Concurrent use of several drugs with potential anticholinergic properties is highly prevalent in the elderly. Methods to determine the overall anticholinergic drug burden have been developed to estimate the risk of central anticholinergic adverse effects. The objective of this MiniReview was to critically appraise the clinical utility of the methods used to assess the anticholinergic drug burden in older people's brain. We evaluated the in vitro method used to measure the anticholinergic activity in a patient's serum and the four anticholinergic drug scales: Anticholinergic Risk Scale, Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden, Drug Burden Index and Anticholinergic Drug Scale. Medline searches of the literature from January 1988 to January 2013 were performed. Studies that related anticholinergic drug burden to central adverse outcomes in elderly people were included, while case reports and studies of single substances were excluded. Despite the consistently reported association between a high anticholinergic drug burden and negative cognitive and psychomotor outcomes in older patients, there are discrepancies in the literature. Furthermore, no significant cognitive improvements after the anticholinergic drug burden was reduced have been shown in randomized controlled trials. It is reasonable to question whether the estimated anticholinergic drug burden can predict the overall brain effects of multiple anticholinergic agents in older people.

Pharmacist-initiated drug changes significantly reduced ADS score but did not improve cognitive function in nursing home residents. Moreover, the drug changes did not reduce SAA or mouth dryness significantly, which might indicate limited applicability of the ADS score to prevent prescription risks in this population.

Objective: To identify potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), to compare drug changes between geriatric and other medical wards, and to investigate the clinical impact of PIMs in acutely hospitalized older adults.Setting and subjects: Retrospective study of 232 home-dwelling, multimorbid older adults (aged ≥75 years) acutely admitted to Vestfold Hospital Trust, Norway.Main outcome measures. PIMs were identified by Norwegian general practice (NORGEP) criteria and Beers’ 2012 criteria. Clinical correlates were laboratory measures, functional and mental status, physical frailty, and length of stay.Results: Mean (SD) age was 86 (5.7) years, and length of stay was 6.5 (4.8) days. During the stay, the mean number of drugs used regularly changed from 7.8 (3.6) to 7.9 (3.6) (p = 0.22), and drugs used pro re nata (prn) changed from 1.4 (1.6) to 2.0 (1.7) (p < 0.001). The prevalence of any PIM changed from 39.2% to 37.9% (p = 0.076), while anticholinergics and benzodiazepines were reduced significantly (p ≤ 0.02). The geriatric ward reduced drug dosages (p < 0.001) and discontinued PIMs (p < 0.001) significantly more often than other medical wards. No relations between number of PIMS and clinical outcomes were identified, but the concomitant use of ≥3 psychotropic/opioid drugs was associated with reduced hand-grip strength (p ≤ 0.012).Conclusion: Hospitalization did not change polypharmacy or PIMs. Drug treatment was more appropriate on the geriatric than other medical wards. No clinical impact of PIMs was observed, but prescribers should be vigilant about concomitant prescription of ≥3 psychotropics/opioids.KEY POINTSAcute hospitalization of older patients with multimorbidity did not increase polypharmacy or potentially inappropriate medications.Prescription of anticholinergics and benzodiazepines was significantly reduced.The geriatric ward reduced drug dosages and discontinued potentially inappropriate medications more frequently than the other medical wards.

AIMThis study evaluated a presumed gradual decline in cognitive function in nursing home residents when the anticholinergic drug scale (ADS) score increased above 3. METHODThe study population was recruited from 21 nursing homes in Norway. Criteria for inclusion were ADS score Ն 3 and no severe dementia, defined as Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) score < 3. Primary cognitive end points were CERAD 10-word lists for recall and Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE). Secondary end points were activity of daily living (ADL), mouth dryness and serum anticholinergic activity (SAA). The patients were stratified into subgroups according to ADS score, i.e. a reference group with score 3 and test groups with scores 4, 5 or Ն6. End points were compared by analyses of covariance (ANCOVA). RESULTSOverall, 230 of the 1101 screened nursing home residents (21%) had an ADS score Ն3. After exclusion 101 residents were recruited and among these, 87 managed to participate in the study. No significant differences were detected in cognitive function or ADL when ADS increased above 3 (P > 0.10), but in vivo (mouth dryness) and in vitro (SAA) measures of peripheral anticholinergic activity were significantly higher in patients with an ADS score Ն6 (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONThe present study does not support a progressive decline in cognitive function with ADS score above 3. This might indicate that the ADS score model has limited potential to predict the clinical risk of central anticholinergic side effects in frail elderly patients receiving multiple anticholinergic drugs.

Can clinical assessments and medication reviews carried out by a geriatrician in cooperation with the patient's family physician have positive effects on health-related quality of life in older patients receiving polypharmacy? Findings: In this cluster randomized clinical trial that included 70 family physicians participating with 174 patients, health-related quality of life after 16 weeks was statistically significantly better in patients randomized to receive the intervention compared to those who received usual care. Meaning: Clinical geriatric assessments and collaborative medication reviews have the potential to improve health-related quality of life among older patients exposed to polypharmacy.

Abstract.Background: The course of Alzheimer's disease (AD) varies considerably between individuals. There is limited evidence on factors important for disease progression. Objective: The primary aim was to study the progression of AD, as measured by the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB). Secondary aims were to investigate whether baseline characteristics are important for differences in progression, and to examine the correlation between progression assessed using three different instruments: CDR-SB (0-18), the cognitive test Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE, 0-30), and the functional measure Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL, 0-1). Methods: The Progression of AD and Resource use (PADR) study is a longitudinal observational study in three Norwegian memory clinics. Results: In total, 282 AD patients (mean age 73.3 years, 54% female) were followed for mean 24 (16-37) months. The mean annual increase in CDR-SB was 1.6 (SD 1.8), the mean decrease in MMSE score 1.9 (SD 2.6), and the mean decrease in IADL score 0.13 (SD 0.14). Of the 282 patients, 132 (46.8%) progressed slowly, with less than 1 point yearly increase in CDR-SB. Cognitive test results at baseline predicted progression rate, and together with age, ApoE, history of hypertension, and drug use could explain 17% of the variance in progression rate. The strongest correlation of change was found between CDR-SB and IADL scores, the weakest between MMSE and IADL scores.

A more rapid progression of dementia was found in a group of patients with increasing depressive symptoms.

Background: Promoting adaptation, improving well-being and maintaining an optimal quality of life (QOL) is an important aspect in dementia care. The purpose of this study was to identify determinants of QOL in young onset dementia, and to assess differences in QoL domains between people with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD). Methods: In total 135 persons with AD and 58 persons with FTD were included from two prospective cohort studies. QOL was assessed with the proxy reported quality of life in Alzheimer's disease questionnaire (QoL-AD). Possible determinants were explored using multiple linear regression and included sociodemographic variables, diagnosis, dementia severity, disease awareness, neuropsychiatric symptoms, met and unmet needs and hours of personal and instrumental care. Differences between QOL domains in people with AD and FTD were calculated using Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: Lower QOL was associated with more depressive symptoms, lower disease awareness, and a higher amount of needs, both met and unmet. People with AD scored lower on the memory and higher on the friends' subscale. No differences were found for the other items. Conclusion: This study demonstrates a unique set of determinants of QOL in AD and FTD. Interventions directed towards these specific factors may improve QOL.