Journal of the American Geriatrics Society最新文献

Background: Despite efforts to promote aging in place, millions of caregivers face decisions about whether a person living with dementia (PLwD) should move from home to another residential setting, such as a nursing home or assisted living facility. These decisions are frequently made during times of crisis, and caregivers report many unmet needs regarding decision making. Tools to support this decision making are lacking.

Methods: Focus groups of caregivers and an expert panel provided the content for a decision support tool. The tool was then iteratively reviewed with a new cohort of 53 caregivers, who participated in cognitive interviews and rated the tool's clarity, trustworthiness, and whether it made them more comfortable thinking about care transitions.

Results: In focus groups, caregivers highlighted the importance of understanding decision making in the context of the entire relationship between the caregiver and PLwD, and they repeatedly called attention to the role of guilt. The expert panel grappled with the ethical standing of the caregiver's well-being in decision making on behalf of the PLwD. The tool consists of two booklets. The first addresses the cognitive and emotional aspects of decision making and the second provides education. Over 95% of caregivers gave a rating of "Good" or "Very Good" for the booklets' clarity, ease of understanding, and trustworthiness. At least 80% agreed or strongly agreed that they were comfortable thinking about the issues and wanted to learn more.

Conclusions: A decision support tool for caregivers of PLwD that provides education about transitions in care site, along with support for the emotional aspects of decision making, is highly acceptable and supports caregivers' ability to engage with what can be a challenging topic.

This figure illustrates teaching strategies for the five domains of geriatric care, represented as the "5 M's": Medication, Mentation, Mobility, Multi-Complexity, and Matters Most. For each domain, Ms. T's clinical problems are listed with corresponding interventions.

Background: Medication adherence is essential for achieving favorable health outcomes, particularly in older adults with multiple chronic conditions.

Objective: This systematic review critically appraised current evidence on interventions aimed at enhancing medication adherence in older adults.

Methods: Literature searches were performed in PubMed/MedLine, EMBASE, and Web of Science for articles published up to December 31, 2024. We identified peer-reviewed studies assessing interventions to improve medication adherence in older adults (≥ 60 years). The primary outcome was intervention effectiveness; secondary outcomes were clinical parameters, disease control, health-related quality of life, rehospitalization rates, event rates, mortality rates, feasibility, acceptability or satisfaction levels, and overall costs or cost-effectiveness.

Results: A total of 128 studies was included: 96 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 16 pre-post studies, 9 non-RCTs, and 7 longitudinal evaluations. The majority (51.2%) was implemented in primary care. An educational component was present in 56.3% of interventions, a technical component in 47.6%, and an attitudinal component in 32.0%. Only 3.2% of interventions included rewards. Various healthcare professionals, such as pharmacists, nurses, and physicians, were involved in delivering interventions. Most studies reported improved adherence, though some factors, such as high baseline adherence, insufficient intervention intensity, and brief follow-up limited the effectiveness. Secondary outcomes often included improvements in disease knowledge, patient satisfaction, quality of life, and clinical indicators like blood pressure and HbA1c levels.

Conclusions: Despite most studies showed a positive impact on adherence, a high heterogeneity was highlighted, and effectiveness was mainly observed in the short term.

Background: Health and financial literacy decline in aging, but it is unclear why. In this study, we hypothesized that older people who are carriers of the APOE ε4 allele exhibit a steeper decline in literacy over time.

Methods: Participants were 851 community-dwelling older adults without dementia at analytic baseline (188 ε4 carriers and 663 noncarriers). Literacy was assessed at baseline and each year thereafter for up to 14 years.

Results: In a linear mixed-effects model adjusted for age, gender, and education, ε4 was associated with a lower starting level of literacy (b = -3.60, SE b = 1.00, p < 0.001) and, critically, a roughly 40% steeper decline in literacy over time (b = -0.41, SE b = 0.14, p = 0.004). The association between ε4 and literacy decline persisted after adjusting for global cognition at baseline (b = -0.35, SE b = 0.14, p = 0.012) and among a subgroup of participants with no cognitive impairment at baseline (b = -0.34, SE b = 0.14, p = 0.016).

Conclusions: ε4 contributes to literacy decline among older adults, presumably due in part to the accumulation of neuropathologies associated with ε4. We discuss the potential clinical implications of ε4-related literacy decline.

Background and objectives: Deprescribing is a key strategy for optimizing therapeutic plans in multimorbid or complex chronic patients. Despite its long-standing use, further studies are needed to validate health outcomes and support its routine clinical integration. This project aims to assess the impact of applying LESS-CHRON criteria in terms of therapeutic and anticholinergic burden, as well as to describe potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) more often involved in chronic treatments of patients with multimorbidity or those with complex health needs across two care settings: institutionalized and outpatients.

Methods: A quasi-experimental, multicenter, pre-post intervention cohort study was conducted in several phases (screening, intervention, and follow-up at 3 and 6 months after inclusion). The study included two cohorts: outpatients and institutionalized patients. The main variable was the percentage reduction in medication use. Additionally, the deprescribing success rate, reasons for non-acceptance (barriers to deprescribing), anticholinergic burden, and non-pharmacological variables were analyzed.

Results: Four hundred and sixty patients (229 outpatients, 231 institutionalized) with a mean age of 84.5 (SD: 7.9) years were included. Demographic, clinical, and pharmacological data were collected. Deprescribing opportunities were identified using the LESS-CHRON criteria, and recommendations were assessed by medical teams. Follow-up evaluations were conducted after 3 months. A total of 960 PIMs were identified, of which 542 medications were successfully deprescribed (345 patients), with an acceptance rate of 56.46%, showing no significant differences between cohorts. The overall therapeutic burden was reduced by 10.73% (SD: 10.68). The main barriers to deprescribing were clinical decisions (69.86%) and patient/family refusal (11.72%). After 3 months, at least one deprescribed drug was reintroduced in 61 patients. The mean deprescribing success rate was 87.10%, which was significantly higher in institutionalized patients (p < 0.05), and the anticholinergic burden was significantly reduced (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: The LESS-CHRON tool effectively identified deprescribing opportunities, reducing both medication burden and anticholinergic load. Institutionalized patients had a higher deprescribing success rate. However, clinical judgment and patient preferences remain key barriers to successful implementation.

Objectives: Frailty is a common condition in community-dwelling older adults with high health and socioeconomic implications. However, primary care-led randomized trials have been scarcely tested.

Design: Multicenter cluster randomized clinical trial.

Setting and participants: Two hundred and seventy-three community-dwelling older adults recruited from 12 Spanish primary care centers.

Inclusion criteria: independence in basic activities of daily living and either prefrailty/frailty using the frailty phenotype or gait speed < 0.8 m/s.

Methods: Participants were randomized 1:1 by clusters to the intervention or the control group, each cluster being a different primary care center.

Intervention: Physical exercise program, nutritional recommendations, and frailty training to primary care professionals. Interventions were conducted based on the guidelines of the "Consensus document on the prevention of frailty in older adults," updated in 2022, from the Spanish Health Ministry.

Control: Usual care.

Main outcome: Improvement in one category of the frailty phenotype or one point in the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) at 12 and 32 weeks. under Intention-to-treat analysis was conducted.

Results: Mean age 78.1 years, 68.4% female. 25.7% were frail and 74.3% prefrail or with a gait speed lower than 0.8 m/s. The percentage of participants improving the main outcome at week 12 for the intervention and control groups were 70.4% and 49.5%, respectively, absolute risk reduction (ARR) 20.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.3%-34.5%; p < 0.01; n = 191), number needed to treat (NNT) 4.8 (95% CI 2.9-13.6). At 32 weeks of follow-up 81.7% and 51.9% of the intervention and control group improved, respectively, ARR 29.8% (95% CI 13.8%-45.7%; p < 0.001; n = 134), NNT 3.4 (95% CI 2.2-7.2).

Conclusions and implications: A primary care-led intervention consisting of a physical exercise program, nutritional recommendations, and training in frailty was feasible and effective for improving frailty status or physical function in community-dwelling older adults with prefrailty or frailty.

Trial registration: clinicaltrial.gov: NCT05002439 (18/JUN/2021).

Background: Falls are a leading cause of injury and death in older adults (age ≥ 65 years). The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States (US) marked a transition into a period of greater social isolation to curb the spread of disease. The pandemic additionally greatly strained the US healthcare system. As a result, older adults participated in less physical activity and experienced greater hesitancy to seek medical care in an effort to minimize their risk of infection. They additionally may have experienced delays and incomplete access to such care. It is possible that such changes worsened frailty and increased vulnerability to falls and fall-related sequelae among this population. We hypothesized that the COVID-19 pandemic led to an increase in fall-related fatalities generally and an increase in fall-related fatalities that occurred in the home.

Methods: We conducted an interrupted time series analysis using a regression model on monthly fall fatalities among older adults from January 2015 through December 2020. Fall fatality data were extracted from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-ranging ONline Data for Epidemiologic Research (CDC WONDER), along with the estimated annual population of US residents aged ≥ 65. The COVID-19 pandemic, defined as starting in the US in March 2020, was the interruption variable.

Results: There were 192,586 fall fatalities among older adults in the study period, with a mean of 2614 deaths per month ( $\sigma$  = 228.4) pre-pandemic, and 3051 deaths per month ( $\sigma$  = 215.1) post-pandemic onset. There was no statistically significant change in the incidence of all fall-related fatalities following pandemic onset. However, there was a 25% increase in incidence of fall-related fatalities that occurred within fall victims' homes, specifically (IRR = 1.25, 95% CI 1.14, 1.36).

Conclusion: There was a significant increase in fall-related fatalities within homes among older adults in the US after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. During pandemic type situations and times of social distancing, increased social supports and resources must be maintained for older adults to reduce the incidence of falls within the home and fall-related injuries.