ABSTRACT
Objectives: To estimate the anticholinergic burden in geriatric patients using two scales and to assess the degree of agreement between them. Methods: Data from an observational study conducted in a primary health care service were used. Anticholinergic burden was assessed using the Belgian Scale Muscarinic Acetylcholinergic Receptor ANTagonist Exposure Scale and the Brazilian Scale of Medicines with Anticholinergic Activity. The cumulative anticholinergic burden score was classified using a categorical approach: Brazilian scale (0: none; 1 2: low; ≥ 3: high) and Belgian scale (0: none; 0.5 1.5: low; ≥ 2: high). The degree of agreement between the two instruments was obtained through Cohen's kappa coefficient. Results: A total of 374 older people were included, most of them female and aged between 60 and 69 years. At least one potentially inappropriate drug with anticholinergic activity was used by 60.70% of patients according to the Brazilian scale and 32.89% by the Belgian scale. On average, 20.85% were under high anticholinergic exposure. Overall, on both scales, the most commonly recurrent medications were those indicated for the treatment of psychiatric disorders. Agreement between the scales was moderate (Kappa = 0.43). Conclusions: A high percentage of older adults was exposed to drugs with an anticholinergic burden, posing risks to health and quality of life. Consensus is needed on how anticholinergic burden is calculated by these scores, as well as standardization of the list of included drugs.
Objetivos: Estimar a carga anticolinérgica em idosos com base em duas escalas e avaliar o grau de concordância entre estas. Metodologia: Foram utilizados dados de um estudo observacional realizado em um serviço de atenção primária. A carga anticolinérgica foi avaliada pela escala belga Muscarinic Acetylcholinergic Receptor ANTagonist Exposure Scale e da Escala Brasileira de Medicamentos com Atividade Anticolinérgica. A pontuação da carga anticolinérgica cumulativa foi classificada utilizando uma abordagem categórica: escala brasileira (0: nenhuma, 1 2: baixa, ≥ 3: alta) e escala belga (0: nenhuma, 0,5 1,5: baixa, ≥ 2: alta). O grau de concordância entre as duas ferramentas foi obtido por meio do coeficiente Capa de Cohen. Resultados: Foram incluídos 374 idosos, a maioria do sexo feminino e com idade entre 60 a 69 anos. O uso de pelo menos um medicamento potencialmente inapropriado com atividade anticolinérgica foi verificado em 60,70% dos idosos com a aplicação da escala brasileira e em 32,89% com a escala belga. Em média, 20.85% estavam sob alta exposição anticolinérgica. De modo geral, os medicamentos mais recorrentes, para ambas as escalas, foram os indicados para o tratamento de transtornos psiquiátricos. A concordância entre as escalas foi moderada (Capa = 0,43). Conclusão: Um percentual elevado de idosos estava exposto a medicamentos com carga anticolinérgica, representando riscos para a saúde e a qualidade de vida. É necessário um consenso sobre como calcular a carga anticolinérgica nos diferentes escores, bem como a padronização da lista de medicamentos incluídos.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Aged , Health Centers , Cholinergic Antagonists/administration & dosage , Inappropriate Prescribing/statistics & numerical data , Health Services for the Aged , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
Abstract Background Direct anticoagulants (DOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) differ in pharmacokinetic characteristics, intensity of required laboratory monitoring, and costs. These differences could affect patients' adherence to treatment and quality of life (QoL). Objective To assess whether patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) using DOACs have better treatment adherence and QoL when compared to patients using VKAs. Methods We conducted a systematic review in Medline, Embase, LILACS, SciELO, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central, until June 9, 2021. We included studies that estimated and compared treatment adherence and QoL between DOACs and VKAs in adults with non-valvular AF. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tools. The protocol was registered in the PROSPERO (CRD 42020165238). Results Sixteen studies, including 122,458 patients with non-valvular AF, evaluated adherence, and eleven studies, including 5,687 patients, assessed QoL. A variety of methods was used to measure adherence. Eleven studies showed no difference in adherence between DOACs and VKAs, while three studies favored VKAs over DOACs and two studies favored DOACs over VKAs. QoL was measured by specific (n = 3) or generic questionnaires (n = 8); results favored DOACs over VKAs in four studies, while in the other seven studies the results showed no difference between the groups. Meta-analyses were not performed due to high methodological heterogeneity among studies. Conclusions Available evidence regarding treatment adherence and QoL with DOACs and VKAs is characterized by methodological heterogeneity and conflicting findings.