Background: Scoring scales such as the Anticholinergic Drug Scale (ADS), the Anticholinergic Risk Scale (ARS), and the Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden Scale (ACB) provide an estimation of total anticholinergic burden. Not all the lists include the same drugs, and the points given for certain drugs differ among them. Whether these discrepancies present important differences in the estimation of anticholinergic burden for an individual patient is unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study is to assess agreement among the three scales. Method: Anticholinergic burden was measured with the three scales in 83 patients aged Ն65 years in a medium-and long-stay psychiatric hospital. Subsequently, patients were categorized into three risk categories: low risk (0 points), medium risk (1-2 points) or high risk (3 or more points). The chance-corrected measures of agreement for the different scores were determined with the k-statistic (kappa). Results: Values for kappa were: 0.19 for Anticholinergic Risk ScaleAnticholinergic Drug Scale, 0.21 for ACB-Anticholinergic Drug Scale and 0.25 for Anticholinergic Risk Scale-ACB. The mean anticholinergic burden measured with ACB was 3.28. Conclusions: There is poor agreement among the three scales. These lists cannot be directly applied to different settings in which drug availability differs substantially, and they require periodic updates. Anticholinergic burden in our setting (psychogeriatric inpatients) was particularly high.

Our results show that SGA may pose a higher risk of seizures than FGA, mainly, but not only due to clozapine. This is line with recent studies suggesting that some SGA carried a higher average risk of electroencephalographic abnormalities than many FGA. Nonetheless, It is well known that spontaneous reports do not allow strong inferences about adverse drug effects, because differences in reporting fractions by time, drug or type of event are difficult or even impossible to distinguish from differences in the occurrence rates of adverse events. Still, we consider that the possibility of SGA carrying a higher risk of seizure induction than FGA warrants further research.

Domperidone, a dopamine antagonist that does not easily cross the blood-brain barrier, is considered the gold standard for treating gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) because the risk of developing extrapyramidal adverse effects is considered minimal. On the other hand, cardiotoxicity related to domperidone is not a new issue. In fact, arrhythmias, sudden death and cardiac arrest were reported with high intravenous doses in the 80s. Concern about the cardiotoxicity of oral domperidone has arisen more recently after the publication of two case-control studies which have questioned domperidone's safety even further, especially in patients > 60 years and in doses >30 mg/day. Very little is known about domperidone's cardiac effects in patients with PD. In addtion, pharmacoepidemiological data about specific antiemetic use in these patients is scarce, with almost anecdotal reports of inappropriate centrally acting antidopaminergic drugs like metoclopramide in the hospital setting. As a result, and even no cases of serious arrhythmias or sudden cardiac death associated with domperidone concerning patients with PD have been reported, no definitive conclusions can be drawn about its safety. In conclusion, despite domperidone is still recognized as the first choice for treating gastrointestinal symptoms PD, doses above 30 mg/daily should only be considered with special caution taking into account its potential cardiotoxic effects.

No abstract

Anticholinergic burden in PD patients is significant, and is caused mostly by drugs not used for PD motor symptoms. Polypharmacy and cholinesterase inhibitors were independently associated with anticholinergic drug prescriptions.