Objectives The objectives of the present analyses are to estimate the frequency of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) at admission according to STOPP/START criteria version 2 in older patients hospitalised due to chronic disease exacerbation as well as to identify risk factors associated to the most frequent active principles as potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). Methods A multicentre, prospective cohort study including older patients (≥65) hospitalized due to chronic disease exacerbation at the internal medicine or geriatric services of 5 hospitals in Spain between September 2016 and December 2018 was conducted. Demographic and clinical data was collected, and a medication review process using STOPP/START criteria version 2 was performed, considering both PIMs and potential prescribing omissions (PPOs). Primary outcome was defined as the presence of any most frequent principles as PIMs, and secondary outcomes were the frequency of any PIM and PPO. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were conducted on all outcomes and multilevel logistic regression analysis, stratified by participating centre, was performed on the primary outcome. Results A total of 740 patients were included (mean age 84.1, 53.2% females), 93.8% of them presenting polypharmacy, with a median of 10 chronic prescriptions. Among all, 603 (81.5%) patients presented at least one PIP, 542 (73.2%) any PIM and 263 (35.5%) any PPO. Drugs prescribed without an evidence-based clinical indication were the most frequent PIM (33.8% of patients); vitamin D supplement in older people who are housebound or experiencing falls or with osteopenia was the most frequent PPO (10.3%). The most frequent active principles as PIMs were proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and benzodiazepines (BZDs), present in 345 (46.6%) patients. This outcome was found significantly associated with age, polypharmacy and essential tremor in an explanatory model with 71% AUC. Conclusions PIMs at admission are highly prevalent in these patients, especially those involving PPIs or BZDs, which affected almost half of the patients. Therefore, these drugs may be considered as the starting point for medication review and deprescription. Trial registration number NCT02830425

Background There is an urgent need to reduce mortality of COVID-19. We examined if corticosteroids and tocilizumab reduce risk for death in patients with severe pneumonia caused by SARS-CoV-2. Methods A retrospective cohort study was performed in a single university hospital. All adult patients admitted with confirmed severe COVID-19 pneumonia from 9 March to 9 April 2020 were included. Severe pneumonia was defined as multi-lobar or bilateral pneumonia and a ratio of oxygen saturation by pulse oximetry to the fraction of inspired oxygen (SpFi)<315. All patients received antiviral and antibiotic treatment. From March 26, patients also received immunomodulatory treatment with corticosteroids (methylprednisolone 250 mg/day for 3 days), or tocilizumab or both. In-hospital mortality in the entire cohort and in a 1:1 matched cohort sub-analysis was evaluated. Results 255 patients were included, 118 received only antiviral and antibiotic treatment while 137, admitted after March 26, also received immunomodulators. In-hospital mortality of patients on immunomodulatory treatment was significantly lower than in those without [47/137(34.3%) vs. 69/118(58.5%), ( p < .001)]. The risk of death was 0.44 (CI, 0.26–0.76) in patients receiving corticosteroids alone and 0.292 (CI, 0.18–0.47) in those treated with corticosteroids and tocilizumab. In the sub-analysis with 202 matched patients, the risk of death was 0.356 (CI 0.179–0.707) in patients receiving corticosteroids alone and 0.233 (0.124–0.436) in those treated with the combination. Conclusions Combined treatment with corticosteroids and tocilizumab reduced mortality with about 25% in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Corticosteroids alone also resulted in lower in-hospital mortality rate compared to patients receiving only antiviral and antibiotic treatment. Corticosteroids alone or combined with tocilizumab may be considered in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia.

IntroductionMultimorbidity is a major challenge for current healthcare systems and professionals. From the different approaches that have been proposed to analyse this issue, the hypothesis of the existence of association patterns of different chronic conditions is gaining visibility. In addition, multimorbidity can be associated to polypharmacy, which can lead to a higher risk of potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) and consequently to adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The general objective of this novel study is to identify the association between PIP, multimorbidity patterns, polypharmacy and the presence of ADRs in older patients admitted for exacerbation of chronic diseases.Methods and analysisThe MoPIM (morbidity, potentially inappropriate medication) study is a multicentre prospective cohort study of an estimated sample of 800 older (≥65 years) patients admitted to five general hospitals in Spain due to an exacerbation of a chronic disease. Patients referred to home hospitalisation, admitted due to an acute process or with a fatal outcome expected at the time of admission are excluded. Sociodemographic data, chronic morbidities and geriatric syndromes, number of chronic prescribed medications, PIP at admission to hospital and on discharge, according to the newest screening tool of older screening tool of older person's potentially inappropriate prescriptions/screening tool to alert doctors to right treatment criteria, and ADRs during hospitalisation are being collected. Multimorbidity patterns will be identified using cluster analyses techniques, and the frequency of polypharmacy, PIP and ADRs will be calculated. Finally, the possible relationship between those indicators will be identified through bivariate and multivariate analyses.Ethics and disseminationThe project has been approved by the clinical research ethics committees of each centre: Comité Ético de investigación Clínica del Parc Taulí, Comitè Ètic d'Investigació Clínica Osona per a la Recerca i Educació Sanitàries (FORES), Comité de Ètica de la Investigación con Medicamentos (CEIm)-Parc de Salut MAR, Comité Ético de Investigación Clínica de Euskadi, Comité de Ética de Investigación del Hospital Universitario de Canarias. The results will be actively and mainly disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals and communications in scientific conferences.Trial registration numberNCT02830425.

There is no published evidence on the possible differences in multimorbidity, inappropriate prescribing, and adverse outcomes of care, simultaneously, from a sex perspective in older patients. We aimed to identify those possible differences in patients hospitalized because of a chronic disease exacerbation. A multicenter, prospective cohort study of 740 older hospitalized patients (≥65 years) was designed, registering sociodemographic variables, frailty, Barthel index, chronic conditions (CCs), geriatric syndromes (GSs), polypharmacy, potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) according to STOPP/START criteria, and adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Outcomes were length of stay (LOS), discharge to nursing home, in-hospital mortality, cause of mortality, and existence of any ADR and its worst consequence. Bivariate analyses between sex and all variables were performed, and a network graph was created for each sex using CC and GS. A total of 740 patients were included (53.2% females, 53.5% ≥85 years old). Women presented higher prevalence of frailty, and more were living in a nursing home or alone, and had a higher percentage of PIP related to anxiolytics or pain management drugs. Moreover, they presented significant pairwise associations between CC, such as asthma, vertigo, thyroid diseases, osteoarticular diseases, and sleep disorders, and with GS, such as chronic pain, constipation, and anxiety/depression. No significant differences in immediate adverse outcomes of care were observed between men and women in the exacerbation episode.