Potentially inappropriate drug prescribing and the omission of beneficial drugs are highly prevalent in acutely ill hospitalized older people in six European centres.
Despite the recommendations of international regulatory agencies, exclusion of older individuals from ongoing trials regarding type 2 diabetes mellitus is frequent--higher than reported for other age-related diseases. This exclusion limits the value of the evidence that clinicians use when treating old, frail, complex patients with diabetes mellitus.
Background Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI) is useful as a prognostic tool in hospitalized older patients, but our knowledge is derived from retrospective studies. We therefore aimed to evaluate in a multicenter, longitudinal, cohort study whether the MPI at hospital admission is useful to identify groups with different mortality risk and whether MPI at discharge may predict institutionalization, rehospitalization, and use of home care services during 12 months. Methods This longitudinal study, carried out between February 2015 and August 2017, included nine public hospitals in Europe and Australia. A standardized comprehensive geriatric assessment including information on functional, nutritional, cognitive status, risk of pressure sores, comorbidities, medications, and cohabitation status was used to calculate the MPI and to categorize participants in low, moderate, and severe risk of mortality. Data regarding mortality, institutionalization, rehospitalization, and use of home care services were recorded through administrative information. Results Altogether, 1,140 hospitalized patients (mean age 84.1 years, women = 60.8%) were included. In the multivariable analysis, compared to patients with low risk group at admission, patients in moderate (odds ratio [OR] = 3.32; 95% CI: 1.79–6.17; p < .001) and severe risk (OR = 10.72, 95% CI: 5.70–20.18, p < .0001) groups were at higher risk of overall mortality. Among the 984 older patients with follow-up data available, those in the severe-risk group experienced a higher risk of overall mortality, institutionalization, rehospitalization, and access to home care services. Conclusions In this cohort of hospitalized older adults, higher MPI values are associated with higher mortality and other negative outcomes. Multidimensional assessment of older people admitted to hospital may facilitate appropriate clinical and postdischarge management.
Despite the increasing evidence of the benefit of corticosteroids for the treatment of moderate-severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, no data are available about the potential role of high doses of steroids for these patients. We evaluated the mortality, the risk of need for mechanical ventilation (MV), or death and the risk of developing a severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) between high (HD) and standard doses (SD) among patients with a severe COVID-19. All consecutive confirmed COVID-19 patients admitted to a single center were selected, including those treated with steroids and an ARDS. Patients were allocated to the HD (≥ 250 mg/day of methylprednisolone) of corticosteroids or the SD (≤ 1.5 mg/kg/day of methylprednisolone) at discretion of treating physician. Five hundred seventy-three patients were included: 428 (74.7%) men, with a median (IQR) age of 64 (54-73) years. In the HD group, a worse baseline respiratory situation was observed and male gender, older age, and comorbidities were significantly more common. After adjusting by baseline characteristics, HDs were associated with a higher mortality than SD (adjusted OR 2.46, 95% CI 1.59-3.81, p < 0.001) and with an increased risk of needing MV or death (adjusted OR 2.35, p = 0.001). Conversely, the risk of developing a severe ARDS was similar between groups. Interaction analysis showed that HD increased mortality exclusively in elderly patients. Our real-world experience advises against exceeding 1-1.5 mg/kg/day of corticosteroids for severe COVID-19 with an ARDS, especially in older subjects. This reinforces the rationale of modulating rather than suppressing immune responses in these patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.