Greta Lozano-Ortega1, Karissa M Johnston2, Antoinette Cheung2, Adrian Wagg3, Noll L Campbell4, Roger R Dmochowski5, Daniel B Ng6. 1. Broadstreet Health Economics & Outcomes Research, 203-343 Railway Street, Vancouver, BC V6A 1A4, Canada. Electronic address: glozano-ortega@broadstreetheor.com. 2. Broadstreet Health Economics & Outcomes Research, 203-343 Railway Street, Vancouver, BC V6A 1A4, Canada. 3. University of Alberta, 1-198 Clinical Sciences Building, 11350 - 83 Avenue, Edmonton, AB T6G 2P4, Canada. 4. College of Pharmacy, Purdue University, 575 Stadium Mall Drive, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA. 5. Urologic Surgery, Vanderbilt University, A-1302 Medical Center North Department of Urologic Surgery, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA. 6. Astellas Pharma Global Development Inc., 1 Astellas Way, Northbrook, IL 60062, USA.
Abstract
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.
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.
Authors: Sarah A Cooley; Robert H Paul; Jeremy F Strain; Anna Boerwinkle; Collin Kilgore; Beau M Ances Journal: AIDS Date: 2021-03-01 Impact factor: 4.632
Authors: Johan Bengtsson; Erik Olsson; Helena Igelström; Jonas Persson; Robert Bodén Journal: J Clin Psychopharmacol Date: 2021 Mar-Apr 01 Impact factor: 3.118
Authors: Ashley I Martinez; Erin L Abner; Gregory A Jicha; Dorinda N Rigsby; Lynne C Eckmann; Mark J Huffmyer; Daniela C Moga Journal: J Manag Care Spec Pharm Date: 2020-04
Authors: Patricia Amoros-Reboredo; Dolors Soy; Marta Hernandez-Hernandez; Sabela Lens; Conxita Mestres Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-05-26 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Greta Lozano-Ortega; Shelagh M Szabo; Antoinette Cheung; Brandon Suehs; Eleanor O Caplan; Adrian Wagg; Noll Campbell; Roger Dmochowski; Basia Rogula; Daniel B Ng Journal: Adv Ther Date: 2019-08-05 Impact factor: 3.845