User login
FDA proposes new rule for over-the-counter hearing aids
The action comes nearly 5 years after Congress passed a law to allow over-the-counter sales for people with mild to moderate hearing loss.
Those with severe hearing loss or people under 18 years old would still need to see a doctor or specialist for a hearing device.
In the United States, access to hearing aids can be difficult and expensive. Usually, patients have to go see their health care providers for a prescription. Then, they go to an audiologist, or a hearing aid specialist, to get the devices fitted.
With the proposed rule, patients could skip both of those steps and buy hearing aids in retail stores or online. This would make the process easier and more cost-friendly, as well increase access to specialists for many Americans who don’t have it.
“This allows us to put hearing devices more in reach of communities that have often been left out. Communities of color and the underserved typically and traditionally lacked access to hearing aids,” Xavier Becerra, secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said at a news briefing.
The FDA says it’s unclear exactly when the new products will be in stores, but finalizing the ruling is a top priority.
For new products, the ruling is expected to go into effect 60 days after it is finalized. Current products would have 180 days to make changes, according to the FDA.
The American Academy of Audiology said in a statement that it is reviewing the proposed rules and will provide comments to the FDA. But in July, Angela Shoup, PhD, a professor at the School of Behavioral and Brain Sciences at the University of Texas at Dallas, wrote to Mr. Becerra with concerns about over-the-counter sales of hearing aids.
“While we certainly support efforts to lower costs and improve access to hearing aids, we have grave concerns about the oversimplification of hearing loss and treatment in the advancement of OTC devices,” she wrote.
“It is through involvement of an audiologist that consumers will achieve the best possible outcomes with OTC hearing aids and avoid the risks of under- or untreated hearing loss,” Dr. Shoup said.
This new category would apply to certain air conduction hearing aids, which are worn inside of the ear and improve hearing by boosting sound into the ear canal.
The FDA is proposing labeling requirements for the hearing devices, including warnings, age restrictions, and information on severe hearing loss and other medical conditions that would prompt patients to seek treatment from their doctors.
The FDA said that it would closely monitor the marketplace to make sure companies advertising hearing loss products follow federal regulations.
There are a number of reasons for hearing loss, including exposure to extremely loud noises, aging, and various medical conditions. Approximately 38 million Americans 18 years old and older report having hearing trouble, said Janet Woodcock, MD, acting commissioner of the FDA.
About 20% of people who could benefit from hearing aids are using them, with barriers to access being a major factor, she added.
“Hearing loss can have a profound impact on daily communication, social interaction, and overall health and quality of life for millions of Americans,” Dr. Woodcock said.
The FDA has updated its guidance on hearing devices and personal sound amplification products.
Personal sound amplification products (PSAPs) are nonmedical devices designed to amplify sounds for people with normal hearing and are usually used for activities such as bird-watching and hunting.
Amplification devices are not regulated by the FDA.
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
The action comes nearly 5 years after Congress passed a law to allow over-the-counter sales for people with mild to moderate hearing loss.
Those with severe hearing loss or people under 18 years old would still need to see a doctor or specialist for a hearing device.
In the United States, access to hearing aids can be difficult and expensive. Usually, patients have to go see their health care providers for a prescription. Then, they go to an audiologist, or a hearing aid specialist, to get the devices fitted.
With the proposed rule, patients could skip both of those steps and buy hearing aids in retail stores or online. This would make the process easier and more cost-friendly, as well increase access to specialists for many Americans who don’t have it.
“This allows us to put hearing devices more in reach of communities that have often been left out. Communities of color and the underserved typically and traditionally lacked access to hearing aids,” Xavier Becerra, secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said at a news briefing.
The FDA says it’s unclear exactly when the new products will be in stores, but finalizing the ruling is a top priority.
For new products, the ruling is expected to go into effect 60 days after it is finalized. Current products would have 180 days to make changes, according to the FDA.
The American Academy of Audiology said in a statement that it is reviewing the proposed rules and will provide comments to the FDA. But in July, Angela Shoup, PhD, a professor at the School of Behavioral and Brain Sciences at the University of Texas at Dallas, wrote to Mr. Becerra with concerns about over-the-counter sales of hearing aids.
“While we certainly support efforts to lower costs and improve access to hearing aids, we have grave concerns about the oversimplification of hearing loss and treatment in the advancement of OTC devices,” she wrote.
“It is through involvement of an audiologist that consumers will achieve the best possible outcomes with OTC hearing aids and avoid the risks of under- or untreated hearing loss,” Dr. Shoup said.
This new category would apply to certain air conduction hearing aids, which are worn inside of the ear and improve hearing by boosting sound into the ear canal.
The FDA is proposing labeling requirements for the hearing devices, including warnings, age restrictions, and information on severe hearing loss and other medical conditions that would prompt patients to seek treatment from their doctors.
The FDA said that it would closely monitor the marketplace to make sure companies advertising hearing loss products follow federal regulations.
There are a number of reasons for hearing loss, including exposure to extremely loud noises, aging, and various medical conditions. Approximately 38 million Americans 18 years old and older report having hearing trouble, said Janet Woodcock, MD, acting commissioner of the FDA.
About 20% of people who could benefit from hearing aids are using them, with barriers to access being a major factor, she added.
“Hearing loss can have a profound impact on daily communication, social interaction, and overall health and quality of life for millions of Americans,” Dr. Woodcock said.
The FDA has updated its guidance on hearing devices and personal sound amplification products.
Personal sound amplification products (PSAPs) are nonmedical devices designed to amplify sounds for people with normal hearing and are usually used for activities such as bird-watching and hunting.
Amplification devices are not regulated by the FDA.
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
The action comes nearly 5 years after Congress passed a law to allow over-the-counter sales for people with mild to moderate hearing loss.
Those with severe hearing loss or people under 18 years old would still need to see a doctor or specialist for a hearing device.
In the United States, access to hearing aids can be difficult and expensive. Usually, patients have to go see their health care providers for a prescription. Then, they go to an audiologist, or a hearing aid specialist, to get the devices fitted.
With the proposed rule, patients could skip both of those steps and buy hearing aids in retail stores or online. This would make the process easier and more cost-friendly, as well increase access to specialists for many Americans who don’t have it.
“This allows us to put hearing devices more in reach of communities that have often been left out. Communities of color and the underserved typically and traditionally lacked access to hearing aids,” Xavier Becerra, secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said at a news briefing.
The FDA says it’s unclear exactly when the new products will be in stores, but finalizing the ruling is a top priority.
For new products, the ruling is expected to go into effect 60 days after it is finalized. Current products would have 180 days to make changes, according to the FDA.
The American Academy of Audiology said in a statement that it is reviewing the proposed rules and will provide comments to the FDA. But in July, Angela Shoup, PhD, a professor at the School of Behavioral and Brain Sciences at the University of Texas at Dallas, wrote to Mr. Becerra with concerns about over-the-counter sales of hearing aids.
“While we certainly support efforts to lower costs and improve access to hearing aids, we have grave concerns about the oversimplification of hearing loss and treatment in the advancement of OTC devices,” she wrote.
“It is through involvement of an audiologist that consumers will achieve the best possible outcomes with OTC hearing aids and avoid the risks of under- or untreated hearing loss,” Dr. Shoup said.
This new category would apply to certain air conduction hearing aids, which are worn inside of the ear and improve hearing by boosting sound into the ear canal.
The FDA is proposing labeling requirements for the hearing devices, including warnings, age restrictions, and information on severe hearing loss and other medical conditions that would prompt patients to seek treatment from their doctors.
The FDA said that it would closely monitor the marketplace to make sure companies advertising hearing loss products follow federal regulations.
There are a number of reasons for hearing loss, including exposure to extremely loud noises, aging, and various medical conditions. Approximately 38 million Americans 18 years old and older report having hearing trouble, said Janet Woodcock, MD, acting commissioner of the FDA.
About 20% of people who could benefit from hearing aids are using them, with barriers to access being a major factor, she added.
“Hearing loss can have a profound impact on daily communication, social interaction, and overall health and quality of life for millions of Americans,” Dr. Woodcock said.
The FDA has updated its guidance on hearing devices and personal sound amplification products.
Personal sound amplification products (PSAPs) are nonmedical devices designed to amplify sounds for people with normal hearing and are usually used for activities such as bird-watching and hunting.
Amplification devices are not regulated by the FDA.
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
A 4-pronged approach to foster healthy aging in older adults
Our approach to caring for the growing number of community-dwelling US adults ages ≥ 65 years has shifted. Although we continue to manage disease and disability, there is an increasing emphasis on the promotion of healthy aging by optimizing health care needs and quality of life (QOL).
The American Geriatric Society (AGS) uses the term “healthy aging” to reflect a dedication to improving the health, independence, and QOL of older people.1 The World Health Organization (WHO) defines healthy aging as “the process of developing and maintaining the functional ability that enables well-being in older age.”2 Functional ability encompasses capabilities that align with a person’s values, including meeting basic needs; learning, growing, and making independent decisions; being mobile; building and maintaining healthy relationships; and contributing to society.2 Similarly, the US Department of Health and Human Services has adopted a multidimensional approach to support people in creating “a productive and meaningful life” as they grow older.3
Numerous theoretical models have emerged from research on aging as a multidimensional construct, as evidenced by a 2016 citation analysis that identified 1755 articles written between 1902 and 2015 relating to “successful aging.”4 The analysis revealed 609 definitions operationalized by researchers’ measurement tools (mostly focused on physical function and other health metrics) and 1146 descriptions created by older adults, many emphasizing psychosocial strategies and cultural factors as key to successful aging.4
One approach that is likely to be useful for family physicians is the Age-Friendly Health System. This is an initiative of The John A. Hartford Foundation and the Institute for Healthcare Improvement that uses a multidisciplinary approach to create environments that foster inclusivity and address the needs of older people.5 Following this guidance, primary care providers use evidence-informed strategies that promote safety and address what matters most to older adults and their family caregivers.
The Age-Friendly Health System, as well as AGS and WHO, recognize that there are multiple aspects to well-being as one grows older. By using focused, evidence-based screening, assessments, and interventions, family physicians can best support aging patients in living their most fulfilling lives.
Here we present a review of evidence-based strategies that promote safety and address what matters most to older adults and their family caregivers using a 4-pronged framework, in the style of the Age-Friendly Health System model. However, the literature on healthy aging includes important messages about patient context and lifelong health behaviors, which we capture in an expanded set of thematic guidance. As such, we encourage family physicians to approach healthy aging as follows: (1) monitor health (screening and prevention), (2) promote mobility (physical function), (3) manage mentation (emotional health and cognitive function), and (4) encourage maintenance of social connections (social networks and QOL).
Monitoring health
Leverage Medicare annual wellness visits. A systematic approach is needed to prevent frailty and functional decline, and thus increase the QOL of older adults. To do this, it is important to focus on health promotion and disease prevention, while addressing existing ailments. One method is to leverage the Medicare annual wellness visit (AWV), which provides an opportunity to assess current health status as well as discuss behavior-change and risk-reduction strategies with patients.
Continue to: Although AWVs...
Although AWVs are an opportunity to improve patient outcomes, we are not taking full advantage of them.6 While AWVs have gained traction since their introduction in 2011, usage rates among ethnoracial minority groups has lagged behind.6 A 2018 cohort study examined reasons for disparate utilization rates among individuals ages ≥ 66 years (N = 14,687).7 Researchers found that differences in utilization between ethnoracial groups were explained by socioeconomic factors. Lower education and lower income, as well as rural living, were associated with lower rates of AWV completion.7 In addition, having a usual, nonemergent place to obtain medical care served as a powerful predictor of AWV utilization for all groups.7
Strategies to increase AWV completion rates among all eligible adults include increasing staff awareness of health literacy challenges and ensuring communication strategies are inclusive by providing printed materials in multiple languages, Braille, or larger typefaces; using accessible vocabulary that does not include medical jargon; and making medical interpreters accessible. In addition, training clinicians about unconscious bias and cultural humility can help foster empathy and awareness of differences in health beliefs and behaviors within diverse patient populations.
A 2019 scoping review of 11 studies (N > 60 million) focused on outcomes from Medicare AWVs for patients ages ≥ 65 years.8 This included uptake of preventive services, such as vaccinations or cancer screenings; advice, education, or referrals offered during the AWV; medication use; and hospitalization rates. Overall findings showed that older adults who received a Medicare AWV were more likely to receive referrals for preventive screenings and follow-through on these recommendations compared with those who did not undergo an AWV.8
Completion rates for vaccines, while remaining low overall, were higher among those who completed an AWV. Additionally, these studies showed improved completion of screenings for breast cancer, bone density, and colon cancer. Several studies in the scoping review supported the use of AWVs as an effective means by which to offer health education and advice related to health promotion and risk reduction, such as diet and lifestyle modifications.8 Little evidence exists on long-term outcomes related to AWV completion.8
Utilize shared decision-making to determine whether preventive screening makes sense for your patient. Although cancer remains the second leading cause of death among Americans ages ≥ 65 years,9 clear screening guidelines for this age group remain elusive.10 Physicians and patients often are reluctant to stop cancer screening despite lower life expectancy and fewer potential benefits of diagnosis in this population.9 Some recent studies reinforce the heterogeneity of the older adult population and further underscore the importance of individual-level decision-making.11-14 It is important to let older adult patients and their caregivers know about the potential risks of screening tests, especially the possibility that incidental findings may lead to unwarranted additional care or monitoring.9
Continue to: Avoid these screening conversation missteps
Avoid these screening conversation missteps. A 2017 qualitative study asked 40 community-dwelling older adults (mean age = 76 years) about their preferences for discussing screening cessation with their physicians.13 Three themes emerged.First, they were open to stopping their screenings, especially when suggested by a trusted physician. Second, health status and physical function made sense as decision points, but life expectancy did not. Finally, lengthy discussions with expanded details about risks and benefits were not appreciated, especially if coupled with comments on the limited benefits for those nearing the end of life. When discussing life expectancy, patients preferred phrasing that focused on how the screening was unnecessary because it would not help them live longer.13
Ensure that your message is understood—and culturally relevant. Recent studies on lower health literacy among older adults15,16 and ethnic and racial minorities17-21—as revealed in the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy22—might offer clues to patient receptivity to discussions about preventive screening and other health decisions.
One study found a significant correlation between higher self-rated health literacy and higher engagement in health behaviors such as mammography screening, moderate physical activity, and tobacco avoidance.16 Perceptions of personal control over health status, as well as perceived social standing, also correlated with health literacy score levels.16 Another study concluded that lower health literacy combined with lower self-efficacy, cultural beliefs about health topics (eg, diet and exercise), and distrust in the health care system contributed to lower rates of preventive care utilization among ethnocultural minority older adults in Canada, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Australia.18
Ensuring that easy-to-understand information is equitably shared with older adults of all races and ethnicities is critical. A 2018 study showed that distrust of the health system and cultural issues contributed to the lower incidence of colorectal cancer screenings in Hispanic and Asian American patients ages 50 to 75 years.21 Patients whose physicians engaged in “health literate practices” (eg, offering clear explanations of diagnostic plans and asking patients to describe what they understood) were more likely to obtain recommended breast and colorectal cancer screenings.20 In particular, researchers found that non-Hispanic Blacks were nearly twice as likely to follow through on colorectal cancer screening if their physicians engaged in health literate practices.20 In addition, receiving clear instructions from physicians increased the odds of completing breast cancer screening among Hispanic and non-Hispanic White women.20
Overall, screening information and recommendations should be standardized for all patients. This is particularly important in light of research that found that older non-Hispanic Black patients were less likely than their non-Hispanic White counterparts to receive information from their physicians about colorectal cancer screening.20
Continue to: Mobility
Mobility
Encourage physical activity. Frequent exercise and other forms of physical activity are associated with healthy aging, as shown in a 2017 systematic review and meta-analysis of 23 studies (N = 174,114).23 Despite considerable heterogeneity between studies in how researchers defined healthy aging and physical activity, they found that adults who incorporate regular movement and exercise into daily life are likely to continue to benefit from it into older age.23 In addition, a 2016 secondary analysis of data from the InCHIANTI longitudinal aging study concluded that adults ages ≥ 65 years (N = 1149) who had maintained higher physical activity levels throughout adulthood had less physical function decline and reduced rates of mobility disability and premature death compared with those who reported being less active.24
Preserve gait speed (and bolster health) with these activities. Walking speed, or gait, measured on a level surface has been used as a predictor for various aspects of well-being in older age, such as daily function, mobility, independence, falls, mortality, and hospitalization risk.25 Reduced gait speed is also one of the key indicators of functional impairment in older adults.
A 2015 systematic review sought to determine which type of exercise intervention (resistance, coordination, or multimodal training) would be most effective in preserving gait speed in healthy older adults (N = 2495; mean age = 74.2 years).25 While the 42 included studies were deemed to be fairly low quality, the review revealed (with large effect size [0.84]) that a number of exercise modalities might stave off loss of gait speed in older adults. Patients in the resistance training group had the greatest improvement in gait speed (0.11 m/s), followed by those in the coordination training group (0.09 m/s) and the multimodal training group (0.05 m/s).25
Finally, muscle mass and strength offer a measure of physical performance and functionality. A 2020 systematic review of 83 studies (N = 108,428) showed that low muscle mass and strength, reduced handgrip strength, and lower physical performance were predictive of reduced capacities in activities of daily living and instrumental activities of daily living.26 It is important to counsel adults to remain active throughout their lives and to include resistance training to maintain muscle mass and strength to preserve their motor function, mobility, independence, and QOL.
Use 1 of these scales to identify frailty. Frailty is a distinct clinical syndrome, in which an individual has low reserves and is highly vulnerable to internal and external stressors. It affects many community-dwelling older adults. Within the literature, there has been ongoing discussion regarding the definition of frailty27 (TABLE 128-31).
Continue to: The Fried Frailty Index...
The Fried Frailty Index defines frailty as a purely physical condition; patients need to exhibit 3 of 5 components (ie, weight loss, exhaustion, weakness, slowness, and low physical activity) to be deemed frail.31 The Edmonton Frail Scale is commonly used in geriatric assessments and counts impairments across several domains including physical activity, mood, cognition, and incontinence.30,32,33 Physicians need to complete a training course prior to its use. Finally, the definition of frailty used by Rockwood et al28, 29 was used to develop the Clinical Frailty Scale, which relies on broader criteria that include social and psychological elements in addition to physical elements.The Clinical Frailty Scale uses clinician judgment to evaluate patient-specific domains (eg, comorbidities, functionality, and cognition) and to generate a score ranging from 1 (very fit) to 9 (terminally ill).29 This scale is accessible and easy to implement. As a result, use of this scale has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. All definitions include a pre-frail state, indicating the dynamic nature of frailty over time.
It is important to identify pre-frail and frail older adults using 1 of these screening tools. Interventions to reverse frailty that can be initiated in the primary care setting include identifying treatable medical conditions, assessing medication appropriateness, providing nutritional advice, and developing an exercise plan.34
Conduct a nutritional assessment; consider this diet. Studies show that nutritional status can predict physical function and frailty risk in older adults. A 2017 systematic review of 19 studies (N = 22,270) of frail adults ages ≥ 65 years found associations related to specific dietary constructs (ie, micronutrients, macronutrients, antioxidants, overall diet quality, and timing of consumption).35 Plant-based diets with higher levels of micronutrients, such as vitamins C and E and beta-carotene, or diets with more protein or macronutrients, regardless of source foods, all resulted in inverse associations with frailty syndrome.35
A 2017 study showed that physical exercise and maintaining good nutritional status may be effective for preventing frailty in community-dwelling pre-frail older individuals.36 A 2019 study showed that a combination of muscle strength training and protein supplementation was the most effective intervention to delay or reverse frailty and was easiest to implement in primary care.37 A 2020 meta-analysis of 31 studies (N = 4794) addressing frailty among primary care patients > 60 years showed that interventions using predominantly resistance-based exercise and nutrition supplementation improved frailty status over the control.38 Researchers also found that a comprehensive geriatric assessment or exercise—alone or in combination with nutrition education—reduced physical frailty.
Mentation
Screen and treat cognitive impairments. Cognitive function and autonomy in decision-making are important factors in healthy aging. Aspects of mental health (eg, depression and anxiety), sensory impairment (eg, visual and auditory impairment), and mentation issues (eg, delirium, dementia, and related conditions), as well as diet, physical exercise, and mobility, can all impede cognitive functionality. The long-term effects of depression, anxiety,39 sensory deficits,40 mobility,41 diet,42 and, ultimately, aging may impact Alzheimer disease (AD). The risk of an AD diagnosis increases with age.39
Continue to: A 2018 prospective cohort study...
A 2018 prospective cohort study using data from the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center followed individuals (N = 12,053) who were cognitively asymptomatic at their initial visits to determine who developed clinical signs of AD.39 Survival analysis showed several psychosocial factors—anxiety, sleep disturbances, and depressive episodes of any type (occurring within the past 2 years, clinician verified, lifetime report)—were significantly associated with an eventual AD diagnosis and increased the risk of AD.39 More research is needed to verify the impact of early intervention for these conditions on neurodegenerative disease; however, screening and treating psychosocial factors such as anxiety and depression should be maintained.
Researchers evaluated the impact of a dual sensory impairment (DSI) on dementia risk using data from 2051 participants in the Ginkgo Evaluation of Memory Study.40 Hearing and visual impairments (defined as DSI when these conditions coexist) or visual impairment alone were significantly associated with increased risk of dementia in older adults. The researchers reported that DSI was significantly associated with a higher risk of all-cause dementia (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.86; 95% CI, 1.25-2.76) and AD (HR = 2.12; 95% CI, 1.34-3.36).40 Visual impairment alone was associated with an increased risk of all-cause dementia (HR = 1.32; 95% CI, 1.02-1.71).40 These results suggest that screening of DSI or visual impairment earlier in the patient’s lifespan may identify those at high risk of dementia in older adulthood.
The American Academy of Ophthalmology recommends patients with healthy eyes be screened once during their 20s and twice in their 30s; a full examination is recommended by age 40. For patients ages ≥ 65 years, it is recommended that eye examinations occur every 1 to 2 years.43
Diet and mobility play a big role in cognition. Diet43 and exercise41,42,44 are believed to have an impact on mentation, and recent studies show memory and global cognition could be malleable later in life. A 2015 meta-analysis of 490 treatment arms of 24 randomized controlled studies showed improvement in global cognition with consumption of a Mediterranean diet plus olive oil (effect size [ES] standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.22; 95% CI, 0.16-0.27) and tai chi exercises (ES SMD = 0.18; 95% CI, 0.06-0.29).42 The analysis also found improved memory among participants who consumed the Mediterranean diet/olive oil combination (ES SMD = 0.22; 95% CI, 0.12-0.32) and soy isoflavone supplements (ES SMD = 0.11; 95% CI, 0.04-0.17). Although the ESs are small, they are significant and offer promising evidence that individual choices related to nutrition or exercise may influence cognition and memory.
A 2018 systematic review found that all domains of cognition showed improvement with 45 to 60 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical exercise.44 Attention, executive function, memory, and working memory showed significant increases, whereas global cognition improvements were not statistically significant.44 A 2016 meta-analysis of 26 studies (N = 26,355) found a positive association between an objective mobility measure (gait, lower-extremity function, and balance) and cognitive function (global, executive function, memory, and processing speed) in older adults.41 These results highlight that diet, mobility, and physical exercise impact cognitive functioning.
Continue to: Maintaining social connections
Maintaining social connections
Social isolation and loneliness—compounded by a pandemic. The US Department of Health and Human Services notes that “community connections” are among the key factors required for healthy aging.3 Similarly, the WHO definition of healthy aging considers whether individuals can build and sustain relationships with other people and find ways to engender their personal values through these connections.2
As people age, their social connections often decrease due to the death of friends and family, shifts in living arrangements, loss of mobility or eyesight (and thus self-transport), and the onset or increased acuity of illness or chronic conditions.45 This has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has spurred shelter-in-place and stay-at-home orders along with recommendations for physical distancing (also known as social distancing), especially for older adults who are at higher risk.46 Smith et al47 calls this the COVID-19 Social Connectivity Paradox, in which older adults limit their interactions with others to protect their physical health and reduce their risk of contracting the virus, but as a result they may undermine their psychosocial health by placing themselves at risk of social isolation and loneliness.47
The double threat. Social isolation and loneliness have been shown to negatively impact physical health and well-being, resulting in an increased risk of early death48-50; higher likelihood of specific diagnoses, including dementia and cardiovascular conditions48,50; and more frequent use of health care services.50 These concepts, while related, represent different mechanisms for negative health outcomes. Social isolation is an objective condition when one has a lack of opportunities for interaction with other people; loneliness refers to the emotional disconnect one feels when separated from others. Few studies have compared outcomes between these concepts, but in those that have, social isolation appears to be more strongly associated with early death.48-50
A 2013 observational study using data from the English Longitudinal Study on Aging found that both social isolation and loneliness were associated with increased mortality among men and women ages ≥ 52 years (N = 6500).48 However, when studied independently, loneliness was not found to be a significant risk factor. In contrast, social isolation significantly impacted mortality risk, even after adjusting for demographic factors and baseline health status.48 These findings are supported by a 2018 cohort study of individuals (N = 479,054) with a history of an acute cardiovascular event that concluded social isolation was a predictor of mortality, whereas loneliness was not.50
A large 2015 meta-analysis (70 studies, N = 3,407,134) of mortality causes among community-dwelling older adults (average age, 66) confirmed that both objective measures of isolation, as well as subjective measures (such as feelings of loneliness or living alone), have a significant predictive effect in longer-term studies. Each measure shows an approximately 30% increase in the likelihood of death after an average of 7 years.49
Continue to: Health care remains a connection point
Health care remains a connection point. Even when life course events and conditions (eg, death of loved ones, loss of transportation or financial resources, or disengagement from community activities) reduce social connections, most older adults engage in some way with the health care system. A 2020 consensus report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine suggests health care professionals capitalize on these connection points with adults ages ≥ 50 years by periodically screening for social isolation and loneliness, documenting social status updates in medical records, and piloting and evaluating interventions in the clinical setting.51
The report offered information about potential avenues for intervention by primary care professionals beyond screening, such as participating in research studies that investigate screening tools and multisystem interventions; social prescribing (linking patients to embedded social work services or community-based organizations); referring patients to support groups; initiating cognitive-based therapy or other behavioral health interventions; or recommending mindfulness practices.51 However, most of the cited intervention studies were not specific to primary care settings and contained poor-quality evidence related to efficacy.
Isolation creates a greater reliance on health services due to a lack of a social support system, while a feeling of emotional disconnection (loneliness) seems to be a barrier to accessing care. A 2017 cohort study linking data from the Health and Retirement Study and Medicare claims revealed that social isolation predicts higher annual health expenditures (> $1600 per beneficiary) driven by hospitalization and skilled nursing facility usage, along with greater mortality, whereas individuals who are lonely result in reduced costs (a reduction of $770 annually) due to lower usage of inpatient and outpatient services.52 Prioritizing interventions that identify and connect isolated older adults to social support, therefore, may increase survivability by ensuring they have access to resources and health care interventions when needed.
In addition, these findings underscore the importance of looking at quality—not just quantity—of older adults’ social connections. A number of validated screening tools exist for social isolation and loneliness (TABLE 253-59); however, concerns exist about assessing risk using a unidimensional tool for a complex concern,47 as well as identifying a problem without having evidence-based interventions to offer as solutions.47,51 Until future studies resolve these concerns, leveraging the physician-patient relationship to broach these difficult subjects may help normalize the issues and create safe spaces to identify individuals who are at risk.
QOL is key to healthy aging. As Kusumastuti et al4 state, “successful ageing lies in the eyes of the beholder.” A 2019 systematic review of 48 qualitative studies revealed that community-dwelling older adults ages ≥ 50 years in 11 countries (N > 4175) perceive well-being by considering QOL within 9 domains: health perception, autonomy, role and activity, relationships, emotional comfort, attitude and adaptation, spirituality, financial security, and home and neighborhood.60 Researchers found that as engagement in any one of these domains declines, older adults may shift their definition of health toward their remaining abilities.60 This offers an explanation as to why patients might rate their health status much higher than their physicians do: older adults tend to have a more holistic concept of health.
Continue to: Take a multidimensional approach to healthy aging
Take a multidimensional approach to healthy aging
Although we have separately examined each of the 4 components of managing healthy aging in a community-dwelling adult, applying a multidimensional approach is most effective. Increasing use of the Medicare AWV provides an opportunity to assess patient health status, determine care preferences, and improve follow-through on preventive screening. It is also important to encourage older adults to engage in regular physical activity—especially muscle-strengthening exercises—and to discuss nutrition and caloric intake to prevent frailty and functional decline.
Assessing and treating vision and hearing impairments and mental health issues, including anxiety and depression, may guard against losses in cognition. When speaking with older adult patients about their social connections, consider asking not only about frequency of contact and access to resources such as food and transportation, but also about whether they are finding ways to bring their own values into those relationships to bolster their QOL. This guidance also may be useful for primary care practices and health care networks when planning future quality-improvement initiatives.
Additional research is needed to support the evidence base for aligning older adult preferences in health care interventions, such as preventive screenings. Also, clinical decision-making requires more clarity about the efficacy of specific diet and exercise interventions for older adults; the impact of early intervention for depression, anxiety, and sleep disorders on neurodegenerative disease; whether loneliness predicts mortality; and how health care delivery systems can be effective at building social connectivity.
For now, it is essential to recognize that initiating health education, screening, and prevention throughout the patient’s lifespan can promote healthy aging outcomes. As family physicians, it is important to capitalize on longitudinal relationships with patients and begin educating younger patients using this multidimensional framework to promote living “a productive and meaningful life”at any age.3
Lynn M. Wilson, DO, 707 Hamilton Street, 8th floor, Department of Family Medicine, Lehigh Valley Health Network, Allentown, PA 18101; [email protected]
1. Friedman S, Mulhausen P, Cleveland M, et al. Healthy aging: American Geriatrics Society white paper executive summary. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018;67:17-20. doi: 10.1111/jgs.15644
2. World Health Organization. World report on ageing and health. 2015. Accessed June 29, 2020. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/186463/9789240694811_eng.pdf?sequence=1
3. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. Healthy aging. Accessed June 29, 2020. www.hhs.gov/aging/healthy-aging
4. Kusumastuti S, Derks MGM, Tellier S, et al. Successful ageing: a study of the literature using citation network analysis. Maturitas. 2016;93:4-12. doi: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2016.04.010
5. Institute for Healthcare Improvement. Age-friendly health systems: guide to using the 4Ms in the care of older adults [white paper]. 2020. Accessed June 29, 2020. www.ihi.org/Engage/Initiatives/Age-Friendly-Health-systems/Documents/IHIAgeFriendlyHealthSystems_GuidetoUsing4MsCare.pdf
6. Lind KE, Hildreth KL, Perraillon MC. Persistent disparities in Medicare’s annual wellness visit utilization. Med Care. 2019;57:984-989. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001229
7. Lind KE, Hildreth K, Lindrooth R, et al. Ethnoracial disparities in Medicare annual wellness visit utilization: evidence from a nationally representative database. Med Care. 2018;56:761-766. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000962
8. Simpson VL, Kovich M. Outcomes of primary care-based Medicare annual wellness visits with older adults: a scoping review. Geriatr Nurs. 2019;40:590-596. doi: 10.1016/j.gerinurse.2019.06.001
9. Heron M. Deaths: leading causes for 2017. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2019;68:1-77.
10. Salzman B, Beldowski K, de la Paz A. Cancer screening in older patients. Am Fam Physician. 2016;93:659-667.
11. Kinsinger LS, Anderson C, Kim J, et al. Implementation of lung cancer screening in the Veterans Health Administration. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177:399-406. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.9022
12. Walter LC, Schonberg MA. Screening mammography in older women: a review. JAMA. 2014;311:1336-1347. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.2834
13. Schoenborn NL, Lee K, Pollack CE, et al. Older adults’ views and communication preferences about cancer screening cessation. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177:1121-1128. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.1778
14. Butterworth JE, Hays R, McDonagh ST, et al. Interventions for involving older patients with multi-morbidity in decision-making during primary care consultations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;10:CD013124. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013124.pub2
15. Bostock S, Steptoe A. Association between low functional health literacy and mortality in older adults: longitudinal cohort study. BMJ. 2012;344:e1602. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e1602
16. Fernandez DM, Larson JL, Zikmund-Fisher BJ. Associations between health literacy and preventive health behaviors among older adults: findings from the health and retirement study. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:596. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3267-7
17. Weekes CV. African Americans and health literacy: a systematic review. ABNF J. 2012;23:76-80.
18. Mantwill S, Monestel-Umaña S, Schulz PJ. The relationship between health literacy and health disparities: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0145455. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145455
19. Khan MM, Kobayashi K. Optimizing health promotion among ethnocultural minority older adults (EMOA). Int J Migration Health Soc Care. 2015;11:268-281. doi: 10.1108/IJMHSC-12-2014-0047
20. Kindratt TB, Dallo FJ, Allicock M, et al. The influence of patient-provider communication on cancer screenings differs among racial and ethnic groups. Prev Med Rep. 2020;18:101086. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2020.101086
21. Hong Y-R, Tauscher J, Cardel M. Distrust in health care and cultural factors are associated with uptake of colorectal cancer screening in Hispanic and Asian Americans. Cancer. 2018;124:335-345. doi: 10.1002/cncr.31052
22. Kutner M, Greenberg E, Jin Y, et al. Literacy in everyday life: results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy. NCES 2007-480. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. April 2007. Accessed August 27, 2021. http://nces.ed.gov/Pubs2007/2007480_1.pdf
23. Daskalopoulou C, Stubbs B, Kralj C, et al. Physical activity and healthy ageing: a systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal cohort studies. Ageing Res Rev. 2017;38:6-17. doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2017.06.003
24. Stenholm S, Koster A, Valkeinen H, et al. Association of physical activity history with physical function and mortality in old age. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2016;71:496-501. doi: 10.1093/gerona/glv111
25. Hortobágyi T, Lesinski M, Gäbler M, et al. Effects of three types of exercise interventions on healthy old adults’ gait speed: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2015;45:1627‐1643. Published correction appears in Sports Med. 2016;46:453. doi: 10.1007/s40279-015-0371-2
26. Wang DXM, Yao J, Zirek Y, et al. Muscle mass, strength, and physical performance predicting activities of daily living: a meta-analysis. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2020;11:3‐25. doi: 10.1002/jcsm.12502
27. Sternberg SA, Wershof Schwartz A, Karunananthan S, et al. The identification of frailty: a systematic literature review. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2011;59:2129-2138. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2011.03597.x
28. Rockwood K, Song X, MacKnight C, et al. A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people. CMAJ. 2005;173:489-495. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.050051
29. Church S, Rogers E, Rockwood K, et al. A scoping review of the Clinical Frailty Scale. BMC Geriatr. 2020;20:393. doi: 10.1186/s12877-020-01801-7
30. Rolfson DB, Majumdar SR, Tsuyuki RT, et al. Validity and reliability of the Edmonton Frail Scale. Age Ageing. 2006;35:526-529. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afl041
31. Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, et al. Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001;56:M146-M156. doi: 10.1093/gerona/56.3.m146
32. Dent E, Kowal P, Hoogendijk EO. Frailty measurement in research and clinical practice: a review. Euro J Intern Med. 2016;31:3-10. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2016.03.007
33. Perna S, Francis MD, Bologna C, et al. Performance of Edmonton Frail Scale on frailty assessment: its association with multi-dimensional geriatric conditions assessed with specific screening tools. BMC Geriatr. 2017;17:2. doi: 10.1186/s12877-016-0382-3
34. Chen CY, Gan P, How CH. Approach to frailty in the elderly in primary care and the community. Singapore Med J. 2018;59:338. doi: 10.11622/smedj.2018052
35. Lorenzo-López L, Maseda A, de Labra C, et al. Nutritional determinants of frailty in older adults: a systematic review. BMC Geriatr. 2017;17:108. doi: 10.1186/s12877-017-0496-2
36. Serra-Prat M, Sist X, Domenich R, et al. Effectiveness of an intervention to prevent frailty in pre-frail community-dwelling older people consulting in primary care: a randomised controlled trial. Age Ageing. 2017;46:401-407. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afw242
37. Travers J, Romero-Ortuno R, Bailey J, et al. Delaying and reversing frailty: a systematic review of primary care interventions. Br J Gen Pract. 2019;69:e61-e69. doi: 10.3399/bjgp18X700241
38. Macdonald SHF, Travers J, Shé ÉN, et al. Primary care interventions to address physical frailty among community-dwelling adults aged 60 years or older: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2020;15:e0228821. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228821
39. Burke SL, Cadet T, Alcide A, et al. Psychosocial risk factors and Alzheimer’s disease: the associative effect of depression, sleep disturbance, and anxiety. Aging Ment Health. 2018;22:1577-1584. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2017.1387760
40. Hwang PH, Longstreth WT Jr, Brenowitz WD, et al. Dual sensory impairment in older adults and risk of dementia from the GEM Study. Alzheimers Dement (Amst). 2020;12:e12054. doi: 10.1002/dad2.12054
41. Demnitz N, Esser P, Dawes H, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies examining the relationship between mobility and cognition in healthy older adults. Gait Posture. 2016;50:164‐174. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.08.028
42. Lehert P, Villaseca P, Hogervorst E, et al. Individually modifiable risk factors to ameliorate cognitive aging: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Climacteric. 2015;18:678-689. doi: 10.3109/13697137.2015.1078106
43. Turbert D. Eye exam and vision testing basics. American Academy of Ophthalmology Web site. January 14, 2021. Accessed March 5, 2021. www.aao.org/eye-health/tips-prevention/eye-exams-101
44. Northey JM, Cherbuin N, Pumpa KL, et al. Exercise interventions for cognitive function in adults older than 50: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2018;52:154-160. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2016-096587
45. CDC. Percent of U.S. adults 55 and over with chronic conditions. November 6, 2015. Accessed April 29, 2021. www.cdc.gov/nchs/health_policy/adult_chronic_conditions.htm
46. National Council on Aging. COVID-driven isolation can be dangerous for older adults. March 31, 2021. Accessed April 29, 2021. www.ncoa.org/article/covid-driven-isolation-can-be-dangerous-for-older-adults
47. Smith ML, Steinman LE, Casey EA. Combatting social isolation among older adults in a time of physical distancing: the COVID-19 social connectivity paradox. Front Public Health. 2020;8:403. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.00403
48. Steptoe A, Shankar A, Demakakos P, et al. Social isolation, loneliness, and all-cause mortality in older men and women. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110:5797-5801. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1219686110
49. Holt-Lunstad J, Smith TB, Baker M, et al. Loneliness and social isolation as risk factors for mortality: a meta-analytic review. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015;10:227-237. doi: 10.1177/1745691614568352
50. Hakulinen C, Pulkki-Råback L, Virtanen M, et al. Social isolation and loneliness as risk factors for myocardial infarction, stroke and mortality: UK Biobank cohort study of 479 054 men and women. Heart. 2018;104:1536-1542. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2017-312663
51. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Social Isolation and Loneliness in Older Adults: Opportunities for the Health Care System. The National Academies Press; 2020. doi: 10.17226/25663
52. Shaw JG, Farid M, Noel-Miller C, et al. Social isolation and Medicare spending: among older adults, objective isolation increases expenditures while loneliness does not. J Aging Health. 2017;29:1119-1143. doi: 10.1177/0898264317703559
53. Berkman LF, Syme SL. Social networks, host resistance, and mortality: a nine-year follow-up study of Alameda County residents. Am J Epidemiol. 1979;109:186-204. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a112674
54. Campaign to End Loneliness. Measuring your impact on loneliness in later life. Accessed April 29, 2021. www.campaigntoendloneliness.org/wp-content/uploads/Loneliness-Measurement-Guidance1-1.pdf
55. Cornwell EY, Waite LJ. Social disconnectedness, perceived isolation, and health among older adults. J Health Soc Behav. 2009;50:31-48. doi: 10.1177/002214650905000103
56. Gierveld JDJ, Van Tilburg T. A 6-item scale for overall, emotional, and social loneliness: confirmatory tests on survey data. Res Aging. 2006;28:582-598. doi: 10.1177/0164027506289723
57. Koenig HG, Westlund RE, George LK, et al. Abbreviating the Duke Social Support Index for use in chronically ill elderly individuals. Psychosomatics. 1993;34:61-69. doi: 10.1016/S0033-3182(93)71928-3
58. Lubben J, Blozik E, Gillmann G, et al. Performance of an abbreviated version of the Lubben Social Network Scale among three European community-dwelling older adult populations. Gerontologist. 2006;46:503-513. doi: 10.1093/geront/46.4.503
59. Russell DW. UCLA Loneliness Scale (version 3): reliability, validity, factor structure. J Pers Assess. 1996;66:20-40. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa6601_2
60. van Leeuwen KM, van Loon MS, van Nes FA, et al. What does quality of life mean to older adults? A thematic synthesis. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0213263. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213263
Our approach to caring for the growing number of community-dwelling US adults ages ≥ 65 years has shifted. Although we continue to manage disease and disability, there is an increasing emphasis on the promotion of healthy aging by optimizing health care needs and quality of life (QOL).
The American Geriatric Society (AGS) uses the term “healthy aging” to reflect a dedication to improving the health, independence, and QOL of older people.1 The World Health Organization (WHO) defines healthy aging as “the process of developing and maintaining the functional ability that enables well-being in older age.”2 Functional ability encompasses capabilities that align with a person’s values, including meeting basic needs; learning, growing, and making independent decisions; being mobile; building and maintaining healthy relationships; and contributing to society.2 Similarly, the US Department of Health and Human Services has adopted a multidimensional approach to support people in creating “a productive and meaningful life” as they grow older.3
Numerous theoretical models have emerged from research on aging as a multidimensional construct, as evidenced by a 2016 citation analysis that identified 1755 articles written between 1902 and 2015 relating to “successful aging.”4 The analysis revealed 609 definitions operationalized by researchers’ measurement tools (mostly focused on physical function and other health metrics) and 1146 descriptions created by older adults, many emphasizing psychosocial strategies and cultural factors as key to successful aging.4
One approach that is likely to be useful for family physicians is the Age-Friendly Health System. This is an initiative of The John A. Hartford Foundation and the Institute for Healthcare Improvement that uses a multidisciplinary approach to create environments that foster inclusivity and address the needs of older people.5 Following this guidance, primary care providers use evidence-informed strategies that promote safety and address what matters most to older adults and their family caregivers.
The Age-Friendly Health System, as well as AGS and WHO, recognize that there are multiple aspects to well-being as one grows older. By using focused, evidence-based screening, assessments, and interventions, family physicians can best support aging patients in living their most fulfilling lives.
Here we present a review of evidence-based strategies that promote safety and address what matters most to older adults and their family caregivers using a 4-pronged framework, in the style of the Age-Friendly Health System model. However, the literature on healthy aging includes important messages about patient context and lifelong health behaviors, which we capture in an expanded set of thematic guidance. As such, we encourage family physicians to approach healthy aging as follows: (1) monitor health (screening and prevention), (2) promote mobility (physical function), (3) manage mentation (emotional health and cognitive function), and (4) encourage maintenance of social connections (social networks and QOL).
Monitoring health
Leverage Medicare annual wellness visits. A systematic approach is needed to prevent frailty and functional decline, and thus increase the QOL of older adults. To do this, it is important to focus on health promotion and disease prevention, while addressing existing ailments. One method is to leverage the Medicare annual wellness visit (AWV), which provides an opportunity to assess current health status as well as discuss behavior-change and risk-reduction strategies with patients.
Continue to: Although AWVs...
Although AWVs are an opportunity to improve patient outcomes, we are not taking full advantage of them.6 While AWVs have gained traction since their introduction in 2011, usage rates among ethnoracial minority groups has lagged behind.6 A 2018 cohort study examined reasons for disparate utilization rates among individuals ages ≥ 66 years (N = 14,687).7 Researchers found that differences in utilization between ethnoracial groups were explained by socioeconomic factors. Lower education and lower income, as well as rural living, were associated with lower rates of AWV completion.7 In addition, having a usual, nonemergent place to obtain medical care served as a powerful predictor of AWV utilization for all groups.7
Strategies to increase AWV completion rates among all eligible adults include increasing staff awareness of health literacy challenges and ensuring communication strategies are inclusive by providing printed materials in multiple languages, Braille, or larger typefaces; using accessible vocabulary that does not include medical jargon; and making medical interpreters accessible. In addition, training clinicians about unconscious bias and cultural humility can help foster empathy and awareness of differences in health beliefs and behaviors within diverse patient populations.
A 2019 scoping review of 11 studies (N > 60 million) focused on outcomes from Medicare AWVs for patients ages ≥ 65 years.8 This included uptake of preventive services, such as vaccinations or cancer screenings; advice, education, or referrals offered during the AWV; medication use; and hospitalization rates. Overall findings showed that older adults who received a Medicare AWV were more likely to receive referrals for preventive screenings and follow-through on these recommendations compared with those who did not undergo an AWV.8
Completion rates for vaccines, while remaining low overall, were higher among those who completed an AWV. Additionally, these studies showed improved completion of screenings for breast cancer, bone density, and colon cancer. Several studies in the scoping review supported the use of AWVs as an effective means by which to offer health education and advice related to health promotion and risk reduction, such as diet and lifestyle modifications.8 Little evidence exists on long-term outcomes related to AWV completion.8
Utilize shared decision-making to determine whether preventive screening makes sense for your patient. Although cancer remains the second leading cause of death among Americans ages ≥ 65 years,9 clear screening guidelines for this age group remain elusive.10 Physicians and patients often are reluctant to stop cancer screening despite lower life expectancy and fewer potential benefits of diagnosis in this population.9 Some recent studies reinforce the heterogeneity of the older adult population and further underscore the importance of individual-level decision-making.11-14 It is important to let older adult patients and their caregivers know about the potential risks of screening tests, especially the possibility that incidental findings may lead to unwarranted additional care or monitoring.9
Continue to: Avoid these screening conversation missteps
Avoid these screening conversation missteps. A 2017 qualitative study asked 40 community-dwelling older adults (mean age = 76 years) about their preferences for discussing screening cessation with their physicians.13 Three themes emerged.First, they were open to stopping their screenings, especially when suggested by a trusted physician. Second, health status and physical function made sense as decision points, but life expectancy did not. Finally, lengthy discussions with expanded details about risks and benefits were not appreciated, especially if coupled with comments on the limited benefits for those nearing the end of life. When discussing life expectancy, patients preferred phrasing that focused on how the screening was unnecessary because it would not help them live longer.13
Ensure that your message is understood—and culturally relevant. Recent studies on lower health literacy among older adults15,16 and ethnic and racial minorities17-21—as revealed in the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy22—might offer clues to patient receptivity to discussions about preventive screening and other health decisions.
One study found a significant correlation between higher self-rated health literacy and higher engagement in health behaviors such as mammography screening, moderate physical activity, and tobacco avoidance.16 Perceptions of personal control over health status, as well as perceived social standing, also correlated with health literacy score levels.16 Another study concluded that lower health literacy combined with lower self-efficacy, cultural beliefs about health topics (eg, diet and exercise), and distrust in the health care system contributed to lower rates of preventive care utilization among ethnocultural minority older adults in Canada, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Australia.18
Ensuring that easy-to-understand information is equitably shared with older adults of all races and ethnicities is critical. A 2018 study showed that distrust of the health system and cultural issues contributed to the lower incidence of colorectal cancer screenings in Hispanic and Asian American patients ages 50 to 75 years.21 Patients whose physicians engaged in “health literate practices” (eg, offering clear explanations of diagnostic plans and asking patients to describe what they understood) were more likely to obtain recommended breast and colorectal cancer screenings.20 In particular, researchers found that non-Hispanic Blacks were nearly twice as likely to follow through on colorectal cancer screening if their physicians engaged in health literate practices.20 In addition, receiving clear instructions from physicians increased the odds of completing breast cancer screening among Hispanic and non-Hispanic White women.20
Overall, screening information and recommendations should be standardized for all patients. This is particularly important in light of research that found that older non-Hispanic Black patients were less likely than their non-Hispanic White counterparts to receive information from their physicians about colorectal cancer screening.20
Continue to: Mobility
Mobility
Encourage physical activity. Frequent exercise and other forms of physical activity are associated with healthy aging, as shown in a 2017 systematic review and meta-analysis of 23 studies (N = 174,114).23 Despite considerable heterogeneity between studies in how researchers defined healthy aging and physical activity, they found that adults who incorporate regular movement and exercise into daily life are likely to continue to benefit from it into older age.23 In addition, a 2016 secondary analysis of data from the InCHIANTI longitudinal aging study concluded that adults ages ≥ 65 years (N = 1149) who had maintained higher physical activity levels throughout adulthood had less physical function decline and reduced rates of mobility disability and premature death compared with those who reported being less active.24
Preserve gait speed (and bolster health) with these activities. Walking speed, or gait, measured on a level surface has been used as a predictor for various aspects of well-being in older age, such as daily function, mobility, independence, falls, mortality, and hospitalization risk.25 Reduced gait speed is also one of the key indicators of functional impairment in older adults.
A 2015 systematic review sought to determine which type of exercise intervention (resistance, coordination, or multimodal training) would be most effective in preserving gait speed in healthy older adults (N = 2495; mean age = 74.2 years).25 While the 42 included studies were deemed to be fairly low quality, the review revealed (with large effect size [0.84]) that a number of exercise modalities might stave off loss of gait speed in older adults. Patients in the resistance training group had the greatest improvement in gait speed (0.11 m/s), followed by those in the coordination training group (0.09 m/s) and the multimodal training group (0.05 m/s).25
Finally, muscle mass and strength offer a measure of physical performance and functionality. A 2020 systematic review of 83 studies (N = 108,428) showed that low muscle mass and strength, reduced handgrip strength, and lower physical performance were predictive of reduced capacities in activities of daily living and instrumental activities of daily living.26 It is important to counsel adults to remain active throughout their lives and to include resistance training to maintain muscle mass and strength to preserve their motor function, mobility, independence, and QOL.
Use 1 of these scales to identify frailty. Frailty is a distinct clinical syndrome, in which an individual has low reserves and is highly vulnerable to internal and external stressors. It affects many community-dwelling older adults. Within the literature, there has been ongoing discussion regarding the definition of frailty27 (TABLE 128-31).
Continue to: The Fried Frailty Index...
The Fried Frailty Index defines frailty as a purely physical condition; patients need to exhibit 3 of 5 components (ie, weight loss, exhaustion, weakness, slowness, and low physical activity) to be deemed frail.31 The Edmonton Frail Scale is commonly used in geriatric assessments and counts impairments across several domains including physical activity, mood, cognition, and incontinence.30,32,33 Physicians need to complete a training course prior to its use. Finally, the definition of frailty used by Rockwood et al28, 29 was used to develop the Clinical Frailty Scale, which relies on broader criteria that include social and psychological elements in addition to physical elements.The Clinical Frailty Scale uses clinician judgment to evaluate patient-specific domains (eg, comorbidities, functionality, and cognition) and to generate a score ranging from 1 (very fit) to 9 (terminally ill).29 This scale is accessible and easy to implement. As a result, use of this scale has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. All definitions include a pre-frail state, indicating the dynamic nature of frailty over time.
It is important to identify pre-frail and frail older adults using 1 of these screening tools. Interventions to reverse frailty that can be initiated in the primary care setting include identifying treatable medical conditions, assessing medication appropriateness, providing nutritional advice, and developing an exercise plan.34
Conduct a nutritional assessment; consider this diet. Studies show that nutritional status can predict physical function and frailty risk in older adults. A 2017 systematic review of 19 studies (N = 22,270) of frail adults ages ≥ 65 years found associations related to specific dietary constructs (ie, micronutrients, macronutrients, antioxidants, overall diet quality, and timing of consumption).35 Plant-based diets with higher levels of micronutrients, such as vitamins C and E and beta-carotene, or diets with more protein or macronutrients, regardless of source foods, all resulted in inverse associations with frailty syndrome.35
A 2017 study showed that physical exercise and maintaining good nutritional status may be effective for preventing frailty in community-dwelling pre-frail older individuals.36 A 2019 study showed that a combination of muscle strength training and protein supplementation was the most effective intervention to delay or reverse frailty and was easiest to implement in primary care.37 A 2020 meta-analysis of 31 studies (N = 4794) addressing frailty among primary care patients > 60 years showed that interventions using predominantly resistance-based exercise and nutrition supplementation improved frailty status over the control.38 Researchers also found that a comprehensive geriatric assessment or exercise—alone or in combination with nutrition education—reduced physical frailty.
Mentation
Screen and treat cognitive impairments. Cognitive function and autonomy in decision-making are important factors in healthy aging. Aspects of mental health (eg, depression and anxiety), sensory impairment (eg, visual and auditory impairment), and mentation issues (eg, delirium, dementia, and related conditions), as well as diet, physical exercise, and mobility, can all impede cognitive functionality. The long-term effects of depression, anxiety,39 sensory deficits,40 mobility,41 diet,42 and, ultimately, aging may impact Alzheimer disease (AD). The risk of an AD diagnosis increases with age.39
Continue to: A 2018 prospective cohort study...
A 2018 prospective cohort study using data from the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center followed individuals (N = 12,053) who were cognitively asymptomatic at their initial visits to determine who developed clinical signs of AD.39 Survival analysis showed several psychosocial factors—anxiety, sleep disturbances, and depressive episodes of any type (occurring within the past 2 years, clinician verified, lifetime report)—were significantly associated with an eventual AD diagnosis and increased the risk of AD.39 More research is needed to verify the impact of early intervention for these conditions on neurodegenerative disease; however, screening and treating psychosocial factors such as anxiety and depression should be maintained.
Researchers evaluated the impact of a dual sensory impairment (DSI) on dementia risk using data from 2051 participants in the Ginkgo Evaluation of Memory Study.40 Hearing and visual impairments (defined as DSI when these conditions coexist) or visual impairment alone were significantly associated with increased risk of dementia in older adults. The researchers reported that DSI was significantly associated with a higher risk of all-cause dementia (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.86; 95% CI, 1.25-2.76) and AD (HR = 2.12; 95% CI, 1.34-3.36).40 Visual impairment alone was associated with an increased risk of all-cause dementia (HR = 1.32; 95% CI, 1.02-1.71).40 These results suggest that screening of DSI or visual impairment earlier in the patient’s lifespan may identify those at high risk of dementia in older adulthood.
The American Academy of Ophthalmology recommends patients with healthy eyes be screened once during their 20s and twice in their 30s; a full examination is recommended by age 40. For patients ages ≥ 65 years, it is recommended that eye examinations occur every 1 to 2 years.43
Diet and mobility play a big role in cognition. Diet43 and exercise41,42,44 are believed to have an impact on mentation, and recent studies show memory and global cognition could be malleable later in life. A 2015 meta-analysis of 490 treatment arms of 24 randomized controlled studies showed improvement in global cognition with consumption of a Mediterranean diet plus olive oil (effect size [ES] standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.22; 95% CI, 0.16-0.27) and tai chi exercises (ES SMD = 0.18; 95% CI, 0.06-0.29).42 The analysis also found improved memory among participants who consumed the Mediterranean diet/olive oil combination (ES SMD = 0.22; 95% CI, 0.12-0.32) and soy isoflavone supplements (ES SMD = 0.11; 95% CI, 0.04-0.17). Although the ESs are small, they are significant and offer promising evidence that individual choices related to nutrition or exercise may influence cognition and memory.
A 2018 systematic review found that all domains of cognition showed improvement with 45 to 60 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical exercise.44 Attention, executive function, memory, and working memory showed significant increases, whereas global cognition improvements were not statistically significant.44 A 2016 meta-analysis of 26 studies (N = 26,355) found a positive association between an objective mobility measure (gait, lower-extremity function, and balance) and cognitive function (global, executive function, memory, and processing speed) in older adults.41 These results highlight that diet, mobility, and physical exercise impact cognitive functioning.
Continue to: Maintaining social connections
Maintaining social connections
Social isolation and loneliness—compounded by a pandemic. The US Department of Health and Human Services notes that “community connections” are among the key factors required for healthy aging.3 Similarly, the WHO definition of healthy aging considers whether individuals can build and sustain relationships with other people and find ways to engender their personal values through these connections.2
As people age, their social connections often decrease due to the death of friends and family, shifts in living arrangements, loss of mobility or eyesight (and thus self-transport), and the onset or increased acuity of illness or chronic conditions.45 This has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has spurred shelter-in-place and stay-at-home orders along with recommendations for physical distancing (also known as social distancing), especially for older adults who are at higher risk.46 Smith et al47 calls this the COVID-19 Social Connectivity Paradox, in which older adults limit their interactions with others to protect their physical health and reduce their risk of contracting the virus, but as a result they may undermine their psychosocial health by placing themselves at risk of social isolation and loneliness.47
The double threat. Social isolation and loneliness have been shown to negatively impact physical health and well-being, resulting in an increased risk of early death48-50; higher likelihood of specific diagnoses, including dementia and cardiovascular conditions48,50; and more frequent use of health care services.50 These concepts, while related, represent different mechanisms for negative health outcomes. Social isolation is an objective condition when one has a lack of opportunities for interaction with other people; loneliness refers to the emotional disconnect one feels when separated from others. Few studies have compared outcomes between these concepts, but in those that have, social isolation appears to be more strongly associated with early death.48-50
A 2013 observational study using data from the English Longitudinal Study on Aging found that both social isolation and loneliness were associated with increased mortality among men and women ages ≥ 52 years (N = 6500).48 However, when studied independently, loneliness was not found to be a significant risk factor. In contrast, social isolation significantly impacted mortality risk, even after adjusting for demographic factors and baseline health status.48 These findings are supported by a 2018 cohort study of individuals (N = 479,054) with a history of an acute cardiovascular event that concluded social isolation was a predictor of mortality, whereas loneliness was not.50
A large 2015 meta-analysis (70 studies, N = 3,407,134) of mortality causes among community-dwelling older adults (average age, 66) confirmed that both objective measures of isolation, as well as subjective measures (such as feelings of loneliness or living alone), have a significant predictive effect in longer-term studies. Each measure shows an approximately 30% increase in the likelihood of death after an average of 7 years.49
Continue to: Health care remains a connection point
Health care remains a connection point. Even when life course events and conditions (eg, death of loved ones, loss of transportation or financial resources, or disengagement from community activities) reduce social connections, most older adults engage in some way with the health care system. A 2020 consensus report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine suggests health care professionals capitalize on these connection points with adults ages ≥ 50 years by periodically screening for social isolation and loneliness, documenting social status updates in medical records, and piloting and evaluating interventions in the clinical setting.51
The report offered information about potential avenues for intervention by primary care professionals beyond screening, such as participating in research studies that investigate screening tools and multisystem interventions; social prescribing (linking patients to embedded social work services or community-based organizations); referring patients to support groups; initiating cognitive-based therapy or other behavioral health interventions; or recommending mindfulness practices.51 However, most of the cited intervention studies were not specific to primary care settings and contained poor-quality evidence related to efficacy.
Isolation creates a greater reliance on health services due to a lack of a social support system, while a feeling of emotional disconnection (loneliness) seems to be a barrier to accessing care. A 2017 cohort study linking data from the Health and Retirement Study and Medicare claims revealed that social isolation predicts higher annual health expenditures (> $1600 per beneficiary) driven by hospitalization and skilled nursing facility usage, along with greater mortality, whereas individuals who are lonely result in reduced costs (a reduction of $770 annually) due to lower usage of inpatient and outpatient services.52 Prioritizing interventions that identify and connect isolated older adults to social support, therefore, may increase survivability by ensuring they have access to resources and health care interventions when needed.
In addition, these findings underscore the importance of looking at quality—not just quantity—of older adults’ social connections. A number of validated screening tools exist for social isolation and loneliness (TABLE 253-59); however, concerns exist about assessing risk using a unidimensional tool for a complex concern,47 as well as identifying a problem without having evidence-based interventions to offer as solutions.47,51 Until future studies resolve these concerns, leveraging the physician-patient relationship to broach these difficult subjects may help normalize the issues and create safe spaces to identify individuals who are at risk.
QOL is key to healthy aging. As Kusumastuti et al4 state, “successful ageing lies in the eyes of the beholder.” A 2019 systematic review of 48 qualitative studies revealed that community-dwelling older adults ages ≥ 50 years in 11 countries (N > 4175) perceive well-being by considering QOL within 9 domains: health perception, autonomy, role and activity, relationships, emotional comfort, attitude and adaptation, spirituality, financial security, and home and neighborhood.60 Researchers found that as engagement in any one of these domains declines, older adults may shift their definition of health toward their remaining abilities.60 This offers an explanation as to why patients might rate their health status much higher than their physicians do: older adults tend to have a more holistic concept of health.
Continue to: Take a multidimensional approach to healthy aging
Take a multidimensional approach to healthy aging
Although we have separately examined each of the 4 components of managing healthy aging in a community-dwelling adult, applying a multidimensional approach is most effective. Increasing use of the Medicare AWV provides an opportunity to assess patient health status, determine care preferences, and improve follow-through on preventive screening. It is also important to encourage older adults to engage in regular physical activity—especially muscle-strengthening exercises—and to discuss nutrition and caloric intake to prevent frailty and functional decline.
Assessing and treating vision and hearing impairments and mental health issues, including anxiety and depression, may guard against losses in cognition. When speaking with older adult patients about their social connections, consider asking not only about frequency of contact and access to resources such as food and transportation, but also about whether they are finding ways to bring their own values into those relationships to bolster their QOL. This guidance also may be useful for primary care practices and health care networks when planning future quality-improvement initiatives.
Additional research is needed to support the evidence base for aligning older adult preferences in health care interventions, such as preventive screenings. Also, clinical decision-making requires more clarity about the efficacy of specific diet and exercise interventions for older adults; the impact of early intervention for depression, anxiety, and sleep disorders on neurodegenerative disease; whether loneliness predicts mortality; and how health care delivery systems can be effective at building social connectivity.
For now, it is essential to recognize that initiating health education, screening, and prevention throughout the patient’s lifespan can promote healthy aging outcomes. As family physicians, it is important to capitalize on longitudinal relationships with patients and begin educating younger patients using this multidimensional framework to promote living “a productive and meaningful life”at any age.3
Lynn M. Wilson, DO, 707 Hamilton Street, 8th floor, Department of Family Medicine, Lehigh Valley Health Network, Allentown, PA 18101; [email protected]
Our approach to caring for the growing number of community-dwelling US adults ages ≥ 65 years has shifted. Although we continue to manage disease and disability, there is an increasing emphasis on the promotion of healthy aging by optimizing health care needs and quality of life (QOL).
The American Geriatric Society (AGS) uses the term “healthy aging” to reflect a dedication to improving the health, independence, and QOL of older people.1 The World Health Organization (WHO) defines healthy aging as “the process of developing and maintaining the functional ability that enables well-being in older age.”2 Functional ability encompasses capabilities that align with a person’s values, including meeting basic needs; learning, growing, and making independent decisions; being mobile; building and maintaining healthy relationships; and contributing to society.2 Similarly, the US Department of Health and Human Services has adopted a multidimensional approach to support people in creating “a productive and meaningful life” as they grow older.3
Numerous theoretical models have emerged from research on aging as a multidimensional construct, as evidenced by a 2016 citation analysis that identified 1755 articles written between 1902 and 2015 relating to “successful aging.”4 The analysis revealed 609 definitions operationalized by researchers’ measurement tools (mostly focused on physical function and other health metrics) and 1146 descriptions created by older adults, many emphasizing psychosocial strategies and cultural factors as key to successful aging.4
One approach that is likely to be useful for family physicians is the Age-Friendly Health System. This is an initiative of The John A. Hartford Foundation and the Institute for Healthcare Improvement that uses a multidisciplinary approach to create environments that foster inclusivity and address the needs of older people.5 Following this guidance, primary care providers use evidence-informed strategies that promote safety and address what matters most to older adults and their family caregivers.
The Age-Friendly Health System, as well as AGS and WHO, recognize that there are multiple aspects to well-being as one grows older. By using focused, evidence-based screening, assessments, and interventions, family physicians can best support aging patients in living their most fulfilling lives.
Here we present a review of evidence-based strategies that promote safety and address what matters most to older adults and their family caregivers using a 4-pronged framework, in the style of the Age-Friendly Health System model. However, the literature on healthy aging includes important messages about patient context and lifelong health behaviors, which we capture in an expanded set of thematic guidance. As such, we encourage family physicians to approach healthy aging as follows: (1) monitor health (screening and prevention), (2) promote mobility (physical function), (3) manage mentation (emotional health and cognitive function), and (4) encourage maintenance of social connections (social networks and QOL).
Monitoring health
Leverage Medicare annual wellness visits. A systematic approach is needed to prevent frailty and functional decline, and thus increase the QOL of older adults. To do this, it is important to focus on health promotion and disease prevention, while addressing existing ailments. One method is to leverage the Medicare annual wellness visit (AWV), which provides an opportunity to assess current health status as well as discuss behavior-change and risk-reduction strategies with patients.
Continue to: Although AWVs...
Although AWVs are an opportunity to improve patient outcomes, we are not taking full advantage of them.6 While AWVs have gained traction since their introduction in 2011, usage rates among ethnoracial minority groups has lagged behind.6 A 2018 cohort study examined reasons for disparate utilization rates among individuals ages ≥ 66 years (N = 14,687).7 Researchers found that differences in utilization between ethnoracial groups were explained by socioeconomic factors. Lower education and lower income, as well as rural living, were associated with lower rates of AWV completion.7 In addition, having a usual, nonemergent place to obtain medical care served as a powerful predictor of AWV utilization for all groups.7
Strategies to increase AWV completion rates among all eligible adults include increasing staff awareness of health literacy challenges and ensuring communication strategies are inclusive by providing printed materials in multiple languages, Braille, or larger typefaces; using accessible vocabulary that does not include medical jargon; and making medical interpreters accessible. In addition, training clinicians about unconscious bias and cultural humility can help foster empathy and awareness of differences in health beliefs and behaviors within diverse patient populations.
A 2019 scoping review of 11 studies (N > 60 million) focused on outcomes from Medicare AWVs for patients ages ≥ 65 years.8 This included uptake of preventive services, such as vaccinations or cancer screenings; advice, education, or referrals offered during the AWV; medication use; and hospitalization rates. Overall findings showed that older adults who received a Medicare AWV were more likely to receive referrals for preventive screenings and follow-through on these recommendations compared with those who did not undergo an AWV.8
Completion rates for vaccines, while remaining low overall, were higher among those who completed an AWV. Additionally, these studies showed improved completion of screenings for breast cancer, bone density, and colon cancer. Several studies in the scoping review supported the use of AWVs as an effective means by which to offer health education and advice related to health promotion and risk reduction, such as diet and lifestyle modifications.8 Little evidence exists on long-term outcomes related to AWV completion.8
Utilize shared decision-making to determine whether preventive screening makes sense for your patient. Although cancer remains the second leading cause of death among Americans ages ≥ 65 years,9 clear screening guidelines for this age group remain elusive.10 Physicians and patients often are reluctant to stop cancer screening despite lower life expectancy and fewer potential benefits of diagnosis in this population.9 Some recent studies reinforce the heterogeneity of the older adult population and further underscore the importance of individual-level decision-making.11-14 It is important to let older adult patients and their caregivers know about the potential risks of screening tests, especially the possibility that incidental findings may lead to unwarranted additional care or monitoring.9
Continue to: Avoid these screening conversation missteps
Avoid these screening conversation missteps. A 2017 qualitative study asked 40 community-dwelling older adults (mean age = 76 years) about their preferences for discussing screening cessation with their physicians.13 Three themes emerged.First, they were open to stopping their screenings, especially when suggested by a trusted physician. Second, health status and physical function made sense as decision points, but life expectancy did not. Finally, lengthy discussions with expanded details about risks and benefits were not appreciated, especially if coupled with comments on the limited benefits for those nearing the end of life. When discussing life expectancy, patients preferred phrasing that focused on how the screening was unnecessary because it would not help them live longer.13
Ensure that your message is understood—and culturally relevant. Recent studies on lower health literacy among older adults15,16 and ethnic and racial minorities17-21—as revealed in the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy22—might offer clues to patient receptivity to discussions about preventive screening and other health decisions.
One study found a significant correlation between higher self-rated health literacy and higher engagement in health behaviors such as mammography screening, moderate physical activity, and tobacco avoidance.16 Perceptions of personal control over health status, as well as perceived social standing, also correlated with health literacy score levels.16 Another study concluded that lower health literacy combined with lower self-efficacy, cultural beliefs about health topics (eg, diet and exercise), and distrust in the health care system contributed to lower rates of preventive care utilization among ethnocultural minority older adults in Canada, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Australia.18
Ensuring that easy-to-understand information is equitably shared with older adults of all races and ethnicities is critical. A 2018 study showed that distrust of the health system and cultural issues contributed to the lower incidence of colorectal cancer screenings in Hispanic and Asian American patients ages 50 to 75 years.21 Patients whose physicians engaged in “health literate practices” (eg, offering clear explanations of diagnostic plans and asking patients to describe what they understood) were more likely to obtain recommended breast and colorectal cancer screenings.20 In particular, researchers found that non-Hispanic Blacks were nearly twice as likely to follow through on colorectal cancer screening if their physicians engaged in health literate practices.20 In addition, receiving clear instructions from physicians increased the odds of completing breast cancer screening among Hispanic and non-Hispanic White women.20
Overall, screening information and recommendations should be standardized for all patients. This is particularly important in light of research that found that older non-Hispanic Black patients were less likely than their non-Hispanic White counterparts to receive information from their physicians about colorectal cancer screening.20
Continue to: Mobility
Mobility
Encourage physical activity. Frequent exercise and other forms of physical activity are associated with healthy aging, as shown in a 2017 systematic review and meta-analysis of 23 studies (N = 174,114).23 Despite considerable heterogeneity between studies in how researchers defined healthy aging and physical activity, they found that adults who incorporate regular movement and exercise into daily life are likely to continue to benefit from it into older age.23 In addition, a 2016 secondary analysis of data from the InCHIANTI longitudinal aging study concluded that adults ages ≥ 65 years (N = 1149) who had maintained higher physical activity levels throughout adulthood had less physical function decline and reduced rates of mobility disability and premature death compared with those who reported being less active.24
Preserve gait speed (and bolster health) with these activities. Walking speed, or gait, measured on a level surface has been used as a predictor for various aspects of well-being in older age, such as daily function, mobility, independence, falls, mortality, and hospitalization risk.25 Reduced gait speed is also one of the key indicators of functional impairment in older adults.
A 2015 systematic review sought to determine which type of exercise intervention (resistance, coordination, or multimodal training) would be most effective in preserving gait speed in healthy older adults (N = 2495; mean age = 74.2 years).25 While the 42 included studies were deemed to be fairly low quality, the review revealed (with large effect size [0.84]) that a number of exercise modalities might stave off loss of gait speed in older adults. Patients in the resistance training group had the greatest improvement in gait speed (0.11 m/s), followed by those in the coordination training group (0.09 m/s) and the multimodal training group (0.05 m/s).25
Finally, muscle mass and strength offer a measure of physical performance and functionality. A 2020 systematic review of 83 studies (N = 108,428) showed that low muscle mass and strength, reduced handgrip strength, and lower physical performance were predictive of reduced capacities in activities of daily living and instrumental activities of daily living.26 It is important to counsel adults to remain active throughout their lives and to include resistance training to maintain muscle mass and strength to preserve their motor function, mobility, independence, and QOL.
Use 1 of these scales to identify frailty. Frailty is a distinct clinical syndrome, in which an individual has low reserves and is highly vulnerable to internal and external stressors. It affects many community-dwelling older adults. Within the literature, there has been ongoing discussion regarding the definition of frailty27 (TABLE 128-31).
Continue to: The Fried Frailty Index...
The Fried Frailty Index defines frailty as a purely physical condition; patients need to exhibit 3 of 5 components (ie, weight loss, exhaustion, weakness, slowness, and low physical activity) to be deemed frail.31 The Edmonton Frail Scale is commonly used in geriatric assessments and counts impairments across several domains including physical activity, mood, cognition, and incontinence.30,32,33 Physicians need to complete a training course prior to its use. Finally, the definition of frailty used by Rockwood et al28, 29 was used to develop the Clinical Frailty Scale, which relies on broader criteria that include social and psychological elements in addition to physical elements.The Clinical Frailty Scale uses clinician judgment to evaluate patient-specific domains (eg, comorbidities, functionality, and cognition) and to generate a score ranging from 1 (very fit) to 9 (terminally ill).29 This scale is accessible and easy to implement. As a result, use of this scale has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. All definitions include a pre-frail state, indicating the dynamic nature of frailty over time.
It is important to identify pre-frail and frail older adults using 1 of these screening tools. Interventions to reverse frailty that can be initiated in the primary care setting include identifying treatable medical conditions, assessing medication appropriateness, providing nutritional advice, and developing an exercise plan.34
Conduct a nutritional assessment; consider this diet. Studies show that nutritional status can predict physical function and frailty risk in older adults. A 2017 systematic review of 19 studies (N = 22,270) of frail adults ages ≥ 65 years found associations related to specific dietary constructs (ie, micronutrients, macronutrients, antioxidants, overall diet quality, and timing of consumption).35 Plant-based diets with higher levels of micronutrients, such as vitamins C and E and beta-carotene, or diets with more protein or macronutrients, regardless of source foods, all resulted in inverse associations with frailty syndrome.35
A 2017 study showed that physical exercise and maintaining good nutritional status may be effective for preventing frailty in community-dwelling pre-frail older individuals.36 A 2019 study showed that a combination of muscle strength training and protein supplementation was the most effective intervention to delay or reverse frailty and was easiest to implement in primary care.37 A 2020 meta-analysis of 31 studies (N = 4794) addressing frailty among primary care patients > 60 years showed that interventions using predominantly resistance-based exercise and nutrition supplementation improved frailty status over the control.38 Researchers also found that a comprehensive geriatric assessment or exercise—alone or in combination with nutrition education—reduced physical frailty.
Mentation
Screen and treat cognitive impairments. Cognitive function and autonomy in decision-making are important factors in healthy aging. Aspects of mental health (eg, depression and anxiety), sensory impairment (eg, visual and auditory impairment), and mentation issues (eg, delirium, dementia, and related conditions), as well as diet, physical exercise, and mobility, can all impede cognitive functionality. The long-term effects of depression, anxiety,39 sensory deficits,40 mobility,41 diet,42 and, ultimately, aging may impact Alzheimer disease (AD). The risk of an AD diagnosis increases with age.39
Continue to: A 2018 prospective cohort study...
A 2018 prospective cohort study using data from the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center followed individuals (N = 12,053) who were cognitively asymptomatic at their initial visits to determine who developed clinical signs of AD.39 Survival analysis showed several psychosocial factors—anxiety, sleep disturbances, and depressive episodes of any type (occurring within the past 2 years, clinician verified, lifetime report)—were significantly associated with an eventual AD diagnosis and increased the risk of AD.39 More research is needed to verify the impact of early intervention for these conditions on neurodegenerative disease; however, screening and treating psychosocial factors such as anxiety and depression should be maintained.
Researchers evaluated the impact of a dual sensory impairment (DSI) on dementia risk using data from 2051 participants in the Ginkgo Evaluation of Memory Study.40 Hearing and visual impairments (defined as DSI when these conditions coexist) or visual impairment alone were significantly associated with increased risk of dementia in older adults. The researchers reported that DSI was significantly associated with a higher risk of all-cause dementia (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.86; 95% CI, 1.25-2.76) and AD (HR = 2.12; 95% CI, 1.34-3.36).40 Visual impairment alone was associated with an increased risk of all-cause dementia (HR = 1.32; 95% CI, 1.02-1.71).40 These results suggest that screening of DSI or visual impairment earlier in the patient’s lifespan may identify those at high risk of dementia in older adulthood.
The American Academy of Ophthalmology recommends patients with healthy eyes be screened once during their 20s and twice in their 30s; a full examination is recommended by age 40. For patients ages ≥ 65 years, it is recommended that eye examinations occur every 1 to 2 years.43
Diet and mobility play a big role in cognition. Diet43 and exercise41,42,44 are believed to have an impact on mentation, and recent studies show memory and global cognition could be malleable later in life. A 2015 meta-analysis of 490 treatment arms of 24 randomized controlled studies showed improvement in global cognition with consumption of a Mediterranean diet plus olive oil (effect size [ES] standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.22; 95% CI, 0.16-0.27) and tai chi exercises (ES SMD = 0.18; 95% CI, 0.06-0.29).42 The analysis also found improved memory among participants who consumed the Mediterranean diet/olive oil combination (ES SMD = 0.22; 95% CI, 0.12-0.32) and soy isoflavone supplements (ES SMD = 0.11; 95% CI, 0.04-0.17). Although the ESs are small, they are significant and offer promising evidence that individual choices related to nutrition or exercise may influence cognition and memory.
A 2018 systematic review found that all domains of cognition showed improvement with 45 to 60 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical exercise.44 Attention, executive function, memory, and working memory showed significant increases, whereas global cognition improvements were not statistically significant.44 A 2016 meta-analysis of 26 studies (N = 26,355) found a positive association between an objective mobility measure (gait, lower-extremity function, and balance) and cognitive function (global, executive function, memory, and processing speed) in older adults.41 These results highlight that diet, mobility, and physical exercise impact cognitive functioning.
Continue to: Maintaining social connections
Maintaining social connections
Social isolation and loneliness—compounded by a pandemic. The US Department of Health and Human Services notes that “community connections” are among the key factors required for healthy aging.3 Similarly, the WHO definition of healthy aging considers whether individuals can build and sustain relationships with other people and find ways to engender their personal values through these connections.2
As people age, their social connections often decrease due to the death of friends and family, shifts in living arrangements, loss of mobility or eyesight (and thus self-transport), and the onset or increased acuity of illness or chronic conditions.45 This has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has spurred shelter-in-place and stay-at-home orders along with recommendations for physical distancing (also known as social distancing), especially for older adults who are at higher risk.46 Smith et al47 calls this the COVID-19 Social Connectivity Paradox, in which older adults limit their interactions with others to protect their physical health and reduce their risk of contracting the virus, but as a result they may undermine their psychosocial health by placing themselves at risk of social isolation and loneliness.47
The double threat. Social isolation and loneliness have been shown to negatively impact physical health and well-being, resulting in an increased risk of early death48-50; higher likelihood of specific diagnoses, including dementia and cardiovascular conditions48,50; and more frequent use of health care services.50 These concepts, while related, represent different mechanisms for negative health outcomes. Social isolation is an objective condition when one has a lack of opportunities for interaction with other people; loneliness refers to the emotional disconnect one feels when separated from others. Few studies have compared outcomes between these concepts, but in those that have, social isolation appears to be more strongly associated with early death.48-50
A 2013 observational study using data from the English Longitudinal Study on Aging found that both social isolation and loneliness were associated with increased mortality among men and women ages ≥ 52 years (N = 6500).48 However, when studied independently, loneliness was not found to be a significant risk factor. In contrast, social isolation significantly impacted mortality risk, even after adjusting for demographic factors and baseline health status.48 These findings are supported by a 2018 cohort study of individuals (N = 479,054) with a history of an acute cardiovascular event that concluded social isolation was a predictor of mortality, whereas loneliness was not.50
A large 2015 meta-analysis (70 studies, N = 3,407,134) of mortality causes among community-dwelling older adults (average age, 66) confirmed that both objective measures of isolation, as well as subjective measures (such as feelings of loneliness or living alone), have a significant predictive effect in longer-term studies. Each measure shows an approximately 30% increase in the likelihood of death after an average of 7 years.49
Continue to: Health care remains a connection point
Health care remains a connection point. Even when life course events and conditions (eg, death of loved ones, loss of transportation or financial resources, or disengagement from community activities) reduce social connections, most older adults engage in some way with the health care system. A 2020 consensus report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine suggests health care professionals capitalize on these connection points with adults ages ≥ 50 years by periodically screening for social isolation and loneliness, documenting social status updates in medical records, and piloting and evaluating interventions in the clinical setting.51
The report offered information about potential avenues for intervention by primary care professionals beyond screening, such as participating in research studies that investigate screening tools and multisystem interventions; social prescribing (linking patients to embedded social work services or community-based organizations); referring patients to support groups; initiating cognitive-based therapy or other behavioral health interventions; or recommending mindfulness practices.51 However, most of the cited intervention studies were not specific to primary care settings and contained poor-quality evidence related to efficacy.
Isolation creates a greater reliance on health services due to a lack of a social support system, while a feeling of emotional disconnection (loneliness) seems to be a barrier to accessing care. A 2017 cohort study linking data from the Health and Retirement Study and Medicare claims revealed that social isolation predicts higher annual health expenditures (> $1600 per beneficiary) driven by hospitalization and skilled nursing facility usage, along with greater mortality, whereas individuals who are lonely result in reduced costs (a reduction of $770 annually) due to lower usage of inpatient and outpatient services.52 Prioritizing interventions that identify and connect isolated older adults to social support, therefore, may increase survivability by ensuring they have access to resources and health care interventions when needed.
In addition, these findings underscore the importance of looking at quality—not just quantity—of older adults’ social connections. A number of validated screening tools exist for social isolation and loneliness (TABLE 253-59); however, concerns exist about assessing risk using a unidimensional tool for a complex concern,47 as well as identifying a problem without having evidence-based interventions to offer as solutions.47,51 Until future studies resolve these concerns, leveraging the physician-patient relationship to broach these difficult subjects may help normalize the issues and create safe spaces to identify individuals who are at risk.
QOL is key to healthy aging. As Kusumastuti et al4 state, “successful ageing lies in the eyes of the beholder.” A 2019 systematic review of 48 qualitative studies revealed that community-dwelling older adults ages ≥ 50 years in 11 countries (N > 4175) perceive well-being by considering QOL within 9 domains: health perception, autonomy, role and activity, relationships, emotional comfort, attitude and adaptation, spirituality, financial security, and home and neighborhood.60 Researchers found that as engagement in any one of these domains declines, older adults may shift their definition of health toward their remaining abilities.60 This offers an explanation as to why patients might rate their health status much higher than their physicians do: older adults tend to have a more holistic concept of health.
Continue to: Take a multidimensional approach to healthy aging
Take a multidimensional approach to healthy aging
Although we have separately examined each of the 4 components of managing healthy aging in a community-dwelling adult, applying a multidimensional approach is most effective. Increasing use of the Medicare AWV provides an opportunity to assess patient health status, determine care preferences, and improve follow-through on preventive screening. It is also important to encourage older adults to engage in regular physical activity—especially muscle-strengthening exercises—and to discuss nutrition and caloric intake to prevent frailty and functional decline.
Assessing and treating vision and hearing impairments and mental health issues, including anxiety and depression, may guard against losses in cognition. When speaking with older adult patients about their social connections, consider asking not only about frequency of contact and access to resources such as food and transportation, but also about whether they are finding ways to bring their own values into those relationships to bolster their QOL. This guidance also may be useful for primary care practices and health care networks when planning future quality-improvement initiatives.
Additional research is needed to support the evidence base for aligning older adult preferences in health care interventions, such as preventive screenings. Also, clinical decision-making requires more clarity about the efficacy of specific diet and exercise interventions for older adults; the impact of early intervention for depression, anxiety, and sleep disorders on neurodegenerative disease; whether loneliness predicts mortality; and how health care delivery systems can be effective at building social connectivity.
For now, it is essential to recognize that initiating health education, screening, and prevention throughout the patient’s lifespan can promote healthy aging outcomes. As family physicians, it is important to capitalize on longitudinal relationships with patients and begin educating younger patients using this multidimensional framework to promote living “a productive and meaningful life”at any age.3
Lynn M. Wilson, DO, 707 Hamilton Street, 8th floor, Department of Family Medicine, Lehigh Valley Health Network, Allentown, PA 18101; [email protected]
1. Friedman S, Mulhausen P, Cleveland M, et al. Healthy aging: American Geriatrics Society white paper executive summary. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018;67:17-20. doi: 10.1111/jgs.15644
2. World Health Organization. World report on ageing and health. 2015. Accessed June 29, 2020. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/186463/9789240694811_eng.pdf?sequence=1
3. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. Healthy aging. Accessed June 29, 2020. www.hhs.gov/aging/healthy-aging
4. Kusumastuti S, Derks MGM, Tellier S, et al. Successful ageing: a study of the literature using citation network analysis. Maturitas. 2016;93:4-12. doi: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2016.04.010
5. Institute for Healthcare Improvement. Age-friendly health systems: guide to using the 4Ms in the care of older adults [white paper]. 2020. Accessed June 29, 2020. www.ihi.org/Engage/Initiatives/Age-Friendly-Health-systems/Documents/IHIAgeFriendlyHealthSystems_GuidetoUsing4MsCare.pdf
6. Lind KE, Hildreth KL, Perraillon MC. Persistent disparities in Medicare’s annual wellness visit utilization. Med Care. 2019;57:984-989. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001229
7. Lind KE, Hildreth K, Lindrooth R, et al. Ethnoracial disparities in Medicare annual wellness visit utilization: evidence from a nationally representative database. Med Care. 2018;56:761-766. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000962
8. Simpson VL, Kovich M. Outcomes of primary care-based Medicare annual wellness visits with older adults: a scoping review. Geriatr Nurs. 2019;40:590-596. doi: 10.1016/j.gerinurse.2019.06.001
9. Heron M. Deaths: leading causes for 2017. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2019;68:1-77.
10. Salzman B, Beldowski K, de la Paz A. Cancer screening in older patients. Am Fam Physician. 2016;93:659-667.
11. Kinsinger LS, Anderson C, Kim J, et al. Implementation of lung cancer screening in the Veterans Health Administration. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177:399-406. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.9022
12. Walter LC, Schonberg MA. Screening mammography in older women: a review. JAMA. 2014;311:1336-1347. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.2834
13. Schoenborn NL, Lee K, Pollack CE, et al. Older adults’ views and communication preferences about cancer screening cessation. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177:1121-1128. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.1778
14. Butterworth JE, Hays R, McDonagh ST, et al. Interventions for involving older patients with multi-morbidity in decision-making during primary care consultations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;10:CD013124. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013124.pub2
15. Bostock S, Steptoe A. Association between low functional health literacy and mortality in older adults: longitudinal cohort study. BMJ. 2012;344:e1602. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e1602
16. Fernandez DM, Larson JL, Zikmund-Fisher BJ. Associations between health literacy and preventive health behaviors among older adults: findings from the health and retirement study. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:596. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3267-7
17. Weekes CV. African Americans and health literacy: a systematic review. ABNF J. 2012;23:76-80.
18. Mantwill S, Monestel-Umaña S, Schulz PJ. The relationship between health literacy and health disparities: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0145455. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145455
19. Khan MM, Kobayashi K. Optimizing health promotion among ethnocultural minority older adults (EMOA). Int J Migration Health Soc Care. 2015;11:268-281. doi: 10.1108/IJMHSC-12-2014-0047
20. Kindratt TB, Dallo FJ, Allicock M, et al. The influence of patient-provider communication on cancer screenings differs among racial and ethnic groups. Prev Med Rep. 2020;18:101086. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2020.101086
21. Hong Y-R, Tauscher J, Cardel M. Distrust in health care and cultural factors are associated with uptake of colorectal cancer screening in Hispanic and Asian Americans. Cancer. 2018;124:335-345. doi: 10.1002/cncr.31052
22. Kutner M, Greenberg E, Jin Y, et al. Literacy in everyday life: results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy. NCES 2007-480. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. April 2007. Accessed August 27, 2021. http://nces.ed.gov/Pubs2007/2007480_1.pdf
23. Daskalopoulou C, Stubbs B, Kralj C, et al. Physical activity and healthy ageing: a systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal cohort studies. Ageing Res Rev. 2017;38:6-17. doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2017.06.003
24. Stenholm S, Koster A, Valkeinen H, et al. Association of physical activity history with physical function and mortality in old age. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2016;71:496-501. doi: 10.1093/gerona/glv111
25. Hortobágyi T, Lesinski M, Gäbler M, et al. Effects of three types of exercise interventions on healthy old adults’ gait speed: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2015;45:1627‐1643. Published correction appears in Sports Med. 2016;46:453. doi: 10.1007/s40279-015-0371-2
26. Wang DXM, Yao J, Zirek Y, et al. Muscle mass, strength, and physical performance predicting activities of daily living: a meta-analysis. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2020;11:3‐25. doi: 10.1002/jcsm.12502
27. Sternberg SA, Wershof Schwartz A, Karunananthan S, et al. The identification of frailty: a systematic literature review. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2011;59:2129-2138. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2011.03597.x
28. Rockwood K, Song X, MacKnight C, et al. A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people. CMAJ. 2005;173:489-495. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.050051
29. Church S, Rogers E, Rockwood K, et al. A scoping review of the Clinical Frailty Scale. BMC Geriatr. 2020;20:393. doi: 10.1186/s12877-020-01801-7
30. Rolfson DB, Majumdar SR, Tsuyuki RT, et al. Validity and reliability of the Edmonton Frail Scale. Age Ageing. 2006;35:526-529. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afl041
31. Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, et al. Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001;56:M146-M156. doi: 10.1093/gerona/56.3.m146
32. Dent E, Kowal P, Hoogendijk EO. Frailty measurement in research and clinical practice: a review. Euro J Intern Med. 2016;31:3-10. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2016.03.007
33. Perna S, Francis MD, Bologna C, et al. Performance of Edmonton Frail Scale on frailty assessment: its association with multi-dimensional geriatric conditions assessed with specific screening tools. BMC Geriatr. 2017;17:2. doi: 10.1186/s12877-016-0382-3
34. Chen CY, Gan P, How CH. Approach to frailty in the elderly in primary care and the community. Singapore Med J. 2018;59:338. doi: 10.11622/smedj.2018052
35. Lorenzo-López L, Maseda A, de Labra C, et al. Nutritional determinants of frailty in older adults: a systematic review. BMC Geriatr. 2017;17:108. doi: 10.1186/s12877-017-0496-2
36. Serra-Prat M, Sist X, Domenich R, et al. Effectiveness of an intervention to prevent frailty in pre-frail community-dwelling older people consulting in primary care: a randomised controlled trial. Age Ageing. 2017;46:401-407. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afw242
37. Travers J, Romero-Ortuno R, Bailey J, et al. Delaying and reversing frailty: a systematic review of primary care interventions. Br J Gen Pract. 2019;69:e61-e69. doi: 10.3399/bjgp18X700241
38. Macdonald SHF, Travers J, Shé ÉN, et al. Primary care interventions to address physical frailty among community-dwelling adults aged 60 years or older: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2020;15:e0228821. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228821
39. Burke SL, Cadet T, Alcide A, et al. Psychosocial risk factors and Alzheimer’s disease: the associative effect of depression, sleep disturbance, and anxiety. Aging Ment Health. 2018;22:1577-1584. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2017.1387760
40. Hwang PH, Longstreth WT Jr, Brenowitz WD, et al. Dual sensory impairment in older adults and risk of dementia from the GEM Study. Alzheimers Dement (Amst). 2020;12:e12054. doi: 10.1002/dad2.12054
41. Demnitz N, Esser P, Dawes H, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies examining the relationship between mobility and cognition in healthy older adults. Gait Posture. 2016;50:164‐174. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.08.028
42. Lehert P, Villaseca P, Hogervorst E, et al. Individually modifiable risk factors to ameliorate cognitive aging: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Climacteric. 2015;18:678-689. doi: 10.3109/13697137.2015.1078106
43. Turbert D. Eye exam and vision testing basics. American Academy of Ophthalmology Web site. January 14, 2021. Accessed March 5, 2021. www.aao.org/eye-health/tips-prevention/eye-exams-101
44. Northey JM, Cherbuin N, Pumpa KL, et al. Exercise interventions for cognitive function in adults older than 50: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2018;52:154-160. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2016-096587
45. CDC. Percent of U.S. adults 55 and over with chronic conditions. November 6, 2015. Accessed April 29, 2021. www.cdc.gov/nchs/health_policy/adult_chronic_conditions.htm
46. National Council on Aging. COVID-driven isolation can be dangerous for older adults. March 31, 2021. Accessed April 29, 2021. www.ncoa.org/article/covid-driven-isolation-can-be-dangerous-for-older-adults
47. Smith ML, Steinman LE, Casey EA. Combatting social isolation among older adults in a time of physical distancing: the COVID-19 social connectivity paradox. Front Public Health. 2020;8:403. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.00403
48. Steptoe A, Shankar A, Demakakos P, et al. Social isolation, loneliness, and all-cause mortality in older men and women. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110:5797-5801. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1219686110
49. Holt-Lunstad J, Smith TB, Baker M, et al. Loneliness and social isolation as risk factors for mortality: a meta-analytic review. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015;10:227-237. doi: 10.1177/1745691614568352
50. Hakulinen C, Pulkki-Råback L, Virtanen M, et al. Social isolation and loneliness as risk factors for myocardial infarction, stroke and mortality: UK Biobank cohort study of 479 054 men and women. Heart. 2018;104:1536-1542. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2017-312663
51. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Social Isolation and Loneliness in Older Adults: Opportunities for the Health Care System. The National Academies Press; 2020. doi: 10.17226/25663
52. Shaw JG, Farid M, Noel-Miller C, et al. Social isolation and Medicare spending: among older adults, objective isolation increases expenditures while loneliness does not. J Aging Health. 2017;29:1119-1143. doi: 10.1177/0898264317703559
53. Berkman LF, Syme SL. Social networks, host resistance, and mortality: a nine-year follow-up study of Alameda County residents. Am J Epidemiol. 1979;109:186-204. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a112674
54. Campaign to End Loneliness. Measuring your impact on loneliness in later life. Accessed April 29, 2021. www.campaigntoendloneliness.org/wp-content/uploads/Loneliness-Measurement-Guidance1-1.pdf
55. Cornwell EY, Waite LJ. Social disconnectedness, perceived isolation, and health among older adults. J Health Soc Behav. 2009;50:31-48. doi: 10.1177/002214650905000103
56. Gierveld JDJ, Van Tilburg T. A 6-item scale for overall, emotional, and social loneliness: confirmatory tests on survey data. Res Aging. 2006;28:582-598. doi: 10.1177/0164027506289723
57. Koenig HG, Westlund RE, George LK, et al. Abbreviating the Duke Social Support Index for use in chronically ill elderly individuals. Psychosomatics. 1993;34:61-69. doi: 10.1016/S0033-3182(93)71928-3
58. Lubben J, Blozik E, Gillmann G, et al. Performance of an abbreviated version of the Lubben Social Network Scale among three European community-dwelling older adult populations. Gerontologist. 2006;46:503-513. doi: 10.1093/geront/46.4.503
59. Russell DW. UCLA Loneliness Scale (version 3): reliability, validity, factor structure. J Pers Assess. 1996;66:20-40. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa6601_2
60. van Leeuwen KM, van Loon MS, van Nes FA, et al. What does quality of life mean to older adults? A thematic synthesis. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0213263. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213263
1. Friedman S, Mulhausen P, Cleveland M, et al. Healthy aging: American Geriatrics Society white paper executive summary. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018;67:17-20. doi: 10.1111/jgs.15644
2. World Health Organization. World report on ageing and health. 2015. Accessed June 29, 2020. https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/186463/9789240694811_eng.pdf?sequence=1
3. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. Healthy aging. Accessed June 29, 2020. www.hhs.gov/aging/healthy-aging
4. Kusumastuti S, Derks MGM, Tellier S, et al. Successful ageing: a study of the literature using citation network analysis. Maturitas. 2016;93:4-12. doi: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2016.04.010
5. Institute for Healthcare Improvement. Age-friendly health systems: guide to using the 4Ms in the care of older adults [white paper]. 2020. Accessed June 29, 2020. www.ihi.org/Engage/Initiatives/Age-Friendly-Health-systems/Documents/IHIAgeFriendlyHealthSystems_GuidetoUsing4MsCare.pdf
6. Lind KE, Hildreth KL, Perraillon MC. Persistent disparities in Medicare’s annual wellness visit utilization. Med Care. 2019;57:984-989. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001229
7. Lind KE, Hildreth K, Lindrooth R, et al. Ethnoracial disparities in Medicare annual wellness visit utilization: evidence from a nationally representative database. Med Care. 2018;56:761-766. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000962
8. Simpson VL, Kovich M. Outcomes of primary care-based Medicare annual wellness visits with older adults: a scoping review. Geriatr Nurs. 2019;40:590-596. doi: 10.1016/j.gerinurse.2019.06.001
9. Heron M. Deaths: leading causes for 2017. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2019;68:1-77.
10. Salzman B, Beldowski K, de la Paz A. Cancer screening in older patients. Am Fam Physician. 2016;93:659-667.
11. Kinsinger LS, Anderson C, Kim J, et al. Implementation of lung cancer screening in the Veterans Health Administration. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177:399-406. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.9022
12. Walter LC, Schonberg MA. Screening mammography in older women: a review. JAMA. 2014;311:1336-1347. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.2834
13. Schoenborn NL, Lee K, Pollack CE, et al. Older adults’ views and communication preferences about cancer screening cessation. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177:1121-1128. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.1778
14. Butterworth JE, Hays R, McDonagh ST, et al. Interventions for involving older patients with multi-morbidity in decision-making during primary care consultations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;10:CD013124. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013124.pub2
15. Bostock S, Steptoe A. Association between low functional health literacy and mortality in older adults: longitudinal cohort study. BMJ. 2012;344:e1602. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e1602
16. Fernandez DM, Larson JL, Zikmund-Fisher BJ. Associations between health literacy and preventive health behaviors among older adults: findings from the health and retirement study. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:596. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3267-7
17. Weekes CV. African Americans and health literacy: a systematic review. ABNF J. 2012;23:76-80.
18. Mantwill S, Monestel-Umaña S, Schulz PJ. The relationship between health literacy and health disparities: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0145455. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145455
19. Khan MM, Kobayashi K. Optimizing health promotion among ethnocultural minority older adults (EMOA). Int J Migration Health Soc Care. 2015;11:268-281. doi: 10.1108/IJMHSC-12-2014-0047
20. Kindratt TB, Dallo FJ, Allicock M, et al. The influence of patient-provider communication on cancer screenings differs among racial and ethnic groups. Prev Med Rep. 2020;18:101086. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2020.101086
21. Hong Y-R, Tauscher J, Cardel M. Distrust in health care and cultural factors are associated with uptake of colorectal cancer screening in Hispanic and Asian Americans. Cancer. 2018;124:335-345. doi: 10.1002/cncr.31052
22. Kutner M, Greenberg E, Jin Y, et al. Literacy in everyday life: results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy. NCES 2007-480. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. April 2007. Accessed August 27, 2021. http://nces.ed.gov/Pubs2007/2007480_1.pdf
23. Daskalopoulou C, Stubbs B, Kralj C, et al. Physical activity and healthy ageing: a systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal cohort studies. Ageing Res Rev. 2017;38:6-17. doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2017.06.003
24. Stenholm S, Koster A, Valkeinen H, et al. Association of physical activity history with physical function and mortality in old age. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2016;71:496-501. doi: 10.1093/gerona/glv111
25. Hortobágyi T, Lesinski M, Gäbler M, et al. Effects of three types of exercise interventions on healthy old adults’ gait speed: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2015;45:1627‐1643. Published correction appears in Sports Med. 2016;46:453. doi: 10.1007/s40279-015-0371-2
26. Wang DXM, Yao J, Zirek Y, et al. Muscle mass, strength, and physical performance predicting activities of daily living: a meta-analysis. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2020;11:3‐25. doi: 10.1002/jcsm.12502
27. Sternberg SA, Wershof Schwartz A, Karunananthan S, et al. The identification of frailty: a systematic literature review. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2011;59:2129-2138. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2011.03597.x
28. Rockwood K, Song X, MacKnight C, et al. A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people. CMAJ. 2005;173:489-495. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.050051
29. Church S, Rogers E, Rockwood K, et al. A scoping review of the Clinical Frailty Scale. BMC Geriatr. 2020;20:393. doi: 10.1186/s12877-020-01801-7
30. Rolfson DB, Majumdar SR, Tsuyuki RT, et al. Validity and reliability of the Edmonton Frail Scale. Age Ageing. 2006;35:526-529. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afl041
31. Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, et al. Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001;56:M146-M156. doi: 10.1093/gerona/56.3.m146
32. Dent E, Kowal P, Hoogendijk EO. Frailty measurement in research and clinical practice: a review. Euro J Intern Med. 2016;31:3-10. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2016.03.007
33. Perna S, Francis MD, Bologna C, et al. Performance of Edmonton Frail Scale on frailty assessment: its association with multi-dimensional geriatric conditions assessed with specific screening tools. BMC Geriatr. 2017;17:2. doi: 10.1186/s12877-016-0382-3
34. Chen CY, Gan P, How CH. Approach to frailty in the elderly in primary care and the community. Singapore Med J. 2018;59:338. doi: 10.11622/smedj.2018052
35. Lorenzo-López L, Maseda A, de Labra C, et al. Nutritional determinants of frailty in older adults: a systematic review. BMC Geriatr. 2017;17:108. doi: 10.1186/s12877-017-0496-2
36. Serra-Prat M, Sist X, Domenich R, et al. Effectiveness of an intervention to prevent frailty in pre-frail community-dwelling older people consulting in primary care: a randomised controlled trial. Age Ageing. 2017;46:401-407. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afw242
37. Travers J, Romero-Ortuno R, Bailey J, et al. Delaying and reversing frailty: a systematic review of primary care interventions. Br J Gen Pract. 2019;69:e61-e69. doi: 10.3399/bjgp18X700241
38. Macdonald SHF, Travers J, Shé ÉN, et al. Primary care interventions to address physical frailty among community-dwelling adults aged 60 years or older: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2020;15:e0228821. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228821
39. Burke SL, Cadet T, Alcide A, et al. Psychosocial risk factors and Alzheimer’s disease: the associative effect of depression, sleep disturbance, and anxiety. Aging Ment Health. 2018;22:1577-1584. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2017.1387760
40. Hwang PH, Longstreth WT Jr, Brenowitz WD, et al. Dual sensory impairment in older adults and risk of dementia from the GEM Study. Alzheimers Dement (Amst). 2020;12:e12054. doi: 10.1002/dad2.12054
41. Demnitz N, Esser P, Dawes H, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies examining the relationship between mobility and cognition in healthy older adults. Gait Posture. 2016;50:164‐174. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.08.028
42. Lehert P, Villaseca P, Hogervorst E, et al. Individually modifiable risk factors to ameliorate cognitive aging: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Climacteric. 2015;18:678-689. doi: 10.3109/13697137.2015.1078106
43. Turbert D. Eye exam and vision testing basics. American Academy of Ophthalmology Web site. January 14, 2021. Accessed March 5, 2021. www.aao.org/eye-health/tips-prevention/eye-exams-101
44. Northey JM, Cherbuin N, Pumpa KL, et al. Exercise interventions for cognitive function in adults older than 50: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2018;52:154-160. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2016-096587
45. CDC. Percent of U.S. adults 55 and over with chronic conditions. November 6, 2015. Accessed April 29, 2021. www.cdc.gov/nchs/health_policy/adult_chronic_conditions.htm
46. National Council on Aging. COVID-driven isolation can be dangerous for older adults. March 31, 2021. Accessed April 29, 2021. www.ncoa.org/article/covid-driven-isolation-can-be-dangerous-for-older-adults
47. Smith ML, Steinman LE, Casey EA. Combatting social isolation among older adults in a time of physical distancing: the COVID-19 social connectivity paradox. Front Public Health. 2020;8:403. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.00403
48. Steptoe A, Shankar A, Demakakos P, et al. Social isolation, loneliness, and all-cause mortality in older men and women. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110:5797-5801. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1219686110
49. Holt-Lunstad J, Smith TB, Baker M, et al. Loneliness and social isolation as risk factors for mortality: a meta-analytic review. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015;10:227-237. doi: 10.1177/1745691614568352
50. Hakulinen C, Pulkki-Råback L, Virtanen M, et al. Social isolation and loneliness as risk factors for myocardial infarction, stroke and mortality: UK Biobank cohort study of 479 054 men and women. Heart. 2018;104:1536-1542. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2017-312663
51. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Social Isolation and Loneliness in Older Adults: Opportunities for the Health Care System. The National Academies Press; 2020. doi: 10.17226/25663
52. Shaw JG, Farid M, Noel-Miller C, et al. Social isolation and Medicare spending: among older adults, objective isolation increases expenditures while loneliness does not. J Aging Health. 2017;29:1119-1143. doi: 10.1177/0898264317703559
53. Berkman LF, Syme SL. Social networks, host resistance, and mortality: a nine-year follow-up study of Alameda County residents. Am J Epidemiol. 1979;109:186-204. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a112674
54. Campaign to End Loneliness. Measuring your impact on loneliness in later life. Accessed April 29, 2021. www.campaigntoendloneliness.org/wp-content/uploads/Loneliness-Measurement-Guidance1-1.pdf
55. Cornwell EY, Waite LJ. Social disconnectedness, perceived isolation, and health among older adults. J Health Soc Behav. 2009;50:31-48. doi: 10.1177/002214650905000103
56. Gierveld JDJ, Van Tilburg T. A 6-item scale for overall, emotional, and social loneliness: confirmatory tests on survey data. Res Aging. 2006;28:582-598. doi: 10.1177/0164027506289723
57. Koenig HG, Westlund RE, George LK, et al. Abbreviating the Duke Social Support Index for use in chronically ill elderly individuals. Psychosomatics. 1993;34:61-69. doi: 10.1016/S0033-3182(93)71928-3
58. Lubben J, Blozik E, Gillmann G, et al. Performance of an abbreviated version of the Lubben Social Network Scale among three European community-dwelling older adult populations. Gerontologist. 2006;46:503-513. doi: 10.1093/geront/46.4.503
59. Russell DW. UCLA Loneliness Scale (version 3): reliability, validity, factor structure. J Pers Assess. 1996;66:20-40. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa6601_2
60. van Leeuwen KM, van Loon MS, van Nes FA, et al. What does quality of life mean to older adults? A thematic synthesis. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0213263. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213263
PRACTICE RECOMMENDATIONS
› Prioritize annual wellness visits to improve patient follow-through on recommended services. B
› Encourage physical activity, especially musclestrengthening exercises, to prevent frailty and to mediate decline in the ability to perform activities of daily living. A
› Assess and treat older adults for visual and hearing impairments A , as well as anxiety, depression, and mobility impairments. C They are all associated with cognitive function.
› Ask patients about the frequency of their social interactions A and quality of their relationships B to determine their access to resources, such as food and transportation, as well as their perceptions about their quality of life.
Strength of recommendation (SOR)
A Good-quality patient-oriented evidence
B Inconsistent or limited-quality patient-oriented evidence
C Consensus, usual practice, opinion, disease-oriented evidence, case series
Sleep apnea has many faces
Fortunately her problem stemmed from sleep apnea, and resolved with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy.
Wallace and Bucks performed a meta analysis of 42 studies of memory in patients with sleep apnea and found sleep apnea patients were impaired when compared to healthy controls on verbal episodic memory (immediate recall, delayed recall, learning, and recognition) and visuospatial episodic memory (immediate and delayed recall).1 A meta-analysis by Olaithe and associates found an improvement in executive function in patients with sleep apnea who were treated with CPAP.2 I think this is worth considering especially in your patients who have subjective memory disturbances and do not appear to have a mild cognitive impairment or dementia.
About 15 years ago I saw a 74-year-old man for nocturia. He had seen two urologists and had a transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) without any real change in his nocturia. I trialed him on all sorts of medications, and he seemed to improve temporarily a little on trazodone (went from seven episodes a night to four).
Eventually, after several years, I sent him for a sleep study. He had severe sleep apnea (Apnea Hypopnea Index, 65; O2 saturations as low as 60%). With treatment, his nocturia resolved. He went from seven episodes to two each night.
Zhou and colleagues performed a meta-analysis of 13 studies looking at the association of sleep apnea with nocturia.3 They found that men with sleep apnea have a high incidence of nocturia.
Miyazato and colleagues looked at the effect of CPAP treatment on nighttime urine production in patients with obstructive sleep apnea.4 In this small study of 40 patients, mean nighttime voiding episodes decreased from 2.1 to 1.2 (P < .01).
I have seen several patients with night sweats who ended up having sleep apnea. These patients have had a resolution of their night sweats with sleep apnea treatment.
Arnardottir and colleagues found that obstructive sleep apnea was associated with frequent nocturnal sweating.5 They found that 31% of men and 33% of women with OSA had nocturnal sweating, compared with about 10% of the general population.
When the OSA patients were treated with positive airway pressure, the prevalence of nocturnal sweating decreased to 11.5%, which is similar to general population numbers. Given how common both sleep apnea and night sweats are, this is an important consideration as you evaluate night sweats.
I have seen many patients who have had atrial fibrillation and sleep apnea. Shapira-Daniels and colleagues did a prospective study of 188 patients with atrial fibrillation without a history of sleep apnea who were referred for ablation.6 All patients had home sleep studies, and testing was consistent with sleep apnea in 82% of patients.
Kanagala and associates found that patients with untreated sleep apnea had a greater chance of recurrent atrial fibrillation after cardioversion.7 Recurrence of atrial fibrillation at 12 months was 82% in untreated OSA patients, higher than the 42% recurrence in the treated OSA group (P = .013) and the 53% recurrence in control patients.
I think sleep apnea evaluation should be strongly considered in patients with atrial fibrillation and should be done before referral for ablations.
Pearl: Consider sleep apnea as a possible cause of or contributing factor to the common primary care problems of cognitive concerns, nocturia, night sweats, and atrial fibrillation.
Dr. Paauw is professor of medicine in the division of general internal medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, and serves as 3rd-year medical student clerkship director at the University of Washington. He is a member of the editorial advisory board of Internal Medicine News. Dr. Paauw has no conflicts to disclose. Contact him at [email protected].
References
1. Wallace A and Bucks RS. Memory and obstructive sleep apnea: a meta-analysis. Sleep. 2013;36(2):203. Epub 2013 Feb 1.
2. Olaithe M and Bucks RS. Executive dysfunction in OSA before and after treatment: a meta-analysis. Sleep. 2013;36(9):1297. Epub 2013 Sep 1.
3. Zhou J et al. Association between obstructive sleep apnea syndrome and nocturia: a meta-analysis. Sleep Breath. 2020 Dec;24(4):1293-8.
4. Miyauchi Y et al. Effect of the continuous positive airway pressure on the nocturnal urine volume or night-time frequency in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Urology 2015;85:333.
5. Arnardottir ES et al. Nocturnal sweating–a common symptom of obstructive sleep apnoea: the Icelandic sleep apnoea cohort. BMJ Open. 2013 May 14;3(5):e002795. BMJ Open 2013;3:e002795
6. Shapira-Daniels A et al. Prevalence of undiagnosed sleep apnea in patients with atrial fibrillation and its impact on therapy. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2020;6(12):1499. Epub 2020 Aug 12.
7. Kanagala R et al. Obstructive sleep apnea and the recurrence of atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2003;107(20):2589. Epub 2003 May 12.
Fortunately her problem stemmed from sleep apnea, and resolved with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy.
Wallace and Bucks performed a meta analysis of 42 studies of memory in patients with sleep apnea and found sleep apnea patients were impaired when compared to healthy controls on verbal episodic memory (immediate recall, delayed recall, learning, and recognition) and visuospatial episodic memory (immediate and delayed recall).1 A meta-analysis by Olaithe and associates found an improvement in executive function in patients with sleep apnea who were treated with CPAP.2 I think this is worth considering especially in your patients who have subjective memory disturbances and do not appear to have a mild cognitive impairment or dementia.
About 15 years ago I saw a 74-year-old man for nocturia. He had seen two urologists and had a transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) without any real change in his nocturia. I trialed him on all sorts of medications, and he seemed to improve temporarily a little on trazodone (went from seven episodes a night to four).
Eventually, after several years, I sent him for a sleep study. He had severe sleep apnea (Apnea Hypopnea Index, 65; O2 saturations as low as 60%). With treatment, his nocturia resolved. He went from seven episodes to two each night.
Zhou and colleagues performed a meta-analysis of 13 studies looking at the association of sleep apnea with nocturia.3 They found that men with sleep apnea have a high incidence of nocturia.
Miyazato and colleagues looked at the effect of CPAP treatment on nighttime urine production in patients with obstructive sleep apnea.4 In this small study of 40 patients, mean nighttime voiding episodes decreased from 2.1 to 1.2 (P < .01).
I have seen several patients with night sweats who ended up having sleep apnea. These patients have had a resolution of their night sweats with sleep apnea treatment.
Arnardottir and colleagues found that obstructive sleep apnea was associated with frequent nocturnal sweating.5 They found that 31% of men and 33% of women with OSA had nocturnal sweating, compared with about 10% of the general population.
When the OSA patients were treated with positive airway pressure, the prevalence of nocturnal sweating decreased to 11.5%, which is similar to general population numbers. Given how common both sleep apnea and night sweats are, this is an important consideration as you evaluate night sweats.
I have seen many patients who have had atrial fibrillation and sleep apnea. Shapira-Daniels and colleagues did a prospective study of 188 patients with atrial fibrillation without a history of sleep apnea who were referred for ablation.6 All patients had home sleep studies, and testing was consistent with sleep apnea in 82% of patients.
Kanagala and associates found that patients with untreated sleep apnea had a greater chance of recurrent atrial fibrillation after cardioversion.7 Recurrence of atrial fibrillation at 12 months was 82% in untreated OSA patients, higher than the 42% recurrence in the treated OSA group (P = .013) and the 53% recurrence in control patients.
I think sleep apnea evaluation should be strongly considered in patients with atrial fibrillation and should be done before referral for ablations.
Pearl: Consider sleep apnea as a possible cause of or contributing factor to the common primary care problems of cognitive concerns, nocturia, night sweats, and atrial fibrillation.
Dr. Paauw is professor of medicine in the division of general internal medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, and serves as 3rd-year medical student clerkship director at the University of Washington. He is a member of the editorial advisory board of Internal Medicine News. Dr. Paauw has no conflicts to disclose. Contact him at [email protected].
References
1. Wallace A and Bucks RS. Memory and obstructive sleep apnea: a meta-analysis. Sleep. 2013;36(2):203. Epub 2013 Feb 1.
2. Olaithe M and Bucks RS. Executive dysfunction in OSA before and after treatment: a meta-analysis. Sleep. 2013;36(9):1297. Epub 2013 Sep 1.
3. Zhou J et al. Association between obstructive sleep apnea syndrome and nocturia: a meta-analysis. Sleep Breath. 2020 Dec;24(4):1293-8.
4. Miyauchi Y et al. Effect of the continuous positive airway pressure on the nocturnal urine volume or night-time frequency in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Urology 2015;85:333.
5. Arnardottir ES et al. Nocturnal sweating–a common symptom of obstructive sleep apnoea: the Icelandic sleep apnoea cohort. BMJ Open. 2013 May 14;3(5):e002795. BMJ Open 2013;3:e002795
6. Shapira-Daniels A et al. Prevalence of undiagnosed sleep apnea in patients with atrial fibrillation and its impact on therapy. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2020;6(12):1499. Epub 2020 Aug 12.
7. Kanagala R et al. Obstructive sleep apnea and the recurrence of atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2003;107(20):2589. Epub 2003 May 12.
Fortunately her problem stemmed from sleep apnea, and resolved with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy.
Wallace and Bucks performed a meta analysis of 42 studies of memory in patients with sleep apnea and found sleep apnea patients were impaired when compared to healthy controls on verbal episodic memory (immediate recall, delayed recall, learning, and recognition) and visuospatial episodic memory (immediate and delayed recall).1 A meta-analysis by Olaithe and associates found an improvement in executive function in patients with sleep apnea who were treated with CPAP.2 I think this is worth considering especially in your patients who have subjective memory disturbances and do not appear to have a mild cognitive impairment or dementia.
About 15 years ago I saw a 74-year-old man for nocturia. He had seen two urologists and had a transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) without any real change in his nocturia. I trialed him on all sorts of medications, and he seemed to improve temporarily a little on trazodone (went from seven episodes a night to four).
Eventually, after several years, I sent him for a sleep study. He had severe sleep apnea (Apnea Hypopnea Index, 65; O2 saturations as low as 60%). With treatment, his nocturia resolved. He went from seven episodes to two each night.
Zhou and colleagues performed a meta-analysis of 13 studies looking at the association of sleep apnea with nocturia.3 They found that men with sleep apnea have a high incidence of nocturia.
Miyazato and colleagues looked at the effect of CPAP treatment on nighttime urine production in patients with obstructive sleep apnea.4 In this small study of 40 patients, mean nighttime voiding episodes decreased from 2.1 to 1.2 (P < .01).
I have seen several patients with night sweats who ended up having sleep apnea. These patients have had a resolution of their night sweats with sleep apnea treatment.
Arnardottir and colleagues found that obstructive sleep apnea was associated with frequent nocturnal sweating.5 They found that 31% of men and 33% of women with OSA had nocturnal sweating, compared with about 10% of the general population.
When the OSA patients were treated with positive airway pressure, the prevalence of nocturnal sweating decreased to 11.5%, which is similar to general population numbers. Given how common both sleep apnea and night sweats are, this is an important consideration as you evaluate night sweats.
I have seen many patients who have had atrial fibrillation and sleep apnea. Shapira-Daniels and colleagues did a prospective study of 188 patients with atrial fibrillation without a history of sleep apnea who were referred for ablation.6 All patients had home sleep studies, and testing was consistent with sleep apnea in 82% of patients.
Kanagala and associates found that patients with untreated sleep apnea had a greater chance of recurrent atrial fibrillation after cardioversion.7 Recurrence of atrial fibrillation at 12 months was 82% in untreated OSA patients, higher than the 42% recurrence in the treated OSA group (P = .013) and the 53% recurrence in control patients.
I think sleep apnea evaluation should be strongly considered in patients with atrial fibrillation and should be done before referral for ablations.
Pearl: Consider sleep apnea as a possible cause of or contributing factor to the common primary care problems of cognitive concerns, nocturia, night sweats, and atrial fibrillation.
Dr. Paauw is professor of medicine in the division of general internal medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, and serves as 3rd-year medical student clerkship director at the University of Washington. He is a member of the editorial advisory board of Internal Medicine News. Dr. Paauw has no conflicts to disclose. Contact him at [email protected].
References
1. Wallace A and Bucks RS. Memory and obstructive sleep apnea: a meta-analysis. Sleep. 2013;36(2):203. Epub 2013 Feb 1.
2. Olaithe M and Bucks RS. Executive dysfunction in OSA before and after treatment: a meta-analysis. Sleep. 2013;36(9):1297. Epub 2013 Sep 1.
3. Zhou J et al. Association between obstructive sleep apnea syndrome and nocturia: a meta-analysis. Sleep Breath. 2020 Dec;24(4):1293-8.
4. Miyauchi Y et al. Effect of the continuous positive airway pressure on the nocturnal urine volume or night-time frequency in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Urology 2015;85:333.
5. Arnardottir ES et al. Nocturnal sweating–a common symptom of obstructive sleep apnoea: the Icelandic sleep apnoea cohort. BMJ Open. 2013 May 14;3(5):e002795. BMJ Open 2013;3:e002795
6. Shapira-Daniels A et al. Prevalence of undiagnosed sleep apnea in patients with atrial fibrillation and its impact on therapy. JACC Clin Electrophysiol. 2020;6(12):1499. Epub 2020 Aug 12.
7. Kanagala R et al. Obstructive sleep apnea and the recurrence of atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2003;107(20):2589. Epub 2003 May 12.
‘Fascinating’ link between Alzheimer’s and COVID-19
The findings could lead to new treatment targets to slow progression and severity of both diseases.
Investigators found that a single genetic variant in the oligoadenylate synthetase 1 (OAS1) gene increases the risk for AD and that related variants in the same gene increase the likelihood of severe COVID-19 outcomes.
“These findings may allow us to identify new drug targets to slow progression of both diseases and reduce their severity,” Dervis Salih, PhD, senior research associate, UK Dementia Research Institute, University College London, said in an interview.
“Our work also suggests new approaches to treat both diseases with the same drugs,” Dr. Salih added.
The study was published online Oct. 7 in Brain.
Shared genetic network
The OAS1 gene is expressed in microglia, a type of immune cell that makes up around 10% of all cells in the brain.
In earlier work, investigators found evidence suggesting a link between the OAS1 gene and AD, but the function of the gene in microglia was unknown.
To further investigate the gene’s link to AD, they sequenced genetic data from 2,547 people – half with AD, and half without.
The genotyping analysis confirmed that the single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs1131454 within OAS1 is significantly associated with AD.
Given that the same OAS1 locus has recently been linked with severe COVID-19 outcomes, the researchers investigated four variants on the OAS1 gene.
Results indicate that SNPs within OAS1 associated with AD also show linkage to SNP variants associated with critical illness in COVID-19.
The rs1131454 (risk allele A) and rs4766676 (risk allele T) are associated with AD, and rs10735079 (risk allele A) and rs6489867 (risk allele T) are associated with critical illness with COVID-19, the investigators reported. All of these risk alleles dampen expression of OAS1.
“This study also provides strong new evidence that interferon signaling by the innate immune system plays a substantial role in the progression of Alzheimer’s,” said Dr. Salih.
“Identifying this shared genetic network in innate immune cells will allow us with future work to identify new biomarkers to track disease progression and also predict disease risk better for both disorders,” he added.
‘Fascinating’ link
In a statement from the UK nonprofit organization, Science Media Center, Kenneth Baillie, MBChB, with the University of Edinburgh, said this study builds on a discovery he and his colleagues made last year that OAS1 variants are associated with severe COVID-19.
“In the ISARIC4C study, we recently found that this is probably due to a change in the way cell membranes detect viruses, but this mechanism doesn’t explain the fascinating association with Alzheimer’s disease reported in this new work,” Dr. Baillie said.
“It is often the case that the same gene can have different roles in different parts of the body. Importantly, it doesn’t mean that having COVID-19 has any effect on your risk of Alzheimer’s,” he added.
Also weighing in on the new study, Jonathan Schott, MD, professor of neurology, University College London, noted that dementia is the “main preexisting health condition associated with COVID-19 mortality, accounting for about one in four deaths from COVID-19 between March and June 2020.
“While some of this excessive mortality may relate to people with dementia being overrepresented in care homes, which were particularly hard hit by the pandemic, or due to general increased vulnerability to infections, there have been questions as to whether there are common factors that might increase susceptibility both to developing dementia and to dying from COVID-19,” Dr. Schott explained.
This “elegant paper” provides evidence for the latter, “suggesting a common genetic mechanism both for Alzheimer’s disease and for severe COVID-19 infection,” Dr. Schott said.
“The identification of a genetic risk factor and elucidation of inflammatory pathways through which it may increase risk has important implications for our understanding of both diseases, with potential implications for novel treatments,” he added.
The study was funded by the UK Dementia Research Institute. The authors have disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Schott serves as chief medical officer for Alzheimer’s Research UK and is clinical adviser to the UK Dementia Research Institute. Dr. Baillie has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The findings could lead to new treatment targets to slow progression and severity of both diseases.
Investigators found that a single genetic variant in the oligoadenylate synthetase 1 (OAS1) gene increases the risk for AD and that related variants in the same gene increase the likelihood of severe COVID-19 outcomes.
“These findings may allow us to identify new drug targets to slow progression of both diseases and reduce their severity,” Dervis Salih, PhD, senior research associate, UK Dementia Research Institute, University College London, said in an interview.
“Our work also suggests new approaches to treat both diseases with the same drugs,” Dr. Salih added.
The study was published online Oct. 7 in Brain.
Shared genetic network
The OAS1 gene is expressed in microglia, a type of immune cell that makes up around 10% of all cells in the brain.
In earlier work, investigators found evidence suggesting a link between the OAS1 gene and AD, but the function of the gene in microglia was unknown.
To further investigate the gene’s link to AD, they sequenced genetic data from 2,547 people – half with AD, and half without.
The genotyping analysis confirmed that the single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs1131454 within OAS1 is significantly associated with AD.
Given that the same OAS1 locus has recently been linked with severe COVID-19 outcomes, the researchers investigated four variants on the OAS1 gene.
Results indicate that SNPs within OAS1 associated with AD also show linkage to SNP variants associated with critical illness in COVID-19.
The rs1131454 (risk allele A) and rs4766676 (risk allele T) are associated with AD, and rs10735079 (risk allele A) and rs6489867 (risk allele T) are associated with critical illness with COVID-19, the investigators reported. All of these risk alleles dampen expression of OAS1.
“This study also provides strong new evidence that interferon signaling by the innate immune system plays a substantial role in the progression of Alzheimer’s,” said Dr. Salih.
“Identifying this shared genetic network in innate immune cells will allow us with future work to identify new biomarkers to track disease progression and also predict disease risk better for both disorders,” he added.
‘Fascinating’ link
In a statement from the UK nonprofit organization, Science Media Center, Kenneth Baillie, MBChB, with the University of Edinburgh, said this study builds on a discovery he and his colleagues made last year that OAS1 variants are associated with severe COVID-19.
“In the ISARIC4C study, we recently found that this is probably due to a change in the way cell membranes detect viruses, but this mechanism doesn’t explain the fascinating association with Alzheimer’s disease reported in this new work,” Dr. Baillie said.
“It is often the case that the same gene can have different roles in different parts of the body. Importantly, it doesn’t mean that having COVID-19 has any effect on your risk of Alzheimer’s,” he added.
Also weighing in on the new study, Jonathan Schott, MD, professor of neurology, University College London, noted that dementia is the “main preexisting health condition associated with COVID-19 mortality, accounting for about one in four deaths from COVID-19 between March and June 2020.
“While some of this excessive mortality may relate to people with dementia being overrepresented in care homes, which were particularly hard hit by the pandemic, or due to general increased vulnerability to infections, there have been questions as to whether there are common factors that might increase susceptibility both to developing dementia and to dying from COVID-19,” Dr. Schott explained.
This “elegant paper” provides evidence for the latter, “suggesting a common genetic mechanism both for Alzheimer’s disease and for severe COVID-19 infection,” Dr. Schott said.
“The identification of a genetic risk factor and elucidation of inflammatory pathways through which it may increase risk has important implications for our understanding of both diseases, with potential implications for novel treatments,” he added.
The study was funded by the UK Dementia Research Institute. The authors have disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Schott serves as chief medical officer for Alzheimer’s Research UK and is clinical adviser to the UK Dementia Research Institute. Dr. Baillie has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The findings could lead to new treatment targets to slow progression and severity of both diseases.
Investigators found that a single genetic variant in the oligoadenylate synthetase 1 (OAS1) gene increases the risk for AD and that related variants in the same gene increase the likelihood of severe COVID-19 outcomes.
“These findings may allow us to identify new drug targets to slow progression of both diseases and reduce their severity,” Dervis Salih, PhD, senior research associate, UK Dementia Research Institute, University College London, said in an interview.
“Our work also suggests new approaches to treat both diseases with the same drugs,” Dr. Salih added.
The study was published online Oct. 7 in Brain.
Shared genetic network
The OAS1 gene is expressed in microglia, a type of immune cell that makes up around 10% of all cells in the brain.
In earlier work, investigators found evidence suggesting a link between the OAS1 gene and AD, but the function of the gene in microglia was unknown.
To further investigate the gene’s link to AD, they sequenced genetic data from 2,547 people – half with AD, and half without.
The genotyping analysis confirmed that the single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs1131454 within OAS1 is significantly associated with AD.
Given that the same OAS1 locus has recently been linked with severe COVID-19 outcomes, the researchers investigated four variants on the OAS1 gene.
Results indicate that SNPs within OAS1 associated with AD also show linkage to SNP variants associated with critical illness in COVID-19.
The rs1131454 (risk allele A) and rs4766676 (risk allele T) are associated with AD, and rs10735079 (risk allele A) and rs6489867 (risk allele T) are associated with critical illness with COVID-19, the investigators reported. All of these risk alleles dampen expression of OAS1.
“This study also provides strong new evidence that interferon signaling by the innate immune system plays a substantial role in the progression of Alzheimer’s,” said Dr. Salih.
“Identifying this shared genetic network in innate immune cells will allow us with future work to identify new biomarkers to track disease progression and also predict disease risk better for both disorders,” he added.
‘Fascinating’ link
In a statement from the UK nonprofit organization, Science Media Center, Kenneth Baillie, MBChB, with the University of Edinburgh, said this study builds on a discovery he and his colleagues made last year that OAS1 variants are associated with severe COVID-19.
“In the ISARIC4C study, we recently found that this is probably due to a change in the way cell membranes detect viruses, but this mechanism doesn’t explain the fascinating association with Alzheimer’s disease reported in this new work,” Dr. Baillie said.
“It is often the case that the same gene can have different roles in different parts of the body. Importantly, it doesn’t mean that having COVID-19 has any effect on your risk of Alzheimer’s,” he added.
Also weighing in on the new study, Jonathan Schott, MD, professor of neurology, University College London, noted that dementia is the “main preexisting health condition associated with COVID-19 mortality, accounting for about one in four deaths from COVID-19 between March and June 2020.
“While some of this excessive mortality may relate to people with dementia being overrepresented in care homes, which were particularly hard hit by the pandemic, or due to general increased vulnerability to infections, there have been questions as to whether there are common factors that might increase susceptibility both to developing dementia and to dying from COVID-19,” Dr. Schott explained.
This “elegant paper” provides evidence for the latter, “suggesting a common genetic mechanism both for Alzheimer’s disease and for severe COVID-19 infection,” Dr. Schott said.
“The identification of a genetic risk factor and elucidation of inflammatory pathways through which it may increase risk has important implications for our understanding of both diseases, with potential implications for novel treatments,” he added.
The study was funded by the UK Dementia Research Institute. The authors have disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Schott serves as chief medical officer for Alzheimer’s Research UK and is clinical adviser to the UK Dementia Research Institute. Dr. Baillie has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
No short-term death risk in elderly after COVID-19 vaccines
and launched an investigation into the safety of the BNT162b2 vaccine (Comirnaty; Pfizer-BioNTech).
Now, the results of that investigation and of a subsequent larger study of nursing home residents in Norway have shown no increased risk for short-term mortality following COVID-19 vaccination in the overall population of elderly patients. The new research also showed clear evidence of a survival benefit compared with the unvaccinated population, Anette Hylen Ranhoff, MD, PhD, said at the annual meeting of the European Geriatric Medicine Society, held in a hybrid format in Athens, Greece, and online.
“We found no evidence of increased short-term mortality among vaccinated older individuals, and particularly not among the nursing home patients,” said Dr. Ranhoff, a senior researcher at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health and professor at University of Bergen, Norway. “But we think that this [lower] mortality risk was most likely a sort of ‘healthy-vaccinee’ effect, which means that people who were a bit more healthy were vaccinated, and not those who were the very, very most frail.”
“We have more or less the same data in France about events, with very high rates of vaccination,” said session moderator Athanase Benetos MD, PhD, professor and chairman of geriatric medicine at the University Hospital of Nancy in France, who was not involved in the study.
“In my department, a month after the end of the vaccination and at the same time while the pandemic in the city was going up, we had a 90% decrease in mortality from COVID in the nursing homes,” he told Dr. Ranhoff.
Potential risks
Frail elderly patients were not included in clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccines, and although previous studies have shown a low incidence of local or systemic reactions to vaccination among older people, “we think that quite mild adverse events following vaccination could trigger and destabilize a frail person,” Dr. Ranhoff said.
As reported Jan. 15, 2021, in BMJ, investigation by the Norwegian Medicines Agency (NOMA) into 13 of the 23 reported cases concluded that common adverse reactions associated with mRNA vaccines could have contributed to the deaths of some of the frail elderly patients
Steinar Madsen, MD, NOMA medical director, told BMJ “we are not alarmed or worried about this, because these are very rare occurrences and they occurred in very frail patients with very serious disease.”
Health authorities investigate
In response to the report and at the request of the Norwegian Public Health Institute and NOMA, Dr. Ranhoff and colleagues investigated the first 100 deaths among nursing-home residents who received the vaccine. The team consisted of three geriatricians and an infectious disease specialist who sees patients in nursing homes.
They looked at each patient’s clinical course before and after vaccination, their health trajectory and life expectancy at the time of vaccination, new symptoms following vaccination, and the time from vaccination to new symptoms and to death.
In addition, the investigators evaluated Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) scores for each patient. CFS scores range from 1 (very fit) to 9 (terminally ill, with a life expectancy of less than 6 months who are otherwise evidently frail).
The initial investigation found that among 95 evaluable patients, the association between vaccination and death was “probable” in 10, “possible” in 26, and “unlikely” in 59.
The mean time from vaccination to symptoms was 1.4 days in the probable cases, 2.5 days in the possible cases, and 4.7 days in the unlikely cases.
The mean time from vaccination to death was 3.1, 8.3, and 8.2 days, respectively.
In all three categories, the patients had mean CFS scores ranging from 7.6 to 7.9, putting them in the “severely frail” category, defined as people who are completely dependent for personal care but seem stable and not at high risk for dying.
“We have quite many nursing home residents in Norway, 35,000; more than 80% have dementia, and the mean age is 85 years. We know that approximately 45 people die every day in these nursing homes, and their mean age of death is 87.5 years,” Dr. Ranhoff said.
Population-wide study
Dr. Ranhoff and colleagues also looked more broadly into the question of potential vaccine-related mortality in the total population of older people in Norway from the day of vaccination to follow-up at 3 weeks.
They conducted a matched cohort study to investigate the relationship between the mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and overall death among persons aged 65 and older in the general population, and across four groups: patients receiving home-based care, long-term nursing home patients, short-term nursing home patients, and those not receiving health services.
The researchers identified a total of 967,786 residents of Norway aged 65 and over at the start of the country’s vaccination campaign at the end of December, 2020, and they matched vaccinated individuals with unvaccinated persons based on demographic, geographic, and clinical risk group factors.
Dr. Ranhoff showed Kaplan-Meier survival curves for the total population and for each of the health-service states. In all cases there was a clear survival benefit for vaccinated vs. unvaccinated patients. She did not, however, provide specific numbers or hazard ratios for the differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in each of the comparisons.
The study was supported by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health. Dr. Ranhoff and Dr. Benetos reported no conflicts of interest.
and launched an investigation into the safety of the BNT162b2 vaccine (Comirnaty; Pfizer-BioNTech).
Now, the results of that investigation and of a subsequent larger study of nursing home residents in Norway have shown no increased risk for short-term mortality following COVID-19 vaccination in the overall population of elderly patients. The new research also showed clear evidence of a survival benefit compared with the unvaccinated population, Anette Hylen Ranhoff, MD, PhD, said at the annual meeting of the European Geriatric Medicine Society, held in a hybrid format in Athens, Greece, and online.
“We found no evidence of increased short-term mortality among vaccinated older individuals, and particularly not among the nursing home patients,” said Dr. Ranhoff, a senior researcher at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health and professor at University of Bergen, Norway. “But we think that this [lower] mortality risk was most likely a sort of ‘healthy-vaccinee’ effect, which means that people who were a bit more healthy were vaccinated, and not those who were the very, very most frail.”
“We have more or less the same data in France about events, with very high rates of vaccination,” said session moderator Athanase Benetos MD, PhD, professor and chairman of geriatric medicine at the University Hospital of Nancy in France, who was not involved in the study.
“In my department, a month after the end of the vaccination and at the same time while the pandemic in the city was going up, we had a 90% decrease in mortality from COVID in the nursing homes,” he told Dr. Ranhoff.
Potential risks
Frail elderly patients were not included in clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccines, and although previous studies have shown a low incidence of local or systemic reactions to vaccination among older people, “we think that quite mild adverse events following vaccination could trigger and destabilize a frail person,” Dr. Ranhoff said.
As reported Jan. 15, 2021, in BMJ, investigation by the Norwegian Medicines Agency (NOMA) into 13 of the 23 reported cases concluded that common adverse reactions associated with mRNA vaccines could have contributed to the deaths of some of the frail elderly patients
Steinar Madsen, MD, NOMA medical director, told BMJ “we are not alarmed or worried about this, because these are very rare occurrences and they occurred in very frail patients with very serious disease.”
Health authorities investigate
In response to the report and at the request of the Norwegian Public Health Institute and NOMA, Dr. Ranhoff and colleagues investigated the first 100 deaths among nursing-home residents who received the vaccine. The team consisted of three geriatricians and an infectious disease specialist who sees patients in nursing homes.
They looked at each patient’s clinical course before and after vaccination, their health trajectory and life expectancy at the time of vaccination, new symptoms following vaccination, and the time from vaccination to new symptoms and to death.
In addition, the investigators evaluated Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) scores for each patient. CFS scores range from 1 (very fit) to 9 (terminally ill, with a life expectancy of less than 6 months who are otherwise evidently frail).
The initial investigation found that among 95 evaluable patients, the association between vaccination and death was “probable” in 10, “possible” in 26, and “unlikely” in 59.
The mean time from vaccination to symptoms was 1.4 days in the probable cases, 2.5 days in the possible cases, and 4.7 days in the unlikely cases.
The mean time from vaccination to death was 3.1, 8.3, and 8.2 days, respectively.
In all three categories, the patients had mean CFS scores ranging from 7.6 to 7.9, putting them in the “severely frail” category, defined as people who are completely dependent for personal care but seem stable and not at high risk for dying.
“We have quite many nursing home residents in Norway, 35,000; more than 80% have dementia, and the mean age is 85 years. We know that approximately 45 people die every day in these nursing homes, and their mean age of death is 87.5 years,” Dr. Ranhoff said.
Population-wide study
Dr. Ranhoff and colleagues also looked more broadly into the question of potential vaccine-related mortality in the total population of older people in Norway from the day of vaccination to follow-up at 3 weeks.
They conducted a matched cohort study to investigate the relationship between the mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and overall death among persons aged 65 and older in the general population, and across four groups: patients receiving home-based care, long-term nursing home patients, short-term nursing home patients, and those not receiving health services.
The researchers identified a total of 967,786 residents of Norway aged 65 and over at the start of the country’s vaccination campaign at the end of December, 2020, and they matched vaccinated individuals with unvaccinated persons based on demographic, geographic, and clinical risk group factors.
Dr. Ranhoff showed Kaplan-Meier survival curves for the total population and for each of the health-service states. In all cases there was a clear survival benefit for vaccinated vs. unvaccinated patients. She did not, however, provide specific numbers or hazard ratios for the differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in each of the comparisons.
The study was supported by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health. Dr. Ranhoff and Dr. Benetos reported no conflicts of interest.
and launched an investigation into the safety of the BNT162b2 vaccine (Comirnaty; Pfizer-BioNTech).
Now, the results of that investigation and of a subsequent larger study of nursing home residents in Norway have shown no increased risk for short-term mortality following COVID-19 vaccination in the overall population of elderly patients. The new research also showed clear evidence of a survival benefit compared with the unvaccinated population, Anette Hylen Ranhoff, MD, PhD, said at the annual meeting of the European Geriatric Medicine Society, held in a hybrid format in Athens, Greece, and online.
“We found no evidence of increased short-term mortality among vaccinated older individuals, and particularly not among the nursing home patients,” said Dr. Ranhoff, a senior researcher at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health and professor at University of Bergen, Norway. “But we think that this [lower] mortality risk was most likely a sort of ‘healthy-vaccinee’ effect, which means that people who were a bit more healthy were vaccinated, and not those who were the very, very most frail.”
“We have more or less the same data in France about events, with very high rates of vaccination,” said session moderator Athanase Benetos MD, PhD, professor and chairman of geriatric medicine at the University Hospital of Nancy in France, who was not involved in the study.
“In my department, a month after the end of the vaccination and at the same time while the pandemic in the city was going up, we had a 90% decrease in mortality from COVID in the nursing homes,” he told Dr. Ranhoff.
Potential risks
Frail elderly patients were not included in clinical trials of COVID-19 vaccines, and although previous studies have shown a low incidence of local or systemic reactions to vaccination among older people, “we think that quite mild adverse events following vaccination could trigger and destabilize a frail person,” Dr. Ranhoff said.
As reported Jan. 15, 2021, in BMJ, investigation by the Norwegian Medicines Agency (NOMA) into 13 of the 23 reported cases concluded that common adverse reactions associated with mRNA vaccines could have contributed to the deaths of some of the frail elderly patients
Steinar Madsen, MD, NOMA medical director, told BMJ “we are not alarmed or worried about this, because these are very rare occurrences and they occurred in very frail patients with very serious disease.”
Health authorities investigate
In response to the report and at the request of the Norwegian Public Health Institute and NOMA, Dr. Ranhoff and colleagues investigated the first 100 deaths among nursing-home residents who received the vaccine. The team consisted of three geriatricians and an infectious disease specialist who sees patients in nursing homes.
They looked at each patient’s clinical course before and after vaccination, their health trajectory and life expectancy at the time of vaccination, new symptoms following vaccination, and the time from vaccination to new symptoms and to death.
In addition, the investigators evaluated Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) scores for each patient. CFS scores range from 1 (very fit) to 9 (terminally ill, with a life expectancy of less than 6 months who are otherwise evidently frail).
The initial investigation found that among 95 evaluable patients, the association between vaccination and death was “probable” in 10, “possible” in 26, and “unlikely” in 59.
The mean time from vaccination to symptoms was 1.4 days in the probable cases, 2.5 days in the possible cases, and 4.7 days in the unlikely cases.
The mean time from vaccination to death was 3.1, 8.3, and 8.2 days, respectively.
In all three categories, the patients had mean CFS scores ranging from 7.6 to 7.9, putting them in the “severely frail” category, defined as people who are completely dependent for personal care but seem stable and not at high risk for dying.
“We have quite many nursing home residents in Norway, 35,000; more than 80% have dementia, and the mean age is 85 years. We know that approximately 45 people die every day in these nursing homes, and their mean age of death is 87.5 years,” Dr. Ranhoff said.
Population-wide study
Dr. Ranhoff and colleagues also looked more broadly into the question of potential vaccine-related mortality in the total population of older people in Norway from the day of vaccination to follow-up at 3 weeks.
They conducted a matched cohort study to investigate the relationship between the mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and overall death among persons aged 65 and older in the general population, and across four groups: patients receiving home-based care, long-term nursing home patients, short-term nursing home patients, and those not receiving health services.
The researchers identified a total of 967,786 residents of Norway aged 65 and over at the start of the country’s vaccination campaign at the end of December, 2020, and they matched vaccinated individuals with unvaccinated persons based on demographic, geographic, and clinical risk group factors.
Dr. Ranhoff showed Kaplan-Meier survival curves for the total population and for each of the health-service states. In all cases there was a clear survival benefit for vaccinated vs. unvaccinated patients. She did not, however, provide specific numbers or hazard ratios for the differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in each of the comparisons.
The study was supported by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health. Dr. Ranhoff and Dr. Benetos reported no conflicts of interest.
FROM EUGMS 2021
Omega-3s tame inflammation in elderly COVID-19 patients
results of a small randomized controlled trial suggest.
Results of the study, which included 22 patients with multiple comorbidities, were presented at the European Geriatric Medicine Society annual congress, a hybrid live and online meeting.
The patients, who had a median age of 81 years, were randomized to receive an intravenous infusion of an omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) emulsion containing 10 g of fish oil per 100 mL or a saline placebo.
Those who received the intravenous infusion had significant decreases from baseline to end of treatment in the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), indicating marked reductions in systemic inflammation.
In contrast, patients randomized to a saline placebo had no significant improvements in NLR, Magnus Bäck, MD, PhD, from the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm reported at the meeting.
“Our lipidomic analysis also showed that omega-3 treatment skewed the lipid response, with reduced levels of proinflammatory lipid mediators, and increased levels of proresolving mediators,” according to a late-breaking abstract, which Dr. Bäck presented during the session.
Omega-3 treatment was not significantly associated with reduction in either C-reactive protein (CRP) or the proinflammatory cytokine interleukin-6, however.
‘Eicosanoid storm’
In a review article published in January 2021 in the open-access journal Frontiers in Physiology, Dr. Bäck and colleagues outlined the rationale for their randomized trial.
“Excessive inflammation has been reported in severe cases with respiratory failure and cardiovascular complications,” they wrote. “In addition to the release of cytokines, referred to as cytokine release syndrome or ‘cytokine storm,’ increased proinflammatory lipid mediators derived from the omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) arachidonic acid may cause an ‘eicosanoid storm,’ which contributes to the uncontrolled systemic inflammation.”
Omega-3 PUFA contains proresolving mediators that can limit inflammatory reactions, suggesting the possibility of an inflammation-resolving benefit in patients with COVID-19 without concerns about immunosuppression, the authors hypothesized.
Trial details
In the trial, COVID-Omega-F, they enrolled patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis requiring hospitalization. Patients with an allergy to fish oil or who had contraindications to intravenous PUFA administration (for example, risk for bleeding, shock, or emboli) were excluded.
Ten patients were randomly assigned to receive infusions of the omega-3 PUFA and 12 were assigned to receive infusions of the placebo, once daily for 5 days. The primary outcome measure was change in inflammatory biomarkers, including white blood cell counts, CRP, cytokines, and lipid mediators.
Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between the two study arms, with a median of about 7 days since the onset of symptoms, and 3.5 days since a diagnosis of COVID-19.
All patients had low lymphocyte responses reflected by a high NLR, a prognostic measure for worse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 infections, Dr. Bäck said.
Inflammation was moderate, with a CRP of 65 mg/L in the placebo group and 62 mg/L in the omega-3 group.
Seven patients in each study arm received concomitant corticoid treatment. Two patients in each arm died in hospital, but there were no serious treatment-related adverse events.
Inflammatory markers improve
As noted before, there was a significant decline in NLR from baseline among patients randomized to omega-3 (P = .02) but no corresponding decrease in patients assigned to placebo infusions.
“The significant decrease was largely driven by an increase in the lymphocyte count in the omega-3 treated group (P = .004), whereas lymphocytes did not significantly change,” Dr. Bäck said.
As expected, patients in the omega-3 group had pronounced increases in omega-3 fatty acids, including eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid.
The metabolism of fatty acids also differed markedly between the groups, with a significant decrease in the omega-3 group but not the placebo group in proinflammatory mediators, and an increase in precursors to proresolving mediators, Dr. Bäck noted.
AFib concerns
In a question-and-answer part of the session, a physician who identified herself as “Senya from Russia” questioned the safety of omega-3 treatment in this population, “because recently there was a meta-analysis which showed that omega-3 fatty acids will increase the risk of atrial fibrillation in older adults especially.”
The systematic review and meta-analysis she referred to, published in Circulation and reported on by this news organization, showed that, among 81,210 patients with a mean age of 65 enrolled in seven randomized controlled trials, omega-3 fatty acid supplementation was associated with a 25% increase in risk for atrial fibrillation. This risk appeared to be higher in trials testing doses greater than 1 g/day, according to the paper.
“This was not monitored in this study,” Dr. Bäck replied. “It is true that the meta-analysis showed an increased incidence of atrial fibrillation, so it would be something to monitor in case this trial would be expanded to a larger population.”
The study was supported by the Karolinska Institute. Dr. Bäck disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
results of a small randomized controlled trial suggest.
Results of the study, which included 22 patients with multiple comorbidities, were presented at the European Geriatric Medicine Society annual congress, a hybrid live and online meeting.
The patients, who had a median age of 81 years, were randomized to receive an intravenous infusion of an omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) emulsion containing 10 g of fish oil per 100 mL or a saline placebo.
Those who received the intravenous infusion had significant decreases from baseline to end of treatment in the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), indicating marked reductions in systemic inflammation.
In contrast, patients randomized to a saline placebo had no significant improvements in NLR, Magnus Bäck, MD, PhD, from the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm reported at the meeting.
“Our lipidomic analysis also showed that omega-3 treatment skewed the lipid response, with reduced levels of proinflammatory lipid mediators, and increased levels of proresolving mediators,” according to a late-breaking abstract, which Dr. Bäck presented during the session.
Omega-3 treatment was not significantly associated with reduction in either C-reactive protein (CRP) or the proinflammatory cytokine interleukin-6, however.
‘Eicosanoid storm’
In a review article published in January 2021 in the open-access journal Frontiers in Physiology, Dr. Bäck and colleagues outlined the rationale for their randomized trial.
“Excessive inflammation has been reported in severe cases with respiratory failure and cardiovascular complications,” they wrote. “In addition to the release of cytokines, referred to as cytokine release syndrome or ‘cytokine storm,’ increased proinflammatory lipid mediators derived from the omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) arachidonic acid may cause an ‘eicosanoid storm,’ which contributes to the uncontrolled systemic inflammation.”
Omega-3 PUFA contains proresolving mediators that can limit inflammatory reactions, suggesting the possibility of an inflammation-resolving benefit in patients with COVID-19 without concerns about immunosuppression, the authors hypothesized.
Trial details
In the trial, COVID-Omega-F, they enrolled patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis requiring hospitalization. Patients with an allergy to fish oil or who had contraindications to intravenous PUFA administration (for example, risk for bleeding, shock, or emboli) were excluded.
Ten patients were randomly assigned to receive infusions of the omega-3 PUFA and 12 were assigned to receive infusions of the placebo, once daily for 5 days. The primary outcome measure was change in inflammatory biomarkers, including white blood cell counts, CRP, cytokines, and lipid mediators.
Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between the two study arms, with a median of about 7 days since the onset of symptoms, and 3.5 days since a diagnosis of COVID-19.
All patients had low lymphocyte responses reflected by a high NLR, a prognostic measure for worse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 infections, Dr. Bäck said.
Inflammation was moderate, with a CRP of 65 mg/L in the placebo group and 62 mg/L in the omega-3 group.
Seven patients in each study arm received concomitant corticoid treatment. Two patients in each arm died in hospital, but there were no serious treatment-related adverse events.
Inflammatory markers improve
As noted before, there was a significant decline in NLR from baseline among patients randomized to omega-3 (P = .02) but no corresponding decrease in patients assigned to placebo infusions.
“The significant decrease was largely driven by an increase in the lymphocyte count in the omega-3 treated group (P = .004), whereas lymphocytes did not significantly change,” Dr. Bäck said.
As expected, patients in the omega-3 group had pronounced increases in omega-3 fatty acids, including eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid.
The metabolism of fatty acids also differed markedly between the groups, with a significant decrease in the omega-3 group but not the placebo group in proinflammatory mediators, and an increase in precursors to proresolving mediators, Dr. Bäck noted.
AFib concerns
In a question-and-answer part of the session, a physician who identified herself as “Senya from Russia” questioned the safety of omega-3 treatment in this population, “because recently there was a meta-analysis which showed that omega-3 fatty acids will increase the risk of atrial fibrillation in older adults especially.”
The systematic review and meta-analysis she referred to, published in Circulation and reported on by this news organization, showed that, among 81,210 patients with a mean age of 65 enrolled in seven randomized controlled trials, omega-3 fatty acid supplementation was associated with a 25% increase in risk for atrial fibrillation. This risk appeared to be higher in trials testing doses greater than 1 g/day, according to the paper.
“This was not monitored in this study,” Dr. Bäck replied. “It is true that the meta-analysis showed an increased incidence of atrial fibrillation, so it would be something to monitor in case this trial would be expanded to a larger population.”
The study was supported by the Karolinska Institute. Dr. Bäck disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
results of a small randomized controlled trial suggest.
Results of the study, which included 22 patients with multiple comorbidities, were presented at the European Geriatric Medicine Society annual congress, a hybrid live and online meeting.
The patients, who had a median age of 81 years, were randomized to receive an intravenous infusion of an omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) emulsion containing 10 g of fish oil per 100 mL or a saline placebo.
Those who received the intravenous infusion had significant decreases from baseline to end of treatment in the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), indicating marked reductions in systemic inflammation.
In contrast, patients randomized to a saline placebo had no significant improvements in NLR, Magnus Bäck, MD, PhD, from the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm reported at the meeting.
“Our lipidomic analysis also showed that omega-3 treatment skewed the lipid response, with reduced levels of proinflammatory lipid mediators, and increased levels of proresolving mediators,” according to a late-breaking abstract, which Dr. Bäck presented during the session.
Omega-3 treatment was not significantly associated with reduction in either C-reactive protein (CRP) or the proinflammatory cytokine interleukin-6, however.
‘Eicosanoid storm’
In a review article published in January 2021 in the open-access journal Frontiers in Physiology, Dr. Bäck and colleagues outlined the rationale for their randomized trial.
“Excessive inflammation has been reported in severe cases with respiratory failure and cardiovascular complications,” they wrote. “In addition to the release of cytokines, referred to as cytokine release syndrome or ‘cytokine storm,’ increased proinflammatory lipid mediators derived from the omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) arachidonic acid may cause an ‘eicosanoid storm,’ which contributes to the uncontrolled systemic inflammation.”
Omega-3 PUFA contains proresolving mediators that can limit inflammatory reactions, suggesting the possibility of an inflammation-resolving benefit in patients with COVID-19 without concerns about immunosuppression, the authors hypothesized.
Trial details
In the trial, COVID-Omega-F, they enrolled patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis requiring hospitalization. Patients with an allergy to fish oil or who had contraindications to intravenous PUFA administration (for example, risk for bleeding, shock, or emboli) were excluded.
Ten patients were randomly assigned to receive infusions of the omega-3 PUFA and 12 were assigned to receive infusions of the placebo, once daily for 5 days. The primary outcome measure was change in inflammatory biomarkers, including white blood cell counts, CRP, cytokines, and lipid mediators.
Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between the two study arms, with a median of about 7 days since the onset of symptoms, and 3.5 days since a diagnosis of COVID-19.
All patients had low lymphocyte responses reflected by a high NLR, a prognostic measure for worse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 infections, Dr. Bäck said.
Inflammation was moderate, with a CRP of 65 mg/L in the placebo group and 62 mg/L in the omega-3 group.
Seven patients in each study arm received concomitant corticoid treatment. Two patients in each arm died in hospital, but there were no serious treatment-related adverse events.
Inflammatory markers improve
As noted before, there was a significant decline in NLR from baseline among patients randomized to omega-3 (P = .02) but no corresponding decrease in patients assigned to placebo infusions.
“The significant decrease was largely driven by an increase in the lymphocyte count in the omega-3 treated group (P = .004), whereas lymphocytes did not significantly change,” Dr. Bäck said.
As expected, patients in the omega-3 group had pronounced increases in omega-3 fatty acids, including eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid.
The metabolism of fatty acids also differed markedly between the groups, with a significant decrease in the omega-3 group but not the placebo group in proinflammatory mediators, and an increase in precursors to proresolving mediators, Dr. Bäck noted.
AFib concerns
In a question-and-answer part of the session, a physician who identified herself as “Senya from Russia” questioned the safety of omega-3 treatment in this population, “because recently there was a meta-analysis which showed that omega-3 fatty acids will increase the risk of atrial fibrillation in older adults especially.”
The systematic review and meta-analysis she referred to, published in Circulation and reported on by this news organization, showed that, among 81,210 patients with a mean age of 65 enrolled in seven randomized controlled trials, omega-3 fatty acid supplementation was associated with a 25% increase in risk for atrial fibrillation. This risk appeared to be higher in trials testing doses greater than 1 g/day, according to the paper.
“This was not monitored in this study,” Dr. Bäck replied. “It is true that the meta-analysis showed an increased incidence of atrial fibrillation, so it would be something to monitor in case this trial would be expanded to a larger population.”
The study was supported by the Karolinska Institute. Dr. Bäck disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM EUGMS
Staff education cuts psychotropic drug use in long-term care
The effect of the intervention was transient, possibly because of high staff turnover, according to the investigators in the new randomized, controlled trial.
The findings were presented by Ulla Aalto, MD, PhD, during a session at the European Geriatric Medicine Society annual congress, a hybrid live and online meeting.
There was a significant reduction in the use of psychotropic agents at 6 months in long-term care wards where the nursing staff had undergone a short training session on drug therapy for older patients, but there was no improvement in wards that were randomly assigned to serve as controls, Dr. Aalto, from Helsinki Hospital, reported during the session.
“Future research would be investigating how we could maintain the positive effects that were gained at 6 months but not seen any more at 1 year, and how to implement the good practice in nursing homes by this kind of staff training,” she said.
Heavy drug use
Psychotropic medications are widely used in long-term care settings, but their indiscriminate use or use of the wrong drug for the wrong patient can be harmful. Inappropriate drug use in long-term care settings is also associated with higher costs, Dr. Aalto said.
To see whether a staff-training intervention could reduce drugs use and lower costs, the investigators conducted a randomized clinical trial in assisted living facilities in Helsinki in 2011, with a total of 227 patients 65 years and older.
Long-term care wards were randomly assigned to either an intervention for nursing staff consisting of two 4-hour sessions on good drug-therapy practice for older adults, or to serve as controls (10 wards in each group).
Drug use and costs were monitored at both 6 and 12 months after randomization. Psychotropic drugs included antipsychotics, antidepressants, anxiolytics, and hypnotics as classified by the World Health Organization. For the purposes of comparison, actual doses were counted and converted into relative proportions of defined daily doses.
The baseline characteristics of patients in each group were generally similar, with a mean age of around 83 years. In each study arm, nearly two-thirds of patients were on at least one psychotropic drug, and of this group, a third had been prescribed 2 or more psychotropic agents.
Nearly half of the patients were on at least one antipsychotic agent and/or antidepressant.
Short-term benefit
As noted before, in the wards randomized to staff training, there was a significant reduction in use of all psychotropics from baseline at 6 months after randomization (P = .045), but there was no change among the control wards.
By 12 months, however, the differences between the intervention and control arms narrowed, and drug use in the intervention arm was no longer significantly lower over baseline.
Drugs costs significantly decreased in the intervention group at 6 months (P = .027) and were numerically but not statistically lower over baseline at 12 months.
In contrast, drug costs in the control arm were numerically (but not statistically) higher at both 6 and 12 months of follow-up.
Annual drug costs in the intervention group decreased by mean of 12.3 euros ($14.22) whereas costs in the control group increased by a mean of 20.6 euros ($23.81).
“This quite light and feasible intervention succeeded in reducing overall defined daily doses of psychotropics in the short term,” Dr. Aalto said.
The waning of the intervention’s effect on drug use and costs may be caused partly by the high employee turnover rate in long-term care facilities and to the dilution effect, she said, referring to a form of judgment bias in which people tend to devalue diagnostic information when other, nondiagnostic information is also available.
Randomized design
In the question-and-answer session following her presentation, audience member Jesper Ryg, MD, PhD from Odense (Denmark) University Hospital and the University of Southern Denmark, also in Odense, commented: “It’s a great study, doing a [randomized, controlled trial] on deprescribing, we need more of those.”
“But what we know now is that a lot of studies show it is possible to deprescribe and get less drugs, but do we have any clinical data? Does this deprescribing lead to less falls, did it lead to lower mortality?” he asked.
Dr. Aalto replied that, in an earlier report from this study, investigators showed that harmful medication use was reduced and negative outcomes were reduced.
Another audience member asked why nursing staff were the target of the intervention, given that physicians do the actual drug prescribing.
Dr. Aalto responded: “It is the physician of course who prescribes, but in nursing homes and long-term care, nursing staff is there all the time, and the physicians are kind of consultants who just come there once in a while, so it’s important that the nurses also know about these harmful medications and can bring them to the doctor when he or she arrives there.”
Dr. Aalto and Dr. Ryg had no disclosures.
The effect of the intervention was transient, possibly because of high staff turnover, according to the investigators in the new randomized, controlled trial.
The findings were presented by Ulla Aalto, MD, PhD, during a session at the European Geriatric Medicine Society annual congress, a hybrid live and online meeting.
There was a significant reduction in the use of psychotropic agents at 6 months in long-term care wards where the nursing staff had undergone a short training session on drug therapy for older patients, but there was no improvement in wards that were randomly assigned to serve as controls, Dr. Aalto, from Helsinki Hospital, reported during the session.
“Future research would be investigating how we could maintain the positive effects that were gained at 6 months but not seen any more at 1 year, and how to implement the good practice in nursing homes by this kind of staff training,” she said.
Heavy drug use
Psychotropic medications are widely used in long-term care settings, but their indiscriminate use or use of the wrong drug for the wrong patient can be harmful. Inappropriate drug use in long-term care settings is also associated with higher costs, Dr. Aalto said.
To see whether a staff-training intervention could reduce drugs use and lower costs, the investigators conducted a randomized clinical trial in assisted living facilities in Helsinki in 2011, with a total of 227 patients 65 years and older.
Long-term care wards were randomly assigned to either an intervention for nursing staff consisting of two 4-hour sessions on good drug-therapy practice for older adults, or to serve as controls (10 wards in each group).
Drug use and costs were monitored at both 6 and 12 months after randomization. Psychotropic drugs included antipsychotics, antidepressants, anxiolytics, and hypnotics as classified by the World Health Organization. For the purposes of comparison, actual doses were counted and converted into relative proportions of defined daily doses.
The baseline characteristics of patients in each group were generally similar, with a mean age of around 83 years. In each study arm, nearly two-thirds of patients were on at least one psychotropic drug, and of this group, a third had been prescribed 2 or more psychotropic agents.
Nearly half of the patients were on at least one antipsychotic agent and/or antidepressant.
Short-term benefit
As noted before, in the wards randomized to staff training, there was a significant reduction in use of all psychotropics from baseline at 6 months after randomization (P = .045), but there was no change among the control wards.
By 12 months, however, the differences between the intervention and control arms narrowed, and drug use in the intervention arm was no longer significantly lower over baseline.
Drugs costs significantly decreased in the intervention group at 6 months (P = .027) and were numerically but not statistically lower over baseline at 12 months.
In contrast, drug costs in the control arm were numerically (but not statistically) higher at both 6 and 12 months of follow-up.
Annual drug costs in the intervention group decreased by mean of 12.3 euros ($14.22) whereas costs in the control group increased by a mean of 20.6 euros ($23.81).
“This quite light and feasible intervention succeeded in reducing overall defined daily doses of psychotropics in the short term,” Dr. Aalto said.
The waning of the intervention’s effect on drug use and costs may be caused partly by the high employee turnover rate in long-term care facilities and to the dilution effect, she said, referring to a form of judgment bias in which people tend to devalue diagnostic information when other, nondiagnostic information is also available.
Randomized design
In the question-and-answer session following her presentation, audience member Jesper Ryg, MD, PhD from Odense (Denmark) University Hospital and the University of Southern Denmark, also in Odense, commented: “It’s a great study, doing a [randomized, controlled trial] on deprescribing, we need more of those.”
“But what we know now is that a lot of studies show it is possible to deprescribe and get less drugs, but do we have any clinical data? Does this deprescribing lead to less falls, did it lead to lower mortality?” he asked.
Dr. Aalto replied that, in an earlier report from this study, investigators showed that harmful medication use was reduced and negative outcomes were reduced.
Another audience member asked why nursing staff were the target of the intervention, given that physicians do the actual drug prescribing.
Dr. Aalto responded: “It is the physician of course who prescribes, but in nursing homes and long-term care, nursing staff is there all the time, and the physicians are kind of consultants who just come there once in a while, so it’s important that the nurses also know about these harmful medications and can bring them to the doctor when he or she arrives there.”
Dr. Aalto and Dr. Ryg had no disclosures.
The effect of the intervention was transient, possibly because of high staff turnover, according to the investigators in the new randomized, controlled trial.
The findings were presented by Ulla Aalto, MD, PhD, during a session at the European Geriatric Medicine Society annual congress, a hybrid live and online meeting.
There was a significant reduction in the use of psychotropic agents at 6 months in long-term care wards where the nursing staff had undergone a short training session on drug therapy for older patients, but there was no improvement in wards that were randomly assigned to serve as controls, Dr. Aalto, from Helsinki Hospital, reported during the session.
“Future research would be investigating how we could maintain the positive effects that were gained at 6 months but not seen any more at 1 year, and how to implement the good practice in nursing homes by this kind of staff training,” she said.
Heavy drug use
Psychotropic medications are widely used in long-term care settings, but their indiscriminate use or use of the wrong drug for the wrong patient can be harmful. Inappropriate drug use in long-term care settings is also associated with higher costs, Dr. Aalto said.
To see whether a staff-training intervention could reduce drugs use and lower costs, the investigators conducted a randomized clinical trial in assisted living facilities in Helsinki in 2011, with a total of 227 patients 65 years and older.
Long-term care wards were randomly assigned to either an intervention for nursing staff consisting of two 4-hour sessions on good drug-therapy practice for older adults, or to serve as controls (10 wards in each group).
Drug use and costs were monitored at both 6 and 12 months after randomization. Psychotropic drugs included antipsychotics, antidepressants, anxiolytics, and hypnotics as classified by the World Health Organization. For the purposes of comparison, actual doses were counted and converted into relative proportions of defined daily doses.
The baseline characteristics of patients in each group were generally similar, with a mean age of around 83 years. In each study arm, nearly two-thirds of patients were on at least one psychotropic drug, and of this group, a third had been prescribed 2 or more psychotropic agents.
Nearly half of the patients were on at least one antipsychotic agent and/or antidepressant.
Short-term benefit
As noted before, in the wards randomized to staff training, there was a significant reduction in use of all psychotropics from baseline at 6 months after randomization (P = .045), but there was no change among the control wards.
By 12 months, however, the differences between the intervention and control arms narrowed, and drug use in the intervention arm was no longer significantly lower over baseline.
Drugs costs significantly decreased in the intervention group at 6 months (P = .027) and were numerically but not statistically lower over baseline at 12 months.
In contrast, drug costs in the control arm were numerically (but not statistically) higher at both 6 and 12 months of follow-up.
Annual drug costs in the intervention group decreased by mean of 12.3 euros ($14.22) whereas costs in the control group increased by a mean of 20.6 euros ($23.81).
“This quite light and feasible intervention succeeded in reducing overall defined daily doses of psychotropics in the short term,” Dr. Aalto said.
The waning of the intervention’s effect on drug use and costs may be caused partly by the high employee turnover rate in long-term care facilities and to the dilution effect, she said, referring to a form of judgment bias in which people tend to devalue diagnostic information when other, nondiagnostic information is also available.
Randomized design
In the question-and-answer session following her presentation, audience member Jesper Ryg, MD, PhD from Odense (Denmark) University Hospital and the University of Southern Denmark, also in Odense, commented: “It’s a great study, doing a [randomized, controlled trial] on deprescribing, we need more of those.”
“But what we know now is that a lot of studies show it is possible to deprescribe and get less drugs, but do we have any clinical data? Does this deprescribing lead to less falls, did it lead to lower mortality?” he asked.
Dr. Aalto replied that, in an earlier report from this study, investigators showed that harmful medication use was reduced and negative outcomes were reduced.
Another audience member asked why nursing staff were the target of the intervention, given that physicians do the actual drug prescribing.
Dr. Aalto responded: “It is the physician of course who prescribes, but in nursing homes and long-term care, nursing staff is there all the time, and the physicians are kind of consultants who just come there once in a while, so it’s important that the nurses also know about these harmful medications and can bring them to the doctor when he or she arrives there.”
Dr. Aalto and Dr. Ryg had no disclosures.
FROM EUGMS 2021
MIND diet preserves cognition, new data show
Adherence to the MIND diet can improve memory and thinking skills of older adults, even in the presence of Alzheimer’s disease pathology, new data from the Rush Memory and Aging Project (MAP) show.
“The MIND diet was associated with better cognitive functions independently of brain pathologies related to Alzheimer’s disease, suggesting that diet may contribute to cognitive resilience, which ultimately indicates that it is never too late for dementia prevention,” lead author Klodian Dhana, MD, PhD, with the Rush Institute of Healthy Aging at Rush University, Chicago, said in an interview.
The study was published online Sept. 14, 2021, in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease.
Impact on brain pathology
“While previous investigations determined that the MIND diet is associated with a slower cognitive decline, the current study furthered the diet and brain health evidence by assessing the impact of brain pathology in the diet-cognition relationship,” Dr. Dhana said.
The MIND diet was pioneered by the late Martha Clare Morris, ScD, a Rush nutritional epidemiologist, who died in 2020 of cancer at age 64. A hybrid of the Mediterranean and DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) diets, the MIND diet includes green leafy vegetables, fish, nuts, berries, beans, and whole grains and limits consumption of fried and fast foods, sweets, and pastries.
The current study focused on 569 older adults who died while participating in the MAP study, which began in 1997. Participants in the study were mostly White and were without known dementia. All of the participants agreed to undergo annual clinical evaluations. They also agreed to undergo brain autopsy after death.
Beginning in 2004, participants completed annual food frequency questionnaires, which were used to calculate a MIND diet score based on how often the participants ate specific foods.
The researchers used a series of regression analyses to examine associations of the MIND diet, dementia-related brain pathologies, and global cognition near the time of death. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, education, apo E4, late-life cognitive activities, and total energy intake.
(beta, 0.119; P = .003).
Notably, the researchers said, neither the strength nor the significance of association changed markedly when AD pathology and other brain pathologies were included in the model (beta, 0.111; P = .003).
The relationship between better adherence to the MIND diet and better cognition remained significant when the analysis was restricted to individuals without mild cognitive impairment at baseline (beta, 0.121; P = .005) as well as to persons in whom a postmortem diagnosis of AD was made on the basis of NIA-Reagan consensus recommendations (beta, 0.114; P = .023).
The limitations of the study include the reliance on self-reported diet information and a sample made up of mostly White volunteers who agreed to annual evaluations and postmortem organ donation, thus limiting generalizability.
Strengths of the study include the prospective design with annual assessment of cognitive function using standardized tests and collection of the dietary information using validated questionnaires. Also, the neuropathologic evaluations were performed by examiners blinded to clinical data.
“Diet changes can impact cognitive functioning and risk of dementia, for better or worse. There are fairly simple diet and lifestyle changes a person could make that may help to slow cognitive decline with aging and contribute to brain health,” Dr. Dhana said in a news release.
Builds resilience
Weighing in on the study, Heather Snyder, PhD, vice president of medical and scientific relations for the Alzheimer’s Association, said this “interesting study sheds light on the impact of nutrition on cognitive function.
“The findings add to the growing literature that lifestyle factors – like access to a heart-healthy diet – may help the brain be more resilient to disease-specific changes,” Snyder said in an interview.
“The Alzheimer’s Association’s US POINTER study is investigating how lifestyle interventions, including nutrition guidance, like the MIND diet, may impact a person’s risk of cognitive decline. An ancillary study of the US POINTER will include brain imaging to investigate how these lifestyle interventions impact the biology of the brain,” Dr. Snyder noted.
The research was supported by the National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Dhana and Dr. Snyder disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Adherence to the MIND diet can improve memory and thinking skills of older adults, even in the presence of Alzheimer’s disease pathology, new data from the Rush Memory and Aging Project (MAP) show.
“The MIND diet was associated with better cognitive functions independently of brain pathologies related to Alzheimer’s disease, suggesting that diet may contribute to cognitive resilience, which ultimately indicates that it is never too late for dementia prevention,” lead author Klodian Dhana, MD, PhD, with the Rush Institute of Healthy Aging at Rush University, Chicago, said in an interview.
The study was published online Sept. 14, 2021, in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease.
Impact on brain pathology
“While previous investigations determined that the MIND diet is associated with a slower cognitive decline, the current study furthered the diet and brain health evidence by assessing the impact of brain pathology in the diet-cognition relationship,” Dr. Dhana said.
The MIND diet was pioneered by the late Martha Clare Morris, ScD, a Rush nutritional epidemiologist, who died in 2020 of cancer at age 64. A hybrid of the Mediterranean and DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) diets, the MIND diet includes green leafy vegetables, fish, nuts, berries, beans, and whole grains and limits consumption of fried and fast foods, sweets, and pastries.
The current study focused on 569 older adults who died while participating in the MAP study, which began in 1997. Participants in the study were mostly White and were without known dementia. All of the participants agreed to undergo annual clinical evaluations. They also agreed to undergo brain autopsy after death.
Beginning in 2004, participants completed annual food frequency questionnaires, which were used to calculate a MIND diet score based on how often the participants ate specific foods.
The researchers used a series of regression analyses to examine associations of the MIND diet, dementia-related brain pathologies, and global cognition near the time of death. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, education, apo E4, late-life cognitive activities, and total energy intake.
(beta, 0.119; P = .003).
Notably, the researchers said, neither the strength nor the significance of association changed markedly when AD pathology and other brain pathologies were included in the model (beta, 0.111; P = .003).
The relationship between better adherence to the MIND diet and better cognition remained significant when the analysis was restricted to individuals without mild cognitive impairment at baseline (beta, 0.121; P = .005) as well as to persons in whom a postmortem diagnosis of AD was made on the basis of NIA-Reagan consensus recommendations (beta, 0.114; P = .023).
The limitations of the study include the reliance on self-reported diet information and a sample made up of mostly White volunteers who agreed to annual evaluations and postmortem organ donation, thus limiting generalizability.
Strengths of the study include the prospective design with annual assessment of cognitive function using standardized tests and collection of the dietary information using validated questionnaires. Also, the neuropathologic evaluations were performed by examiners blinded to clinical data.
“Diet changes can impact cognitive functioning and risk of dementia, for better or worse. There are fairly simple diet and lifestyle changes a person could make that may help to slow cognitive decline with aging and contribute to brain health,” Dr. Dhana said in a news release.
Builds resilience
Weighing in on the study, Heather Snyder, PhD, vice president of medical and scientific relations for the Alzheimer’s Association, said this “interesting study sheds light on the impact of nutrition on cognitive function.
“The findings add to the growing literature that lifestyle factors – like access to a heart-healthy diet – may help the brain be more resilient to disease-specific changes,” Snyder said in an interview.
“The Alzheimer’s Association’s US POINTER study is investigating how lifestyle interventions, including nutrition guidance, like the MIND diet, may impact a person’s risk of cognitive decline. An ancillary study of the US POINTER will include brain imaging to investigate how these lifestyle interventions impact the biology of the brain,” Dr. Snyder noted.
The research was supported by the National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Dhana and Dr. Snyder disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Adherence to the MIND diet can improve memory and thinking skills of older adults, even in the presence of Alzheimer’s disease pathology, new data from the Rush Memory and Aging Project (MAP) show.
“The MIND diet was associated with better cognitive functions independently of brain pathologies related to Alzheimer’s disease, suggesting that diet may contribute to cognitive resilience, which ultimately indicates that it is never too late for dementia prevention,” lead author Klodian Dhana, MD, PhD, with the Rush Institute of Healthy Aging at Rush University, Chicago, said in an interview.
The study was published online Sept. 14, 2021, in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease.
Impact on brain pathology
“While previous investigations determined that the MIND diet is associated with a slower cognitive decline, the current study furthered the diet and brain health evidence by assessing the impact of brain pathology in the diet-cognition relationship,” Dr. Dhana said.
The MIND diet was pioneered by the late Martha Clare Morris, ScD, a Rush nutritional epidemiologist, who died in 2020 of cancer at age 64. A hybrid of the Mediterranean and DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) diets, the MIND diet includes green leafy vegetables, fish, nuts, berries, beans, and whole grains and limits consumption of fried and fast foods, sweets, and pastries.
The current study focused on 569 older adults who died while participating in the MAP study, which began in 1997. Participants in the study were mostly White and were without known dementia. All of the participants agreed to undergo annual clinical evaluations. They also agreed to undergo brain autopsy after death.
Beginning in 2004, participants completed annual food frequency questionnaires, which were used to calculate a MIND diet score based on how often the participants ate specific foods.
The researchers used a series of regression analyses to examine associations of the MIND diet, dementia-related brain pathologies, and global cognition near the time of death. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, education, apo E4, late-life cognitive activities, and total energy intake.
(beta, 0.119; P = .003).
Notably, the researchers said, neither the strength nor the significance of association changed markedly when AD pathology and other brain pathologies were included in the model (beta, 0.111; P = .003).
The relationship between better adherence to the MIND diet and better cognition remained significant when the analysis was restricted to individuals without mild cognitive impairment at baseline (beta, 0.121; P = .005) as well as to persons in whom a postmortem diagnosis of AD was made on the basis of NIA-Reagan consensus recommendations (beta, 0.114; P = .023).
The limitations of the study include the reliance on self-reported diet information and a sample made up of mostly White volunteers who agreed to annual evaluations and postmortem organ donation, thus limiting generalizability.
Strengths of the study include the prospective design with annual assessment of cognitive function using standardized tests and collection of the dietary information using validated questionnaires. Also, the neuropathologic evaluations were performed by examiners blinded to clinical data.
“Diet changes can impact cognitive functioning and risk of dementia, for better or worse. There are fairly simple diet and lifestyle changes a person could make that may help to slow cognitive decline with aging and contribute to brain health,” Dr. Dhana said in a news release.
Builds resilience
Weighing in on the study, Heather Snyder, PhD, vice president of medical and scientific relations for the Alzheimer’s Association, said this “interesting study sheds light on the impact of nutrition on cognitive function.
“The findings add to the growing literature that lifestyle factors – like access to a heart-healthy diet – may help the brain be more resilient to disease-specific changes,” Snyder said in an interview.
“The Alzheimer’s Association’s US POINTER study is investigating how lifestyle interventions, including nutrition guidance, like the MIND diet, may impact a person’s risk of cognitive decline. An ancillary study of the US POINTER will include brain imaging to investigate how these lifestyle interventions impact the biology of the brain,” Dr. Snyder noted.
The research was supported by the National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Dhana and Dr. Snyder disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Pelvic floor dysfunction imaging: New guidelines provide recommendations
New consensus guidelines from a multispecialty working group of the Pelvic Floor Disorders Consortium (PFDC) clear up inconsistencies in the use of magnetic resonance defecography (MRD) and provide universal recommendations on MRD technique, interpretation, reporting, and other factors.
“The consensus language used to describe pelvic floor disorders is critical, so as to allow the various experts who treat these patients [to] communicate and collaborate effectively with each other,” coauthor Liliana Bordeianou, MD, MPH, an associate professor of surgery at Harvard Medical School and chair of the Massachusetts General Hospital Colorectal and Pelvic Floor Centers, told this news organization.
“These diseases do not choose an arbitrary side in the pelvis,” she noted. “Instead, these diseases affect the entire pelvis and require a multidisciplinary and collaborative solution.”
MRD is a key component in that solution, providing dynamic evaluation of pelvic floor function and visualization of the complex interaction in pelvic compartments among patients with defecatory pelvic floor disorders, such as vaginal or uterine prolapse, constipation, incontinence, or other pelvic floor dysfunctions.
However, a key shortcoming has been a lack of consistency in nomenclature and the reporting of MRD findings among institutions and subspecialties.
Clinicians may wind up using different definitions for the same condition and different thresholds for grading severity, resulting in inconsistent communication not only between clinicians across institutions but even within the same institution, the report notes.
To address the situation, radiologists with the Pelvic Floor Dysfunction Disease Focused Panel of the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) published recommendations on MRD protocol and technique in April.
However, even with that guidance, there has been significant variability in the interpretation and utilization of MRD findings among specialties outside of radiology.
The new report was therefore developed to include input from the broad variety of specialists involved in the treatment of patients with pelvic floor disorders, including colorectal surgeons, urogynecologists, urologists, gynecologists, gastroenterologists, radiologists, physiotherapists, and other advanced care practitioners.
“The goal of this effort was to create a universal set of recommendations and language for MRD technique, interpretation, and reporting that can be utilized and carry the same significance across disciplines,” write the authors of the report, published in the American Journal of Roentgenology.
One key area addressed in the report is a recommendation that MRD can be performed in either the upright or supine position, which has been a topic of inconsistency, said Brooke Gurland, MD, medical director of the Pelvic Health Center at Stanford University, California, a co-author on the consensus statement.
“Supine versus upright position was a source of debate, but ultimately there was a consensus that supine position was acceptable,” she told said in an interview.
Regarding positioning, the recommendations conclude that “given the variable results from different studies, consortium members agreed that it is acceptable to perform MRD in the supine position when upright MRD is not available.”
“Importantly, consortium experts stressed that it is very important that this imaging be performed after proper patient education on the purpose of the examination,” they note.
Other recommendations delve into contrast medium considerations, such as the recommendation that MRD does not require the routine use of vaginal contrast medium for adequate imaging of pathology.
And guidance on the technique and grading of relevant pathology include a recommendation to use the pubococcygeal line (PCL) as a point of reference to quantify the prolapse of organs in all compartments of the pelvic floor.
“There is an increasing appreciation that most patients with pelvic organ prolapse experience dual or even triple compartment pathology, making it important to describe the observations in all three compartments to ensure the mobilization of the appropriate team of experts to treat the patient,” the authors note.
The consensus report features an interpretative template providing synopses of the recommendations, which can be adjusted and modified according to additional radiologic information, as well as individualized patient information or clinician preferences.
However, “the suggested verbiage and steps should be advocated as the minimum requirements when performing and interpreting MRD in patients with evacuation disorders of the pelvic floor,” the authors note.
Dr. Gurland added that, in addition to providing benefits in the present utilization of MRD, the clearer guidelines should help advance its use to improve patient care in the future.
“Standardizing imaging techniques, reporting, and language is critical to improving our understanding and then developing therapies for pelvic floor disorders,” she said.
“In the future, correlating MRD with surgical outcomes and identifying modifiable risk factors will improve patient care.”
In addition to being published in the AJR, the report was published concurrently in the journals Diseases of the Colon & Rectum, International Urogynecology Journal, and Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery.
The authors of the guidelines have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
New consensus guidelines from a multispecialty working group of the Pelvic Floor Disorders Consortium (PFDC) clear up inconsistencies in the use of magnetic resonance defecography (MRD) and provide universal recommendations on MRD technique, interpretation, reporting, and other factors.
“The consensus language used to describe pelvic floor disorders is critical, so as to allow the various experts who treat these patients [to] communicate and collaborate effectively with each other,” coauthor Liliana Bordeianou, MD, MPH, an associate professor of surgery at Harvard Medical School and chair of the Massachusetts General Hospital Colorectal and Pelvic Floor Centers, told this news organization.
“These diseases do not choose an arbitrary side in the pelvis,” she noted. “Instead, these diseases affect the entire pelvis and require a multidisciplinary and collaborative solution.”
MRD is a key component in that solution, providing dynamic evaluation of pelvic floor function and visualization of the complex interaction in pelvic compartments among patients with defecatory pelvic floor disorders, such as vaginal or uterine prolapse, constipation, incontinence, or other pelvic floor dysfunctions.
However, a key shortcoming has been a lack of consistency in nomenclature and the reporting of MRD findings among institutions and subspecialties.
Clinicians may wind up using different definitions for the same condition and different thresholds for grading severity, resulting in inconsistent communication not only between clinicians across institutions but even within the same institution, the report notes.
To address the situation, radiologists with the Pelvic Floor Dysfunction Disease Focused Panel of the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) published recommendations on MRD protocol and technique in April.
However, even with that guidance, there has been significant variability in the interpretation and utilization of MRD findings among specialties outside of radiology.
The new report was therefore developed to include input from the broad variety of specialists involved in the treatment of patients with pelvic floor disorders, including colorectal surgeons, urogynecologists, urologists, gynecologists, gastroenterologists, radiologists, physiotherapists, and other advanced care practitioners.
“The goal of this effort was to create a universal set of recommendations and language for MRD technique, interpretation, and reporting that can be utilized and carry the same significance across disciplines,” write the authors of the report, published in the American Journal of Roentgenology.
One key area addressed in the report is a recommendation that MRD can be performed in either the upright or supine position, which has been a topic of inconsistency, said Brooke Gurland, MD, medical director of the Pelvic Health Center at Stanford University, California, a co-author on the consensus statement.
“Supine versus upright position was a source of debate, but ultimately there was a consensus that supine position was acceptable,” she told said in an interview.
Regarding positioning, the recommendations conclude that “given the variable results from different studies, consortium members agreed that it is acceptable to perform MRD in the supine position when upright MRD is not available.”
“Importantly, consortium experts stressed that it is very important that this imaging be performed after proper patient education on the purpose of the examination,” they note.
Other recommendations delve into contrast medium considerations, such as the recommendation that MRD does not require the routine use of vaginal contrast medium for adequate imaging of pathology.
And guidance on the technique and grading of relevant pathology include a recommendation to use the pubococcygeal line (PCL) as a point of reference to quantify the prolapse of organs in all compartments of the pelvic floor.
“There is an increasing appreciation that most patients with pelvic organ prolapse experience dual or even triple compartment pathology, making it important to describe the observations in all three compartments to ensure the mobilization of the appropriate team of experts to treat the patient,” the authors note.
The consensus report features an interpretative template providing synopses of the recommendations, which can be adjusted and modified according to additional radiologic information, as well as individualized patient information or clinician preferences.
However, “the suggested verbiage and steps should be advocated as the minimum requirements when performing and interpreting MRD in patients with evacuation disorders of the pelvic floor,” the authors note.
Dr. Gurland added that, in addition to providing benefits in the present utilization of MRD, the clearer guidelines should help advance its use to improve patient care in the future.
“Standardizing imaging techniques, reporting, and language is critical to improving our understanding and then developing therapies for pelvic floor disorders,” she said.
“In the future, correlating MRD with surgical outcomes and identifying modifiable risk factors will improve patient care.”
In addition to being published in the AJR, the report was published concurrently in the journals Diseases of the Colon & Rectum, International Urogynecology Journal, and Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery.
The authors of the guidelines have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
New consensus guidelines from a multispecialty working group of the Pelvic Floor Disorders Consortium (PFDC) clear up inconsistencies in the use of magnetic resonance defecography (MRD) and provide universal recommendations on MRD technique, interpretation, reporting, and other factors.
“The consensus language used to describe pelvic floor disorders is critical, so as to allow the various experts who treat these patients [to] communicate and collaborate effectively with each other,” coauthor Liliana Bordeianou, MD, MPH, an associate professor of surgery at Harvard Medical School and chair of the Massachusetts General Hospital Colorectal and Pelvic Floor Centers, told this news organization.
“These diseases do not choose an arbitrary side in the pelvis,” she noted. “Instead, these diseases affect the entire pelvis and require a multidisciplinary and collaborative solution.”
MRD is a key component in that solution, providing dynamic evaluation of pelvic floor function and visualization of the complex interaction in pelvic compartments among patients with defecatory pelvic floor disorders, such as vaginal or uterine prolapse, constipation, incontinence, or other pelvic floor dysfunctions.
However, a key shortcoming has been a lack of consistency in nomenclature and the reporting of MRD findings among institutions and subspecialties.
Clinicians may wind up using different definitions for the same condition and different thresholds for grading severity, resulting in inconsistent communication not only between clinicians across institutions but even within the same institution, the report notes.
To address the situation, radiologists with the Pelvic Floor Dysfunction Disease Focused Panel of the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) published recommendations on MRD protocol and technique in April.
However, even with that guidance, there has been significant variability in the interpretation and utilization of MRD findings among specialties outside of radiology.
The new report was therefore developed to include input from the broad variety of specialists involved in the treatment of patients with pelvic floor disorders, including colorectal surgeons, urogynecologists, urologists, gynecologists, gastroenterologists, radiologists, physiotherapists, and other advanced care practitioners.
“The goal of this effort was to create a universal set of recommendations and language for MRD technique, interpretation, and reporting that can be utilized and carry the same significance across disciplines,” write the authors of the report, published in the American Journal of Roentgenology.
One key area addressed in the report is a recommendation that MRD can be performed in either the upright or supine position, which has been a topic of inconsistency, said Brooke Gurland, MD, medical director of the Pelvic Health Center at Stanford University, California, a co-author on the consensus statement.
“Supine versus upright position was a source of debate, but ultimately there was a consensus that supine position was acceptable,” she told said in an interview.
Regarding positioning, the recommendations conclude that “given the variable results from different studies, consortium members agreed that it is acceptable to perform MRD in the supine position when upright MRD is not available.”
“Importantly, consortium experts stressed that it is very important that this imaging be performed after proper patient education on the purpose of the examination,” they note.
Other recommendations delve into contrast medium considerations, such as the recommendation that MRD does not require the routine use of vaginal contrast medium for adequate imaging of pathology.
And guidance on the technique and grading of relevant pathology include a recommendation to use the pubococcygeal line (PCL) as a point of reference to quantify the prolapse of organs in all compartments of the pelvic floor.
“There is an increasing appreciation that most patients with pelvic organ prolapse experience dual or even triple compartment pathology, making it important to describe the observations in all three compartments to ensure the mobilization of the appropriate team of experts to treat the patient,” the authors note.
The consensus report features an interpretative template providing synopses of the recommendations, which can be adjusted and modified according to additional radiologic information, as well as individualized patient information or clinician preferences.
However, “the suggested verbiage and steps should be advocated as the minimum requirements when performing and interpreting MRD in patients with evacuation disorders of the pelvic floor,” the authors note.
Dr. Gurland added that, in addition to providing benefits in the present utilization of MRD, the clearer guidelines should help advance its use to improve patient care in the future.
“Standardizing imaging techniques, reporting, and language is critical to improving our understanding and then developing therapies for pelvic floor disorders,” she said.
“In the future, correlating MRD with surgical outcomes and identifying modifiable risk factors will improve patient care.”
In addition to being published in the AJR, the report was published concurrently in the journals Diseases of the Colon & Rectum, International Urogynecology Journal, and Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery.
The authors of the guidelines have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Improving Physicians’ Bowel Documentation on Geriatric Wards
From Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, Sheffield, UK, S5 7AU.
Objective: Constipation is widely prevalent in older adults and may result in complications such as urinary retention, delirium, and bowel obstruction. Previous studies have indicated that while the nursing staff do well in completing stool charts, doctors monitor them infrequently. This project aimed to improve the documentation of bowel movement by doctors on ward rounds to 85%, by the end of a 3-month period.
Methods: Baseline, postintervention, and sustainability data were collected from inpatient notes on weekdays on a geriatric ward in Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK. Posters and stickers of the poo emoji were placed on walls and in inpatient notes, respectively, as a reminder.
Results: Data on bowel activity documentation were collected from 28 patients. The baseline data showed that bowel activity was monitored daily on the ward 60.49% of the time. However, following the interventions, there was a significant increase in documentation, to 86.78%. The sustainability study showed that bowel activity was documented on the ward 56.56% of the time.
Conclusion: This study shows how a strong initial effect on behavioral change can be accomplished through simple interventions such as stickers and posters. As most wards currently still use paper notes, this is a generalizable model that other wards can trial. However, this study also shows the difficulty in maintaining behavioral change over extended periods of time.
Keywords: bowel movement; documentation; obstruction; constipation; geriatrics; incontinence; junior doctor; quality improvement.
Constipation is widely prevalent in the elderly, encountered frequently in both community and hospital medicine.1 Its estimated prevalence in adults over 84 years old is 34% for women and 25% for men, rising to up to 80% for long-term care residents.2
Chronic constipation is generally characterized by unsatisfactory defecation due to infrequent bowel emptying or difficulty with stool passage, which may lead to incomplete evacuation.2-4 Constipation in the elderly, in addition to causing abdominal pain, nausea, and reduced appetite, may result in complications such as fecal incontinence (and overflow diarrhea), urinary retention, delirium, and bowel obstruction, which may in result in life-threatening perforation.5,6 For inpatients on geriatric wards, these consequences may increase morbidity and mortality, while prolonging hospital stays, thereby also increasing exposure to hospital-acquired infections.7 Furthermore, constipation is also associated with impaired health-related quality of life.8
Management includes treating the cause, stopping contributing medications, early mobilization, diet modification, and, if all else fails, prescription laxatives. Therefore, early identification and appropriate treatment of constipation is beneficial in inpatient care, as well as when planning safe and patient-centered discharges.
Given the risks and complications of constipation in the elderly, we, a group of Foundation Year 2 (FY2) doctors in the UK Foundation Programme, decided to explore how doctors can help to recognize this condition early. Regular bowel movement documentation in patient notes on ward rounds is crucial, as it has been shown to reduce constipation-associated complications.5 However, complications from constipation can take significant amounts of time to develop and, therefore, documenting bowel movements on a daily basis is not necessary.
Based on these observations along with targets set out in previous studies,7 our aim was to improve documentation of bowel movement on ward rounds to 85% by March 2020.
Methods
Before the data collection process, a fishbone diagram was designed to identify the potential causes of poor documentation of bowel movement on geriatric wards. There were several aspects that were reviewed, including, for example, patients, health care professionals, organizational policies, procedures, and equipment. It was then decided to focus on raising awareness of the documentation of bowel movement by doctors specifically.
Retrospective data were collected from the inpatient paper notes of 28 patients on Brearley 6, a geriatric ward at the Northern General Hospital within Sheffield Teaching Hospitals (STH), on weekdays over a 3-week period. The baseline data collected included the bed number of the patient, whether or not bowel movement on initial ward round was documented, and whether it was the junior, registrar, or consultant leading the ward round. End-of-life and discharged patients were excluded (Table).
The interventions consisted of posters and stickers. Posters were displayed on Brearley 6, including the doctors’ office, nurses’ station, and around the bays where notes were kept, in order to emphasize their importance. The stickers of the poo emoji were also printed and placed at the front of each set of inpatient paper notes as a reminder for the doctor documenting on the ward round. The interventions were also introduced in the morning board meeting to ensure all staff on Brearley 6 were aware of them.
Data were collected on weekdays over a 3-week period starting 2 weeks after the interventions were put in place (Table). In order to assess that the intervention had been sustained, data were again collected 1 month later over a 2-week period (Table). Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington, USA) was used to analyze all data, and control charts were used to assess variability in the data.
Results
The baseline data showed that bowel movement was documented 60.49% of the time by doctors on the initial ward round before intervention, as illustrated in Figure 1. There was no evidence of an out-of-control process in this baseline data set.
The comparison between the preintervention and postintervention data is illustrated in Figure 1. The postintervention data, which were taken 2 weeks after intervention, showed a significant increase in the documentation of bowel movements, to 86.78%. The figure displays a number of features consistent with an out-of-control process: beyond limits (≥ 1 points beyond control limits), Zone A rule (2 out of 3 consecutive points beyond 2 standard deviations from the mean), Zone B rule (4 out of 5 consecutive points beyond 1 standard deviation from the mean), and Zone C rule (≥ 8 consecutive points on 1 side of the mean). These findings demonstrate a special cause variation in the documentation of bowel movements.
Figure 2 shows the sustainability of the intervention, which averaged 56.56% postintervention nearly 2 months later. The data returned to preintervention variability levels.
Discussion
Our project explored an important issue that was frequently encountered by department clinicians. Our team of FY2 doctors, in general, had little experience with quality improvement. We have developed our understanding and experience through planning, making, and measuring improvement.
It was challenging deciding on how to deal with the problem. A number of ways were considered to improve the paper rounding chart, but the nursing team had already planned to make changes to it. Bowel activity is mainly documented by nursing staff, but there was no specific protocol for recognizing constipation and when to inform the medical team. We decided to focus on doctors’ documentation in patient notes during the ward round, as this is where the decision regarding management of bowels is made, including interventions that could only be done by doctors, such as prescribing laxatives.
Strom et al9 have described a number of successful quality improvement interventions, and we decided to follow the authors’ guidance to implement a reminder system strategy using both posters and stickers to prompt doctors to document bowel activity. Both of these were simple, and the text on the poster was concise. The only cost incurred on the project was from printing the stickers; this totalled £2.99 (US $4.13). Individual stickers for each ward round entry were considered but not used, as it would create an additional task for doctors.
The data initially indicated that the interventions had their desired effect. However, this positive change was unsustainable, most likely suggesting that the novelty of the stickers and posters wore off at some point, leading to junior doctors no longer noticing them. Further Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles should examine the reasons why the change is difficult to sustain and implement new policies that aim to overcome them.
There were a number of limitations to this study. A patient could be discharged before data collection, which was done twice weekly. This could have resulted in missed data during the collection period. In addition, the accuracy of the documentation is dependent on nursing staff correctly recording—as well as the doctors correctly viewing—all sources of information on bowel activity. Observer bias is possible, too, as a steering group member was involved in data collection. Their awareness of the project could cause a positive skew in the data. And, unfortunately, the project came to an abrupt end because of COVID-19 cases on the ward.
We examined the daily documentation of bowel activity, which may not be necessary considering that internationally recognized constipation classifications, such as the Rome III criteria, define constipation as fewer than 3 bowel movements per week.10 However, the data collection sheet did not include patient identifiers, so it was impossible to determine whether bowel activity had been documented 3 or more times per week for each patient. This is important because a clinician may only decide to act if there is no bowel movement activity for 3 or more days.
Because our data were collected on a single geriatric ward, which had an emphasis on Parkinson’s disease, it is unclear whether our findings are generalizable to other clinical areas in STH. However, constipation is common in the elderly, so it is likely to be relevant to other wards, as more than a third of STH hospital beds are occupied by patients aged 75 years and older.11
Conclusion
Overall, our study highlights the fact that monitoring bowel activity is important on a geriatric ward. Recognizing constipation early prevents complications and delays to discharge. As mentioned earlier, our aim was achieved initially but not sustained. Therefore, future development should focus on sustainability. For example, laxative-focused ward rounds have shown to be effective at recognizing and preventing constipation by intervening early.12 Future cycles that we considered included using an electronic reminder on the hospital IT system, as the trust is aiming to introduce electronic documentation. Focus could also be placed on improving documentation in bowel charts by ward staff. This could be achieved by organizing regular educational sessions on the complications of constipation and when to inform the medical team regarding concerns.
Acknowledgments: The authors thank Dr. Jamie Kapur, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, for his guidance and supervision, as well as our collaborators: Rachel Hallam, Claire Walker, Monisha Chakravorty, and Hamza Khan.
Corresponding author: Alexander P. Noar, BMBCh, BA, 10 Stanhope Gardens, London, N6 5TS; [email protected].
Financial disclosures: None.
1. Forootan M, Bagheri N, Darvishi M. Chronic constipation: A review of literature. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018;97:e10631. doi:10.1097/MD.00000000000.10631
2. Schuster BG, Kosar L, Kamrul R. Constipation in older adults: stepwise approach to keep things moving. Can Fam Physician. 2015;61:152-158.
3. Gray JR. What is chronic constipation? Definition and diagnosis. Can J Gastroenterol. 2011;25 (Suppl B):7B-10B.
4. American Gastroenterological Association, Bharucha AE, Dorn SD, Lembo A, Pressman A. American Gastroenterological Association medical position statement on constipation. Gastroenterology. 2013;144:211-217. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2012.10.029
5. Maung TZ, Singh K. Regular monitoring with stool chart prevents constipation, urinary retention and delirium in elderly patients: an audit leading to clinical effectiveness, efficiency and patient centredness. Future Healthc J. 2019;6(Suppl 2):3. doi:10.7861/futurehosp.6-2s-s3
6. Mostafa SM, Bhandari S, Ritchie G, et al. Constipation and its implications in the critically ill patient. Br J Anaesth. 2003;91:815-819. doi:10.1093/bja/aeg275
7. Jackson R, Cheng P, Moreman S, et al. “The constipation conundrum”: Improving recognition of constipation on a gastroenterology ward. BMJ Qual Improv Rep. 2016;5(1):u212167.w3007. doi:10.1136/bmjquality.u212167.w3007
8. Rao S, Go JT. Update on the management of constipation in the elderly: new treatment options. Clin Interv Aging. 2010;5:163-171. doi:10.2147/cia.s8100
9. Strom KL. Quality improvement interventions: what works? J Healthc Qual. 2001;23(5):4-24. doi:10.1111/j.1945-1474.2001.tb00368.x
10. De Giorgio R, Ruggeri E, Stanghellini V, et al. Chronic constipation in the elderly: a primer for the gastroenterologist. BMC Gastroenterol. 2015;15:130. doi:10.1186/s12876-015-366-3
11. The Health Foundation. Improving the flow of older people. April 2013. Accessed August 11, 2021. https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/sheff-study.pdf
12. Linton A. Improving management of constipation in an inpatient setting using a care bundle. BMJ Qual Improv Rep. 2014;3(1):u201903.w1002. doi:10.1136/bmjquality.u201903.w1002
From Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, Sheffield, UK, S5 7AU.
Objective: Constipation is widely prevalent in older adults and may result in complications such as urinary retention, delirium, and bowel obstruction. Previous studies have indicated that while the nursing staff do well in completing stool charts, doctors monitor them infrequently. This project aimed to improve the documentation of bowel movement by doctors on ward rounds to 85%, by the end of a 3-month period.
Methods: Baseline, postintervention, and sustainability data were collected from inpatient notes on weekdays on a geriatric ward in Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK. Posters and stickers of the poo emoji were placed on walls and in inpatient notes, respectively, as a reminder.
Results: Data on bowel activity documentation were collected from 28 patients. The baseline data showed that bowel activity was monitored daily on the ward 60.49% of the time. However, following the interventions, there was a significant increase in documentation, to 86.78%. The sustainability study showed that bowel activity was documented on the ward 56.56% of the time.
Conclusion: This study shows how a strong initial effect on behavioral change can be accomplished through simple interventions such as stickers and posters. As most wards currently still use paper notes, this is a generalizable model that other wards can trial. However, this study also shows the difficulty in maintaining behavioral change over extended periods of time.
Keywords: bowel movement; documentation; obstruction; constipation; geriatrics; incontinence; junior doctor; quality improvement.
Constipation is widely prevalent in the elderly, encountered frequently in both community and hospital medicine.1 Its estimated prevalence in adults over 84 years old is 34% for women and 25% for men, rising to up to 80% for long-term care residents.2
Chronic constipation is generally characterized by unsatisfactory defecation due to infrequent bowel emptying or difficulty with stool passage, which may lead to incomplete evacuation.2-4 Constipation in the elderly, in addition to causing abdominal pain, nausea, and reduced appetite, may result in complications such as fecal incontinence (and overflow diarrhea), urinary retention, delirium, and bowel obstruction, which may in result in life-threatening perforation.5,6 For inpatients on geriatric wards, these consequences may increase morbidity and mortality, while prolonging hospital stays, thereby also increasing exposure to hospital-acquired infections.7 Furthermore, constipation is also associated with impaired health-related quality of life.8
Management includes treating the cause, stopping contributing medications, early mobilization, diet modification, and, if all else fails, prescription laxatives. Therefore, early identification and appropriate treatment of constipation is beneficial in inpatient care, as well as when planning safe and patient-centered discharges.
Given the risks and complications of constipation in the elderly, we, a group of Foundation Year 2 (FY2) doctors in the UK Foundation Programme, decided to explore how doctors can help to recognize this condition early. Regular bowel movement documentation in patient notes on ward rounds is crucial, as it has been shown to reduce constipation-associated complications.5 However, complications from constipation can take significant amounts of time to develop and, therefore, documenting bowel movements on a daily basis is not necessary.
Based on these observations along with targets set out in previous studies,7 our aim was to improve documentation of bowel movement on ward rounds to 85% by March 2020.
Methods
Before the data collection process, a fishbone diagram was designed to identify the potential causes of poor documentation of bowel movement on geriatric wards. There were several aspects that were reviewed, including, for example, patients, health care professionals, organizational policies, procedures, and equipment. It was then decided to focus on raising awareness of the documentation of bowel movement by doctors specifically.
Retrospective data were collected from the inpatient paper notes of 28 patients on Brearley 6, a geriatric ward at the Northern General Hospital within Sheffield Teaching Hospitals (STH), on weekdays over a 3-week period. The baseline data collected included the bed number of the patient, whether or not bowel movement on initial ward round was documented, and whether it was the junior, registrar, or consultant leading the ward round. End-of-life and discharged patients were excluded (Table).
The interventions consisted of posters and stickers. Posters were displayed on Brearley 6, including the doctors’ office, nurses’ station, and around the bays where notes were kept, in order to emphasize their importance. The stickers of the poo emoji were also printed and placed at the front of each set of inpatient paper notes as a reminder for the doctor documenting on the ward round. The interventions were also introduced in the morning board meeting to ensure all staff on Brearley 6 were aware of them.
Data were collected on weekdays over a 3-week period starting 2 weeks after the interventions were put in place (Table). In order to assess that the intervention had been sustained, data were again collected 1 month later over a 2-week period (Table). Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington, USA) was used to analyze all data, and control charts were used to assess variability in the data.
Results
The baseline data showed that bowel movement was documented 60.49% of the time by doctors on the initial ward round before intervention, as illustrated in Figure 1. There was no evidence of an out-of-control process in this baseline data set.
The comparison between the preintervention and postintervention data is illustrated in Figure 1. The postintervention data, which were taken 2 weeks after intervention, showed a significant increase in the documentation of bowel movements, to 86.78%. The figure displays a number of features consistent with an out-of-control process: beyond limits (≥ 1 points beyond control limits), Zone A rule (2 out of 3 consecutive points beyond 2 standard deviations from the mean), Zone B rule (4 out of 5 consecutive points beyond 1 standard deviation from the mean), and Zone C rule (≥ 8 consecutive points on 1 side of the mean). These findings demonstrate a special cause variation in the documentation of bowel movements.
Figure 2 shows the sustainability of the intervention, which averaged 56.56% postintervention nearly 2 months later. The data returned to preintervention variability levels.
Discussion
Our project explored an important issue that was frequently encountered by department clinicians. Our team of FY2 doctors, in general, had little experience with quality improvement. We have developed our understanding and experience through planning, making, and measuring improvement.
It was challenging deciding on how to deal with the problem. A number of ways were considered to improve the paper rounding chart, but the nursing team had already planned to make changes to it. Bowel activity is mainly documented by nursing staff, but there was no specific protocol for recognizing constipation and when to inform the medical team. We decided to focus on doctors’ documentation in patient notes during the ward round, as this is where the decision regarding management of bowels is made, including interventions that could only be done by doctors, such as prescribing laxatives.
Strom et al9 have described a number of successful quality improvement interventions, and we decided to follow the authors’ guidance to implement a reminder system strategy using both posters and stickers to prompt doctors to document bowel activity. Both of these were simple, and the text on the poster was concise. The only cost incurred on the project was from printing the stickers; this totalled £2.99 (US $4.13). Individual stickers for each ward round entry were considered but not used, as it would create an additional task for doctors.
The data initially indicated that the interventions had their desired effect. However, this positive change was unsustainable, most likely suggesting that the novelty of the stickers and posters wore off at some point, leading to junior doctors no longer noticing them. Further Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles should examine the reasons why the change is difficult to sustain and implement new policies that aim to overcome them.
There were a number of limitations to this study. A patient could be discharged before data collection, which was done twice weekly. This could have resulted in missed data during the collection period. In addition, the accuracy of the documentation is dependent on nursing staff correctly recording—as well as the doctors correctly viewing—all sources of information on bowel activity. Observer bias is possible, too, as a steering group member was involved in data collection. Their awareness of the project could cause a positive skew in the data. And, unfortunately, the project came to an abrupt end because of COVID-19 cases on the ward.
We examined the daily documentation of bowel activity, which may not be necessary considering that internationally recognized constipation classifications, such as the Rome III criteria, define constipation as fewer than 3 bowel movements per week.10 However, the data collection sheet did not include patient identifiers, so it was impossible to determine whether bowel activity had been documented 3 or more times per week for each patient. This is important because a clinician may only decide to act if there is no bowel movement activity for 3 or more days.
Because our data were collected on a single geriatric ward, which had an emphasis on Parkinson’s disease, it is unclear whether our findings are generalizable to other clinical areas in STH. However, constipation is common in the elderly, so it is likely to be relevant to other wards, as more than a third of STH hospital beds are occupied by patients aged 75 years and older.11
Conclusion
Overall, our study highlights the fact that monitoring bowel activity is important on a geriatric ward. Recognizing constipation early prevents complications and delays to discharge. As mentioned earlier, our aim was achieved initially but not sustained. Therefore, future development should focus on sustainability. For example, laxative-focused ward rounds have shown to be effective at recognizing and preventing constipation by intervening early.12 Future cycles that we considered included using an electronic reminder on the hospital IT system, as the trust is aiming to introduce electronic documentation. Focus could also be placed on improving documentation in bowel charts by ward staff. This could be achieved by organizing regular educational sessions on the complications of constipation and when to inform the medical team regarding concerns.
Acknowledgments: The authors thank Dr. Jamie Kapur, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, for his guidance and supervision, as well as our collaborators: Rachel Hallam, Claire Walker, Monisha Chakravorty, and Hamza Khan.
Corresponding author: Alexander P. Noar, BMBCh, BA, 10 Stanhope Gardens, London, N6 5TS; [email protected].
Financial disclosures: None.
From Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, Sheffield, UK, S5 7AU.
Objective: Constipation is widely prevalent in older adults and may result in complications such as urinary retention, delirium, and bowel obstruction. Previous studies have indicated that while the nursing staff do well in completing stool charts, doctors monitor them infrequently. This project aimed to improve the documentation of bowel movement by doctors on ward rounds to 85%, by the end of a 3-month period.
Methods: Baseline, postintervention, and sustainability data were collected from inpatient notes on weekdays on a geriatric ward in Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK. Posters and stickers of the poo emoji were placed on walls and in inpatient notes, respectively, as a reminder.
Results: Data on bowel activity documentation were collected from 28 patients. The baseline data showed that bowel activity was monitored daily on the ward 60.49% of the time. However, following the interventions, there was a significant increase in documentation, to 86.78%. The sustainability study showed that bowel activity was documented on the ward 56.56% of the time.
Conclusion: This study shows how a strong initial effect on behavioral change can be accomplished through simple interventions such as stickers and posters. As most wards currently still use paper notes, this is a generalizable model that other wards can trial. However, this study also shows the difficulty in maintaining behavioral change over extended periods of time.
Keywords: bowel movement; documentation; obstruction; constipation; geriatrics; incontinence; junior doctor; quality improvement.
Constipation is widely prevalent in the elderly, encountered frequently in both community and hospital medicine.1 Its estimated prevalence in adults over 84 years old is 34% for women and 25% for men, rising to up to 80% for long-term care residents.2
Chronic constipation is generally characterized by unsatisfactory defecation due to infrequent bowel emptying or difficulty with stool passage, which may lead to incomplete evacuation.2-4 Constipation in the elderly, in addition to causing abdominal pain, nausea, and reduced appetite, may result in complications such as fecal incontinence (and overflow diarrhea), urinary retention, delirium, and bowel obstruction, which may in result in life-threatening perforation.5,6 For inpatients on geriatric wards, these consequences may increase morbidity and mortality, while prolonging hospital stays, thereby also increasing exposure to hospital-acquired infections.7 Furthermore, constipation is also associated with impaired health-related quality of life.8
Management includes treating the cause, stopping contributing medications, early mobilization, diet modification, and, if all else fails, prescription laxatives. Therefore, early identification and appropriate treatment of constipation is beneficial in inpatient care, as well as when planning safe and patient-centered discharges.
Given the risks and complications of constipation in the elderly, we, a group of Foundation Year 2 (FY2) doctors in the UK Foundation Programme, decided to explore how doctors can help to recognize this condition early. Regular bowel movement documentation in patient notes on ward rounds is crucial, as it has been shown to reduce constipation-associated complications.5 However, complications from constipation can take significant amounts of time to develop and, therefore, documenting bowel movements on a daily basis is not necessary.
Based on these observations along with targets set out in previous studies,7 our aim was to improve documentation of bowel movement on ward rounds to 85% by March 2020.
Methods
Before the data collection process, a fishbone diagram was designed to identify the potential causes of poor documentation of bowel movement on geriatric wards. There were several aspects that were reviewed, including, for example, patients, health care professionals, organizational policies, procedures, and equipment. It was then decided to focus on raising awareness of the documentation of bowel movement by doctors specifically.
Retrospective data were collected from the inpatient paper notes of 28 patients on Brearley 6, a geriatric ward at the Northern General Hospital within Sheffield Teaching Hospitals (STH), on weekdays over a 3-week period. The baseline data collected included the bed number of the patient, whether or not bowel movement on initial ward round was documented, and whether it was the junior, registrar, or consultant leading the ward round. End-of-life and discharged patients were excluded (Table).
The interventions consisted of posters and stickers. Posters were displayed on Brearley 6, including the doctors’ office, nurses’ station, and around the bays where notes were kept, in order to emphasize their importance. The stickers of the poo emoji were also printed and placed at the front of each set of inpatient paper notes as a reminder for the doctor documenting on the ward round. The interventions were also introduced in the morning board meeting to ensure all staff on Brearley 6 were aware of them.
Data were collected on weekdays over a 3-week period starting 2 weeks after the interventions were put in place (Table). In order to assess that the intervention had been sustained, data were again collected 1 month later over a 2-week period (Table). Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington, USA) was used to analyze all data, and control charts were used to assess variability in the data.
Results
The baseline data showed that bowel movement was documented 60.49% of the time by doctors on the initial ward round before intervention, as illustrated in Figure 1. There was no evidence of an out-of-control process in this baseline data set.
The comparison between the preintervention and postintervention data is illustrated in Figure 1. The postintervention data, which were taken 2 weeks after intervention, showed a significant increase in the documentation of bowel movements, to 86.78%. The figure displays a number of features consistent with an out-of-control process: beyond limits (≥ 1 points beyond control limits), Zone A rule (2 out of 3 consecutive points beyond 2 standard deviations from the mean), Zone B rule (4 out of 5 consecutive points beyond 1 standard deviation from the mean), and Zone C rule (≥ 8 consecutive points on 1 side of the mean). These findings demonstrate a special cause variation in the documentation of bowel movements.
Figure 2 shows the sustainability of the intervention, which averaged 56.56% postintervention nearly 2 months later. The data returned to preintervention variability levels.
Discussion
Our project explored an important issue that was frequently encountered by department clinicians. Our team of FY2 doctors, in general, had little experience with quality improvement. We have developed our understanding and experience through planning, making, and measuring improvement.
It was challenging deciding on how to deal with the problem. A number of ways were considered to improve the paper rounding chart, but the nursing team had already planned to make changes to it. Bowel activity is mainly documented by nursing staff, but there was no specific protocol for recognizing constipation and when to inform the medical team. We decided to focus on doctors’ documentation in patient notes during the ward round, as this is where the decision regarding management of bowels is made, including interventions that could only be done by doctors, such as prescribing laxatives.
Strom et al9 have described a number of successful quality improvement interventions, and we decided to follow the authors’ guidance to implement a reminder system strategy using both posters and stickers to prompt doctors to document bowel activity. Both of these were simple, and the text on the poster was concise. The only cost incurred on the project was from printing the stickers; this totalled £2.99 (US $4.13). Individual stickers for each ward round entry were considered but not used, as it would create an additional task for doctors.
The data initially indicated that the interventions had their desired effect. However, this positive change was unsustainable, most likely suggesting that the novelty of the stickers and posters wore off at some point, leading to junior doctors no longer noticing them. Further Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles should examine the reasons why the change is difficult to sustain and implement new policies that aim to overcome them.
There were a number of limitations to this study. A patient could be discharged before data collection, which was done twice weekly. This could have resulted in missed data during the collection period. In addition, the accuracy of the documentation is dependent on nursing staff correctly recording—as well as the doctors correctly viewing—all sources of information on bowel activity. Observer bias is possible, too, as a steering group member was involved in data collection. Their awareness of the project could cause a positive skew in the data. And, unfortunately, the project came to an abrupt end because of COVID-19 cases on the ward.
We examined the daily documentation of bowel activity, which may not be necessary considering that internationally recognized constipation classifications, such as the Rome III criteria, define constipation as fewer than 3 bowel movements per week.10 However, the data collection sheet did not include patient identifiers, so it was impossible to determine whether bowel activity had been documented 3 or more times per week for each patient. This is important because a clinician may only decide to act if there is no bowel movement activity for 3 or more days.
Because our data were collected on a single geriatric ward, which had an emphasis on Parkinson’s disease, it is unclear whether our findings are generalizable to other clinical areas in STH. However, constipation is common in the elderly, so it is likely to be relevant to other wards, as more than a third of STH hospital beds are occupied by patients aged 75 years and older.11
Conclusion
Overall, our study highlights the fact that monitoring bowel activity is important on a geriatric ward. Recognizing constipation early prevents complications and delays to discharge. As mentioned earlier, our aim was achieved initially but not sustained. Therefore, future development should focus on sustainability. For example, laxative-focused ward rounds have shown to be effective at recognizing and preventing constipation by intervening early.12 Future cycles that we considered included using an electronic reminder on the hospital IT system, as the trust is aiming to introduce electronic documentation. Focus could also be placed on improving documentation in bowel charts by ward staff. This could be achieved by organizing regular educational sessions on the complications of constipation and when to inform the medical team regarding concerns.
Acknowledgments: The authors thank Dr. Jamie Kapur, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, for his guidance and supervision, as well as our collaborators: Rachel Hallam, Claire Walker, Monisha Chakravorty, and Hamza Khan.
Corresponding author: Alexander P. Noar, BMBCh, BA, 10 Stanhope Gardens, London, N6 5TS; [email protected].
Financial disclosures: None.
1. Forootan M, Bagheri N, Darvishi M. Chronic constipation: A review of literature. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018;97:e10631. doi:10.1097/MD.00000000000.10631
2. Schuster BG, Kosar L, Kamrul R. Constipation in older adults: stepwise approach to keep things moving. Can Fam Physician. 2015;61:152-158.
3. Gray JR. What is chronic constipation? Definition and diagnosis. Can J Gastroenterol. 2011;25 (Suppl B):7B-10B.
4. American Gastroenterological Association, Bharucha AE, Dorn SD, Lembo A, Pressman A. American Gastroenterological Association medical position statement on constipation. Gastroenterology. 2013;144:211-217. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2012.10.029
5. Maung TZ, Singh K. Regular monitoring with stool chart prevents constipation, urinary retention and delirium in elderly patients: an audit leading to clinical effectiveness, efficiency and patient centredness. Future Healthc J. 2019;6(Suppl 2):3. doi:10.7861/futurehosp.6-2s-s3
6. Mostafa SM, Bhandari S, Ritchie G, et al. Constipation and its implications in the critically ill patient. Br J Anaesth. 2003;91:815-819. doi:10.1093/bja/aeg275
7. Jackson R, Cheng P, Moreman S, et al. “The constipation conundrum”: Improving recognition of constipation on a gastroenterology ward. BMJ Qual Improv Rep. 2016;5(1):u212167.w3007. doi:10.1136/bmjquality.u212167.w3007
8. Rao S, Go JT. Update on the management of constipation in the elderly: new treatment options. Clin Interv Aging. 2010;5:163-171. doi:10.2147/cia.s8100
9. Strom KL. Quality improvement interventions: what works? J Healthc Qual. 2001;23(5):4-24. doi:10.1111/j.1945-1474.2001.tb00368.x
10. De Giorgio R, Ruggeri E, Stanghellini V, et al. Chronic constipation in the elderly: a primer for the gastroenterologist. BMC Gastroenterol. 2015;15:130. doi:10.1186/s12876-015-366-3
11. The Health Foundation. Improving the flow of older people. April 2013. Accessed August 11, 2021. https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/sheff-study.pdf
12. Linton A. Improving management of constipation in an inpatient setting using a care bundle. BMJ Qual Improv Rep. 2014;3(1):u201903.w1002. doi:10.1136/bmjquality.u201903.w1002
1. Forootan M, Bagheri N, Darvishi M. Chronic constipation: A review of literature. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018;97:e10631. doi:10.1097/MD.00000000000.10631
2. Schuster BG, Kosar L, Kamrul R. Constipation in older adults: stepwise approach to keep things moving. Can Fam Physician. 2015;61:152-158.
3. Gray JR. What is chronic constipation? Definition and diagnosis. Can J Gastroenterol. 2011;25 (Suppl B):7B-10B.
4. American Gastroenterological Association, Bharucha AE, Dorn SD, Lembo A, Pressman A. American Gastroenterological Association medical position statement on constipation. Gastroenterology. 2013;144:211-217. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2012.10.029
5. Maung TZ, Singh K. Regular monitoring with stool chart prevents constipation, urinary retention and delirium in elderly patients: an audit leading to clinical effectiveness, efficiency and patient centredness. Future Healthc J. 2019;6(Suppl 2):3. doi:10.7861/futurehosp.6-2s-s3
6. Mostafa SM, Bhandari S, Ritchie G, et al. Constipation and its implications in the critically ill patient. Br J Anaesth. 2003;91:815-819. doi:10.1093/bja/aeg275
7. Jackson R, Cheng P, Moreman S, et al. “The constipation conundrum”: Improving recognition of constipation on a gastroenterology ward. BMJ Qual Improv Rep. 2016;5(1):u212167.w3007. doi:10.1136/bmjquality.u212167.w3007
8. Rao S, Go JT. Update on the management of constipation in the elderly: new treatment options. Clin Interv Aging. 2010;5:163-171. doi:10.2147/cia.s8100
9. Strom KL. Quality improvement interventions: what works? J Healthc Qual. 2001;23(5):4-24. doi:10.1111/j.1945-1474.2001.tb00368.x
10. De Giorgio R, Ruggeri E, Stanghellini V, et al. Chronic constipation in the elderly: a primer for the gastroenterologist. BMC Gastroenterol. 2015;15:130. doi:10.1186/s12876-015-366-3
11. The Health Foundation. Improving the flow of older people. April 2013. Accessed August 11, 2021. https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/sheff-study.pdf
12. Linton A. Improving management of constipation in an inpatient setting using a care bundle. BMJ Qual Improv Rep. 2014;3(1):u201903.w1002. doi:10.1136/bmjquality.u201903.w1002