International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2016
Exploring the relationship between fall risk-increasing drugs and fall-related fractures.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
De Winter Sabrina, Vanwynsberghe Sarah, Foulon Veerle, Dejaeger Eddy, Flamaing Johan, Sermon An, Van der Linden Lorenz, Spriet Isabel
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Hospital admissions due to fall-related fractures are a major problem in the aging population. Several risk factors have been identified, including drug use. Most studies often retrieved prescription-only drugs from national databases. These are associated with some limitations as they do not always reliably reproduce the complete patient's active drug list.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between the number of FRIDs intake identified by a standardised medication reconciliation process and a fall-related fracture leading to a hospital admission in older adults.
SETTING: The first cohort has been recruited from one traumatology ward of a tertiary teaching hospital in Belgium and the second cohort has been recruited from 11 community pharmacies in Belgium.
METHOD: A prospective study with two individually matched cohorts was performed. Adult patients (≥75 years) admitted with an injury due to a fall were included in the first cohort (faller group). The second cohort consisted of patients who did not suffer from a fall within the last 6 months (non-faller group). Matching was performed for age, gender, place of residence and use of a walking aid. In both groups, clinical pharmacists and undergraduate pharmacy students obtained the medication history, using a standardised approach. A list of drugs considered to increase the risk of falling was created. It included cardiovascular drugs and drugs acting on the nervous system. A linear mixed model was used to compare the number of fall risk-increasing drugs between fallers and non-fallers.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The number of fall risk-increasing drugs in a faller versus a non-faller group.
RESULTS: Sixty-one patients were matched with 121 non-fallers. Patients received on average 3.1 ± 2.1 and 3.2 ± 1.8 fall risk-increasing drugs in the faller and in the non-faller group, respectively. The mean number of fall risk-increasing drugs was comparable in both groups (p = 0.844), even after adjusting for alcohol consumption, fear of falling, vision and foot problems (p = 0.721).
CONCLUSION: In a sample of hospitalised patients admitted for a fall-related injury, no significant difference in the number of fall risk-increasing drugs versus that of an outpatient group of non-fallers was found.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between the number of FRIDs intake identified by a standardised medication reconciliation process and a fall-related fracture leading to a hospital admission in older adults.
SETTING: The first cohort has been recruited from one traumatology ward of a tertiary teaching hospital in Belgium and the second cohort has been recruited from 11 community pharmacies in Belgium.
METHOD: A prospective study with two individually matched cohorts was performed. Adult patients (≥75 years) admitted with an injury due to a fall were included in the first cohort (faller group). The second cohort consisted of patients who did not suffer from a fall within the last 6 months (non-faller group). Matching was performed for age, gender, place of residence and use of a walking aid. In both groups, clinical pharmacists and undergraduate pharmacy students obtained the medication history, using a standardised approach. A list of drugs considered to increase the risk of falling was created. It included cardiovascular drugs and drugs acting on the nervous system. A linear mixed model was used to compare the number of fall risk-increasing drugs between fallers and non-fallers.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The number of fall risk-increasing drugs in a faller versus a non-faller group.
RESULTS: Sixty-one patients were matched with 121 non-fallers. Patients received on average 3.1 ± 2.1 and 3.2 ± 1.8 fall risk-increasing drugs in the faller and in the non-faller group, respectively. The mean number of fall risk-increasing drugs was comparable in both groups (p = 0.844), even after adjusting for alcohol consumption, fear of falling, vision and foot problems (p = 0.721).
CONCLUSION: In a sample of hospitalised patients admitted for a fall-related injury, no significant difference in the number of fall risk-increasing drugs versus that of an outpatient group of non-fallers was found.