Sabrina De Winter1, Sarah Vanwynsberghe2, Veerle Foulon3, Eddy Dejaeger4, Johan Flamaing4, An Sermon5, Lorenz Van der Linden2, Isabel Spriet2. 1. Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Louvain, Belgium. sabrina.dewinter@uzleuven.be. 2. Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Louvain, Belgium. 3. Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy, Catholic University Leuven, Herestraat 49 - Bus 521, 3000, Louvain, Belgium. 4. Gerontology and Geriatrics, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Louvain, Belgium. 5. Traumatology, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, 3000, Louvain, Belgium.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hospital admissions due to fall-related fractures are a major problem in the aging population. Several risk factors have been identified, including drug use. Most studies often retrieved prescription-only drugs from national databases. These are associated with some limitations as they do not always reliably reproduce the complete patient's active drug list. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between the number of FRIDs intake identified by a standardised medication reconciliation process and a fall-related fracture leading to a hospital admission in older adults. SETTING: The first cohort has been recruited from one traumatology ward of a tertiary teaching hospital in Belgium and the second cohort has been recruited from 11 community pharmacies in Belgium. METHOD: A prospective study with two individually matched cohorts was performed. Adult patients (≥75 years) admitted with an injury due to a fall were included in the first cohort (faller group). The second cohort consisted of patients who did not suffer from a fall within the last 6 months (non-faller group). Matching was performed for age, gender, place of residence and use of a walking aid. In both groups, clinical pharmacists and undergraduate pharmacy students obtained the medication history, using a standardised approach. A list of drugs considered to increase the risk of falling was created. It included cardiovascular drugs and drugs acting on the nervous system. A linear mixed model was used to compare the number of fall risk-increasing drugs between fallers and non-fallers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The number of fall risk-increasing drugs in a faller versus a non-faller group. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients were matched with 121 non-fallers. Patients received on average 3.1 ± 2.1 and 3.2 ± 1.8 fall risk-increasing drugs in the faller and in the non-faller group, respectively. The mean number of fall risk-increasing drugs was comparable in both groups (p = 0.844), even after adjusting for alcohol consumption, fear of falling, vision and foot problems (p = 0.721). CONCLUSION: In a sample of hospitalised patients admitted for a fall-related injury, no significant difference in the number of fall risk-increasing drugs versus that of an outpatient group of non-fallers was found.
BACKGROUND: Hospital admissions due to fall-related fractures are a major problem in the aging population. Several risk factors have been identified, including drug use. Most studies often retrieved prescription-only drugs from national databases. These are associated with some limitations as they do not always reliably reproduce the complete patient's active drug list. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between the number of FRIDs intake identified by a standardised medication reconciliation process and a fall-related fracture leading to a hospital admission in older adults. SETTING: The first cohort has been recruited from one traumatology ward of a tertiary teaching hospital in Belgium and the second cohort has been recruited from 11 community pharmacies in Belgium. METHOD: A prospective study with two individually matched cohorts was performed. Adult patients (≥75 years) admitted with an injury due to a fall were included in the first cohort (faller group). The second cohort consisted of patients who did not suffer from a fall within the last 6 months (non-faller group). Matching was performed for age, gender, place of residence and use of a walking aid. In both groups, clinical pharmacists and undergraduate pharmacy students obtained the medication history, using a standardised approach. A list of drugs considered to increase the risk of falling was created. It included cardiovascular drugs and drugs acting on the nervous system. A linear mixed model was used to compare the number of fall risk-increasing drugs between fallers and non-fallers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The number of fall risk-increasing drugs in a faller versus a non-faller group. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients were matched with 121 non-fallers. Patients received on average 3.1 ± 2.1 and 3.2 ± 1.8 fall risk-increasing drugs in the faller and in the non-faller group, respectively. The mean number of fall risk-increasing drugs was comparable in both groups (p = 0.844), even after adjusting for alcohol consumption, fear of falling, vision and foot problems (p = 0.721). CONCLUSION: In a sample of hospitalised patients admitted for a fall-related injury, no significant difference in the number of fall risk-increasing drugs versus that of an outpatient group of non-fallers was found.
Entities:
Keywords:
Belgium; Fall risk-increasing drugs; Falls; Fractures; Hospitalisation; Older adults
Authors: Vincent C Tam; Sandra R Knowles; Patricia L Cornish; Nowell Fine; Romina Marchesano; Edward E Etchells Journal: CMAJ Date: 2005-08-30 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Mary E Tinetti; Ling Han; David S H Lee; Gail J McAvay; Peter Peduzzi; Cary P Gross; Bingqing Zhou; Haiqun Lin Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Allen R Huang; Louise Mallet; Christian M Rochefort; Tewodros Eguale; David L Buckeridge; Robyn Tamblyn Journal: Drugs Aging Date: 2012-05-01 Impact factor: 3.923
Authors: John C Woolcott; Kathryn J Richardson; Matthew O Wiens; Bhavini Patel; Judith Marin; Karim M Khan; Carlo A Marra Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2009-11-23
Authors: Magnus K Karlsson; Thord Vonschewelov; Caroline Karlsson; Maria Cöster; Björn E Rosengen Journal: Scand J Public Health Date: 2013-04-03 Impact factor: 3.021
Authors: Rebecca L Lamis; Joan S Kramer; LaDonna S Hale; Rosalee E Zackula; Gina M Berg Journal: Am J Health Syst Pharm Date: 2012-11-01 Impact factor: 2.637