Peter Hanlon1, Terence J Quinn2, Katie I Gallacher1, Phyo K Myint3,4, Bhautesh Dinesh Jani1, Barbara I Nicholl1, Richard Lowrie5, Roy L Soiza3,4, Samuel R Neal3, Duncan Lee6, Frances S Mair7. 1. General Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom. 2. Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom. 3. Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Foresterhill, Aberdeen, Scotland, United Kingdom. 4. Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, NHS Grampian, Aberdeen, Scotland, United Kingdom. 5. Pharmacy and Prescribing Support Unit, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, West Glasgow Ambulatory Care Unit, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom. 6. School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Glasgow, University Place, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom. 7. General Practice and Primary Care, Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom frances.mair@glasgow.ac.uk.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Anticholinergic burden (ACB), the cumulative effect of anticholinergic medications, is associated with adverse outcomes in older people but is less studied in middle-aged populations. Numerous scales exist to quantify ACB. The aims of this study were to quantify ACB in a large cohort using the 10 most common anticholinergic scales, to assess the association of each scale with adverse outcomes, and to assess overlap in populations identified by each scale. METHODS: We performed a longitudinal analysis of the UK Biobank community cohort (502,538 participants, baseline age: 37-73 years, median years of follow-up: 6.2). The ACB was calculated at baseline using 10 scales. Baseline data were linked to national mortality register records and hospital episode statistics. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE). Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, MACE, hospital admission for fall/fracture, and hospital admission with dementia/delirium. Cox proportional hazards models (hazard ratio [HR], 95% CI) quantified associations between ACB scales and outcomes adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic status, body mass index, smoking status, alcohol use, physical activity, and morbidity count. RESULTS: Anticholinergic medication use varied from 8% to 17.6% depending on the scale used. For the primary outcome, ACB was significantly associated with all-cause mortality/MACE for each scale. The Anticholinergic Drug Scale was most strongly associated with mortality/MACE (HR = 1.12; 95% CI, 1.11-1.14 per 1-point increase in score). The ACB was significantly associated with all secondary outcomes. The Anticholinergic Effect on Cognition scale was most strongly associated with dementia/delirium (HR = 1.45; 95% CI, 1.3-1.61 per 1-point increase). CONCLUSIONS: The ACB was associated with adverse outcomes in a middle- to older-aged population. Populations identified and effect size differed between scales. Scale choice influenced the population identified as potentially requiring reduction in ACB in clinical practice or intervention trials.
PURPOSE: Anticholinergic burden (ACB), the cumulative effect of anticholinergic medications, is associated with adverse outcomes in older people but is less studied in middle-aged populations. Numerous scales exist to quantify ACB. The aims of this study were to quantify ACB in a large cohort using the 10 most common anticholinergic scales, to assess the association of each scale with adverse outcomes, and to assess overlap in populations identified by each scale. METHODS: We performed a longitudinal analysis of the UK Biobank community cohort (502,538 participants, baseline age: 37-73 years, median years of follow-up: 6.2). The ACB was calculated at baseline using 10 scales. Baseline data were linked to national mortality register records and hospital episode statistics. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE). Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, MACE, hospital admission for fall/fracture, and hospital admission with dementia/delirium. Cox proportional hazards models (hazard ratio [HR], 95% CI) quantified associations between ACB scales and outcomes adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic status, body mass index, smoking status, alcohol use, physical activity, and morbidity count. RESULTS: Anticholinergic medication use varied from 8% to 17.6% depending on the scale used. For the primary outcome, ACB was significantly associated with all-cause mortality/MACE for each scale. The Anticholinergic Drug Scale was most strongly associated with mortality/MACE (HR = 1.12; 95% CI, 1.11-1.14 per 1-point increase in score). The ACB was significantly associated with all secondary outcomes. The Anticholinergic Effect on Cognition scale was most strongly associated with dementia/delirium (HR = 1.45; 95% CI, 1.3-1.61 per 1-point increase). CONCLUSIONS: The ACB was associated with adverse outcomes in a middle- to older-aged population. Populations identified and effect size differed between scales. Scale choice influenced the population identified as potentially requiring reduction in ACB in clinical practice or intervention trials.
Authors: Jaclyn L F Bosco; Rebecca A Silliman; Soe Soe Thwin; Ann M Geiger; Diana S M Buist; Marianne N Prout; Marianne Ulcickas Yood; Reina Haque; Feifei Wei; Timothy L Lash Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2009-05-19 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Karen Barnett; Stewart W Mercer; Michael Norbury; Graham Watt; Sally Wyke; Bruce Guthrie Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-05-10 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Tim Wilkinson; Amanda Ly; Christian Schnier; Kristiina Rannikmäe; Kathryn Bush; Carol Brayne; Terence J Quinn; Cathie L M Sudlow Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2018-04-03 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Søren T Skou; Frances S Mair; Martin Fortin; Bruce Guthrie; Bruno P Nunes; J Jaime Miranda; Cynthia M Boyd; Sanghamitra Pati; Sally Mtenga; Susan M Smith Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2022-07-14 Impact factor: 65.038
Authors: Sweilem B Al Rihani; Malavika Deodhar; Lucy I Darakjian; Pamela Dow; Matt K Smith; Ravil Bikmetov; Jacques Turgeon; Veronique Michaud Journal: Drugs Aging Date: 2021-11-09 Impact factor: 3.923
Authors: Jure Mur; Daniel L McCartney; Daniel I Chasman; Peter M Visscher; Graciela Muniz-Terrera; Simon R Cox; Tom C Russ; Riccardo E Marioni Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2021 Impact factor: 4.160
Authors: Martin Taylor-Rowan; Sophie Edwards; Anna H Noel-Storr; Jenny McCleery; Phyo K Myint; Roy Soiza; Carrie Stewart; Yoon Kong Loke; Terry J Quinn Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2021-05-05
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