Karen Cardwell1, Carmel M Hughes2, Cristín Ryan1,3. 1. Clinical and Practice Research Group, School of Pharmacy, Queen's University Belfast, 97 Lisburn Road, Belfast, BT9 7BL, Northern Ireland. 2. Clinical and Practice Research Group, School of Pharmacy, Queen's University Belfast, 97 Lisburn Road, Belfast, BT9 7BL, Northern Ireland. c.hughes@qub.ac.uk. 3. School of Pharmacy, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Increased exposure to anticholinergic medication is problematic, particularly in those aged 80 years and older. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to identify tools used to quantify anticholinergic medication burden and determine the most appropriate tool for use in longitudinal research, conducted in those aged 80 years and older. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted across six electronic databases to identify existing tools. Data extraction was conducted independently by two researchers; studies describing the development of each tool were also retrieved and relevant data extracted. An assessment of quality was completed for all studies. Tools were assessed in terms of their measurement of the association between anticholinergic medication burden and a defined set of clinical outcomes, their development and their suitability for use in longitudinal research; the latter was evaluated on the basis of criteria defined as the key attributes of an ideal anticholinergic risk tool. RESULTS: In total, 807 papers were retrieved, 13 studies were eligible for inclusion and eight tools were identified. Included studies were classed as 'very good' or 'good' following the quality assessment analysis; one study was unclassified. Anticholinergic medication burden as measured in studies was associated with impaired cognitive and physical function, as well as an increased frequency of falls. The Drug Burden Index (DBI) exhibited most of the key attributes of an ideal anticholinergic risk tool. CONCLUSION: This review identified the DBI as the most appropriate tool for use in longitudinal research focused on older people and their exposure to anticholinergic medication burden.
BACKGROUND: Increased exposure to anticholinergic medication is problematic, particularly in those aged 80 years and older. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to identify tools used to quantify anticholinergic medication burden and determine the most appropriate tool for use in longitudinal research, conducted in those aged 80 years and older. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted across six electronic databases to identify existing tools. Data extraction was conducted independently by two researchers; studies describing the development of each tool were also retrieved and relevant data extracted. An assessment of quality was completed for all studies. Tools were assessed in terms of their measurement of the association between anticholinergic medication burden and a defined set of clinical outcomes, their development and their suitability for use in longitudinal research; the latter was evaluated on the basis of criteria defined as the key attributes of an ideal anticholinergic risk tool. RESULTS: In total, 807 papers were retrieved, 13 studies were eligible for inclusion and eight tools were identified. Included studies were classed as 'very good' or 'good' following the quality assessment analysis; one study was unclassified. Anticholinergic medication burden as measured in studies was associated with impaired cognitive and physical function, as well as an increased frequency of falls. The Drug Burden Index (DBI) exhibited most of the key attributes of an ideal anticholinergic risk tool. CONCLUSION: This review identified the DBI as the most appropriate tool for use in longitudinal research focused on older people and their exposure to anticholinergic medication burden.
Authors: Nicholas M Wilson; Sarah N Hilmer; Lyn M March; Jian Sheng Chen; Danijela Gnjidic; Rebecca S Mason; Ian D Cameron; Philip N Sambrook Journal: Drugs Aging Date: 2012-02-01 Impact factor: 3.923
Authors: Eija Lönnroos; Danijela Gnjidic; Sarah N Hilmer; J Simon Bell; Hannu Kautiainen; Raimo Sulkava; Sirpa Hartikainen Journal: Drugs Aging Date: 2012-05-01 Impact factor: 3.923
Authors: Lisa M Kalisch Ellett; Nicole L Pratt; Emmae N Ramsay; John D Barratt; Elizabeth E Roughead Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2014-10-03 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Niko M Perttila; Hanna Öhman; Timo E Strandberg; Hannu Kautiainen; Minna Raivio; Marja-Liisa Laakkonen; Niina Savikko; Reijo S Tilvis; Kaisu H Pitkälä Journal: Drugs Aging Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 3.923
Authors: Satabdi Chatterjee; Vishal Bali; Ryan M Carnahan; Hua Chen; Michael L Johnson; Rajender R Aparasu Journal: Drugs Aging Date: 2017-09 Impact factor: 3.923
Authors: Marta Lavrador; Ana C Cabral; Isabel V Figueiredo; Manuel T Veríssimo; M Margarida Castel-Branco; Fernando Fernandez-Llimos Journal: Int J Clin Pharm Date: 2020-08-29