No abstract

ObjectivePrevious prevalence estimates of POtentially Serious Alcohol–Medication INteractions in Older adults (POSAMINO) are based on in-home inventories of medications; however, this method is associated with under-reporting of medications when compared with dispensing records. This study aims to estimate the prevalence of POSAMINO among community-dwelling older adults using drug dispensing data from the community pharmacy setting.DesignCross-sectional study.SettingIrish Community Pharmacy.Participants1599 consecutive older adults presenting with a prescription to 1 of 120 community pharmacies nationwide; community-dwelling, aged ≥65 years, able to speak and understand English, with no evidence of cognitive impairment. The mean age of sample was 75.5 years (SD 6.5); 55% (n=884) female.Measures38 POSAMINO criteria were identified using participants’ pharmacy dispensing records linked to self-reported alcohol consumption (beverage-specific quantity and frequency measures) over the last 12 months.ResultsThe overall prevalence of POSAMINO in the study population was 28%, with 10% at risk of at least one POSAMINO criteria and 18% at risk of two or more. Exposure to POSAMINO most commonly involved cardiovascular agents (19%) and central nervous system agents (15%). Exposure to a higher number of POSAMINO criteria was associated with younger age (adjusted incident rate ratio (AIRR): 0.97; 95% CI: 0.95 to 0.98), male sex (AIRR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.67) and a higher number of comorbidities (AIRR: 1.05; 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.13).ConclusionThis study adds to the growing body of evidence, which suggests that older adults are vulnerable to potentially serious alcohol–medication interactions, particularly those involving cardiovascular and central nervous system agents, increasing their risk of orthostatic hypotension, gastrointestinal bleeds and increased sedation. Application of the POSAMINO criteria at the point of prescribing may facilitate the risk stratification of older adults and prioritise alcohol screening and brief alcohol interventions in those at greatest risk of harm.

Screening for perinatal-occurring obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is rare. We sought to evaluate the Dimensional Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (DOCS) as a screening tool for perinatal OCD and compare the screening accuracy of the DOCS with the commonly recommended Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS). English-speaking, pregnant individuals aged 19+ ( N = 574) completed online questionnaires and diagnostic interviews to assess for OCD prenatally and twice postpartum. The DOCS total score demonstrated the highest level of accuracy. Neither the EPDS-Full nor the three-item Anxiety subscale of the EPDS (EPDS-3A) met the criteria of a sufficiently accurate screening tool for OCD at any of the assessment points. Findings provide support for the DOCS as a screening tool for perinatal OCD and indicate a need for disorder-specific screening for perinatal anxiety and their related disorders (AD). Generalizability of findings is limited to Canada only. Future research would benefit from comparisons with measures of perinatal OCD (e.g., the Perinatal Obsessive-Compulsive Scale).

Background: Perinatal anxiety and related disorders are common (20%), distressing and impairing. Fear of childbirth (FoB) is a common type of perinatal anxiety associated with negative mental health, obstetrical, childbirth and child outcomes. Screening can facilitate treatment access for those most in need. Objectives: The purpose of this research was to evaluate the accuracy of the Childbirth Fear Questionnaire (CFQ) and the Wijma Delivery Expectations Questionnaire (W-DEQ) of FoB as screening tools for a specific phobia, FoB. Methods: A total of 659 English-speaking pregnant women living in Canada and over the age of 18 were recruited for the study. Participants completed an online survey of demographic, current pregnancy and reproductive history information, as well as the CFQ and the W-DEQ, and a telephone interview to assess specific phobia FoB. Results: Symptoms meeting full and subclinical diagnostic criteria for a specific phobia, FoB, were reported by 3.3% and 7.1% of participants, respectively. The W-DEQ met or exceeded the criteria for a “good enough” screening tool across several analyses, whereas the CFQ only met these criteria in one analysis and came close in three others. Conclusions: The W-DEQ demonstrated high performance as a screening tool for a specific phobia, FoB, with accuracy superior to that of the CFQ. Additional research to ensure the stability of these findings is needed.