties experienced by older people in relation to age-related limitations were studied using Likert scale questions., Results: In total, 3060 free evocations were collected, and ten semantic categories were created. These categories were composed of participants' geriatric knowledge, about age-related limitations, and participants' feelings, about the experience of these limitations. These two aspects were impacted by the aging-simulation experience. Moreover, changes observed resulted in a better consideration of difficulties associated with age-related limitations., Conclusions: The aging-simulation experience is an effective educational tool to raise awareness among health professionals of age-related difficulties. This sensory activity allows health professionals to put themselves in the shoes of older patients and to feel age-related difficulties.

Background: Atrial fibrillation is the most frequent sustained arrhythmia. Atrial fibrillation often recurs after restoration of normal sinus rhythm. Antiarrhythmic drugs have been widely used to prevent recurrence. This is an update of a review previously published in 2006, 2012 and 2015., Objectives: To determine the effects of long-term treatment with antiarrhythmic drugs on death, stroke, drug adverse effects and recurrence of atrial fibrillation in people who had recovered sinus rhythm after having atrial fibrillation., Search Methods: We updated the searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase in January 2019, and ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP in February 2019. We checked the reference lists of retrieved articles, recent reviews and meta-analyses., Selection Criteria: Two authors independently selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any antiarrhythmic drug with a control (no treatment, placebo, drugs for rate control) or with another antiarrhythmic drug in adults who had atrial fibrillation and in whom sinus rhythm was restored, spontaneously or by any intervention. We excluded postoperative atrial fibrillation., Data Collection and Analysis: Two authors independently assessed quality and extracted data. We pooled studies, if appropriate, using Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (RR), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). All results were calculated at one year of follow-up or the nearest time point., Main Results: This update included one new study (100 participants) and excluded one previously included study because of double publication. Finally, we included 59 RCTs comprising 20,981 participants studying quinidine, disopyramide, propafenone, flecainide, metoprolol, amiodarone, dofetilide, dronedarone and sotalol. Overall, mean follow-up was 10.2 months.All-cause mortalityHigh-certainty evidence from five RCTs indicated that treatment with sotalol was associated with a higher all-cause mortality rate compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 2.23, 95% CI 1.03 to 4.81; participants = 1882). The number need to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for sotalol was 102 participants treated for one year to have one additional death. Low-certainty evidence from six RCTs suggested that risk of mortality may be higher in people taking quinidine (RR 2.01, 95% CI 0.84 to 4.77; participants = 1646). Moderate-certainty evidence showed increased RR for mortality but with very wide CIs for metoprolol (RR 2.02, 95% CI 0.37 to 11.05, 2 RCTs, participants = 562) and amiodarone (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.55 to 4.99, 2 RCTs, participants = 444), compared with placebo.We found little or no difference in mortality with dofetilide (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.27; moderate-certainty evidence) or dronedarone (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.09; high-certainty evidence) compared to placebo/no treatment. There were few data on mortality for disopyramide, flecainide and propafenone, making impossible a reliable estimation for those drugs.Withdrawals due to adverse eventsAll analysed drugs increased withdrawals due to adverse effects compared to placebo or no treatment (quinidine: RR 1.56, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.78; disopyramide: RR 3.68, 95% CI 0.95 to 14.24; propafenone: RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.46; flecainide: RR 15.41, 95% CI 0.91 to 260.19; metoprolol: RR 3.47, 95% CI 1.48 to 8.15; amiodarone: RR 6.70, 95% CI 1.91 to 23.45; dofetilide: RR 1.77, 95% CI 0.75 to 4.18; dronedarone: RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.34 to 1.85; sotalol: RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.23 to 3.11). Certainty of the evidence for this outcome was low for disopyramide, amiodarone, dofetilide and flecainide; moderate to high for the remaining drugs.ProarrhythmiaVirtually all studied antiarrhythmics showed increased proarrhythmic effects (counting both tachyarrhythmias and bradyarrhythmias attributable to treatment) (quinidine: RR 2.05, 95% CI 0.95 to 4.41; disopyramide: no data; flecainide: RR 4.80, 95% CI 1.30 to 17.77; metoprolol: RR 18.14, 95% CI 2.42 to 135.66; amiodarone: RR 2.22, 95% CI 0.71 to 6.96; dofetilide: RR 5.50, 95% CI 1.33 to 22.76; dronedarone: RR 1.95, 95% CI 0.77 to 4.98; sotalol: RR 3.55, 95% CI 2.16 to 5.83); with the exception of propafenone (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.39 to 4.47) for which the certainty of evidence was very low and we were uncertain about the effect. Certainty of the evidence for this outcome for the other drugs was moderate to high.StrokeEleven studies reported stroke outcomes with quinidine, disopyramide, flecainide, amiodarone, dronedarone and sotalol. High-certainty evidence from two RCTs suggested that dronedarone may be associated with reduced risk of stroke (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.95; participants = 5872). This result is attributed to one study dominating the meta-analysis and has yet to be reproduced in other studies. There was no apparent effect on stroke rates with the other antiarrhythmics.Recurrence of atrial fibrillationModerate- to high-certainty evidence, with the exception of disopyramide which was low-certainty evidence, showed that all analysed drugs, including metoprolol, reduced recurrence of atrial fibrillation (quinidine: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.88; disopyramide: RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.01; propafenone: RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.74; flecainide: RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.77; metoprolol: RR 0.83 95% CI 0.68 to 1.02; amiodarone: RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.58; dofetilide: RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.85; dronedarone: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.91; sotalol: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.87). Despite this reduction, atrial fibrillation still recurred in 43% to 67% of people treated with antiarrhythmics., Authors' Conclusions: There is high-certainty evidence of increased mortality associated with sotalol treatment, and low-certainty evidence suggesting increased mortality with quinidine, when used for maintaining sinus rhythm in people with atrial fibrillation. We found few data on mortality in people taking disopyramide, flecainide and propafenone, so it was not possible to make a reliable estimation of the mortality risk for these drugs. However, we did find moderate-certainty evidence of marked increases in proarrhythmia and adverse effects with flecainide.Overall, there is evidence showing that antiarrhythmic drugs increase adverse events, increase proarrhythmic events and some antiarrhythmics may increase mortality. Conversely, although they reduce recurrences of atrial fibrillation, there is no evidence of any benefit on other clinical outcomes, compared with placebo or no treatment.

Objectives: Healthcare professionals are expected to firmly ground their practice in sound evidence. That implies that they know and use evidence-based medicine (EBM). In this study, our aim was to know how often health professionals actually made use of EBM in their daily practice., Design: A questionnaire survey of healthcare professionals., Participants: Healthcare professionals who attended six university postgraduate courses. 226 answered the questionnaire (144 physicians, 64 nurses and 24 pharmacists; response rate 63.3%)., Setting: 56.5% of respondents worked in hospitals (mostly non-teaching), 25.0% in nursing homes and 10.2% in primary care. All participants were French-speaking and lived in France or Switzerland., Measures: Declared degree of knowledge and use of EBM, use of EBM-related information sources., Results: Overall, 14.2% of respondents declared to use EBM regularly in their daily practice and 15.6% declared to use EBM only occasionally. The remaining respondents declared they: knew about EBM but did not use it (33.1%), had just heard about EBM (31.9%) or did not know what EBM is (4.0%). Concerning the use of EBM-related information sources, 83.4% declared to use at least monthly (or more often) clinical guidelines, 47.1% PubMed, 21.3% the Cochrane Library and 6.4% other medical databases.Fewer pharmacists (12%) declared to use EBM in their practice than nurses (22%) or doctors (36%). No difference appeared when analysed by gender, work setting or years after graduation. The most frequent obstacles perceived for the practice of EBM were: lack of general knowledge about EBM, lack of skills for critical appraisal and lack of time., Conclusions: Only a minority of health professionals-with differences between physicians, nurses and pharmacists-declare to regularly use EBM in their professional practice. A larger proportion appears to be interested in EBM but seems to be deterred by their lack of knowledge, skills and personal time., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

The multidimensional, multiprofessional gerontological evaluation helps identify geriatric syndromes and situations of fragility. This is a first step to establish a plan of care and assistance, to reduce the risk of falls, hospitalization, entry into institutions and to prevent a decline in independence. Older people with cardiovascular disease such as heart failure are at very high risk of repeated hospitalizations, with an average of 45% of patients re-hospitalized in the year following all-cause hospitalization. In the context of heart failure, frailty is an independent risk factor for mortality within 30 days of leaving hospital. Screening for frailty before transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or interventional rhythmic procedure is a determining factor in decision-making for benefit in terms of survival and quality of life in elderly patients. Vascular diseases by their cerebral complications represent the first cause of mortality and the first cause of loss of functional independence in the subjects of more than 65 years. Vascular disease is a risk factor for cognitive impairment in the elderly., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Heart failure (HF) is a clinical syndrome that associates clinical signs in people over 80 years of age, an increase in natriuretic peptides and abnormal cardiac structures that result from cardiac aging in many cases. The most common symptoms are grouped according to the acronym "EPOF" (shortness of breath, weight gain, edema, fatigue). Over the age of 80, comorbidities must be taken into account. The incidence and prevalence of HF significantly increases with age and makes HF the most common reason for hospitalization for people over 80, and an important health expense. The management of HF, necessarily multidisciplinary with a geriatric evaluation, has improved over time due to effective targeted treatment, but mortality, hospitalization and readmission rates remain high. Therapeutic education and patient follow-up for treatment optimization are needed., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)