Background: Psychomotor agitation as part of the behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) is one of the common issues found in aged care facilities. The current inadequate management strategies lead to poor functional and medical outcomes. Psychotropic interventions are the current preferred treatment method, but should these medications be the prescribers’ first preference? This review aims to compare pharmacological interventions for psychomotor agitation, judging them according to their effectuality and justifiability profiles. This is to be achieved by retrieving information from Randomized Control Trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews. Objectives: This review evaluates evidence from RCTs, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses of BPSD patients who have taken agitation treatments. Assessing the efficacy of citalopram, other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and antipsychotic treatments were compared to each other for the purpose of improving agitation outcomes and lowering patient side effects. Methods: This review includes RCT that compared citalopram with one or more atypical antipsychotics or with a placebo, along with systematic reviews comparing citalopram (SSRI) with antipsychotics such as quetiapine, olanzapine, and risperidone. Studies were extracted by searching and accessing databases, such as PubMed, OVID, and Cochrane with restrictions of date from 2000 to 2021 and published in the English language. Conclusion: There are still a limited number of studies including SSRIs for the treatment of agitation in BPSD. SSRIs such as citalopram were associated with a reduction in the symptoms of agitation, and lower risk of adverse effects when compared to antipsychotics. Future studies are required to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of SSRI treatments for agitation in BPSD.
Aim: this scoping review was designed to identify studies that assess adverse drug reactions (ADRs) for older people in Australian aged care facilities. This review critically evaluates each published study to identify the risk of, or actual, adverse drug events in older people. Inclusion criteria: this review considered any clinical studies that examined the adverse effects of medications in older people who were living in aged care facilities. This review considered qualitative studies, analytical studies, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), descriptive cross-sectional studies, and analytic observational studies that explored the use of medications and their adverse effects on older people in clinical settings (including aged care facilities). Methods: an initial search of the PubMed (United State National Library of Medicine), OvidSP, EBSCOHost, ScienceDirect, Wiley Online, SAGE, and SCOPUS databases, with full text was performed, followed by an analysis of the article’s title and abstract. Additionally, MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) was used to describe the article. The initial round of the database search was based on inclusion criteria from studies that assessed tools or protocols aiming to identify the adverse effects of medications on the elderly population suffering chronic conditions or multiple co-morbidities. Two reviewers screened the retrieved papers for inclusion. The data presented in this review are in tabular forms and accompanied by a narrative summary which aligns with the review’s objectives. Results: seven studies were identified, and the extracted data from these studies were grouped according their characteristics and the auditing results of each study. Conclusion: it would be beneficial to design a comprehensive or broadly adverse drug reaction assessment tool derived from Australian data that has been used on the elderly in an Australian healthcare setting.
Aggressive behaviors of people with dementia pose a significant challenge to employees in nursing homes and aged care facilities. Aggressive behavior is a result of psychomotor agitation in dementia (BPSD). Globally, psychotropic interventions are the preferred treatment for BPSD. However, it is still unclear which psychotropic should be prescribed. The purpose of this systematic review is to compare pharmacological interventions for psychomotor agitation and psychosis symptoms. Method: The studies were extracted from databases, such as PubMed, OVID, and Cochrane, with a date restriction from 2000 to present, and in English. PRISMA steps were used to refine the extracted data. The RCTs extracted for this systematic review compared active ingredient medications to one another or to a placebo. Results: PRISMA was used to assess all selected trials comprehensively. Four trials are being conducted on quetiapine, two on haloperidol, one on olanzapine, three on risperidone, one on brexpiprazole, one on pimavanserin, and two on aripiprazole. Compared to typical antipsychotics, quetiapine showed tolerable adverse effects and did not worsen parkinsonism. Psychosis symptoms and behavioral improvements can be improved with haloperidol. Among elderly patients with psychosis, risperidone reduces angriness, paranoia, and aggression, as well as improves global functioning. As compared with other antipsychotics, aripiprazole provides a lower risk of adverse effects and demonstrated improvement in agitation, anxiety, and depression associated with psychosis. While olanzapine improves hostile suspiciousness, hallucinations, aggression, mistrust, and uncooperativeness, it worsens depression symptoms. Psychosis was treated effectively with pimavanserin without adverse effects on motor functions. Psychosis symptoms are well tolerated by brexpiprazole, but insomnia, headache, and urinary tract infections are common side effects. Conclusions: In this systematic review, we provide an overview of how to choose the correct antipsychotics and dosages for the management of BPSD and emphasize the importance of safe and conservative use of these drugs.
Aim: this scoping review was designed to identify studies that assess the adverse drug reactions (ADRs) for older people in Australian aged-care facilities. This review critically evaluated each published study to identify the risk of, or actual adverse drug events in older people. Inclusion criteria: This review considered any clinical studies that examined the adverse effects of medications in older people who were living in aged-care facilities. This review considered qualitative studies, analytical studies, RCTs, descriptive cross-sectional studies, and analytic observational studies that explored the use of medications and their adverse effects on older people in clinical settings (including aged care facilities). Methods: An initial search of the PubMed, OvidSP, EBSCOHost, MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Wiley Online, SAGE, and SCOPUS databases, with full text was performed, followed by an analysis of the article’s title and abstract. Additionally, MeSH was used to describe the article. The initial round of the database search was based on inclusion criteria from studies that assessed tools or protocols aiming to identify the adverse effects of medications on the elderly population suffering chronic conditions or multiple co-morbidities. Two reviewers screened the retrieved papers for inclusion. The data presented in this review are in tabular forms and a narrative summary which aligns with the review’s objectives. Results: Seven studies were identified, and the extracted data from these studies were grouped according their characteristics and the auditing results of each study. Conclusion: There was no comprehensive or broadly adverse drug reaction assessment tool derived from Australian data that has been used on the elderly in an Australian healthcare setting.
Background: The psychomotor agitation of the behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) is one of the common issues in aged care facilities, leading to the poor functional and medical consequences. Psychotropic interventions are the preferred choice of treatment, but which medication should be the prescribers first preference? This review aims to compare pharmacological interventions for psychomotor agitation, judging them according to their effectuality and justifiability profiles. This is to be achieved by retrieving information from Randomised Control Trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews. Objectives: This review evaluates evidence from RCTs, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses of BPSD patients who have taken agitation treatments. Assessing the efficacy of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) and antipsychotic treatments when compared to each other for the purpose of improving agitation outcomes. Methods: This review includes RCT that compared one or more active ingredient medications with another medication or with a placebo, along with systematic reviews comparing citalopram (SSRI) with antipsychotics such as quetiapine, olanzapine, and risperidone. Studies were extracted by searching and accessing databases, such as PubMed, OVID, and Cochrane with restrictions of date from 2000 to 2021 and English language. Conclusion: There is still limited studies of SSRIs for the treatment of agitation in BPSD. SSRIs such as citalopram were associated with a reduction in symptoms of agitation, and lower risk of adverse effects compared to antipsychotics. Future studies are required to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of SSRI treatments for agitation in BPSD.
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.