Polypharmacy and the occurrence of potential drug–drug interactions among geriatric patients at the outpatient pharmacy department of a regional hospital in Durban, South Africa

Background Polypharmacy is the administration of an excessive number of medicines and a significant irrational medicine use practice. Little is known about this practice in South Africa. This study aimed to determine the level of polypharmacy and potential drug–drug interactions amongst the geriatric patient population in a facility in South Africa. Method A cross-sectional retrospective prescription chart review for 250 geriatric patients was conducted at the outpatient pharmacy department of a regional hospital. Variables extracted included demographic information, diagnosis, type of prescriber contact, and polypharmacy. Potential drug–drug interactions were determined with web-based multi-drug interaction checkers. Results The average (SD) number of diagnosed clinical problems was 3.54 ± 1.26, with hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and heart disease occurring most frequently. The level of polypharmacy was high with patients receiving an average (SD) of 12.13 ± 4.25 prescribed medicines from 3032 prescribed medicines. The level of polypharmacy was highest within the age categories, 60–64, and 70–74 years of age, respectively. The level of potential drug–drug interactions was also high with an average (SD) of 10.30 ± 7.48 from 2570 potential drug interactions. The majority of these interactions were moderate (72.5%) and pharmacodynamic (73.2%) by nature of the clinical severity of action and mechanism of action, respectively. Polypharmacy and type of prescriber contact were statistically significant contributors to the occurrence of potential drug–drug interactions, (F (2, 249) = 68.057, p < 0.05). However, in a multivariate analysis of variables to determine the strength of the association, polypharmacy was determined to be the strongest contributor to the occurrence of potential drug–drug interactions (p < 0.05) when compared with the type of prescriber contact (p value = 0.467). Therefore, irrespective of the type of prescriber contact, polypharmacy increases the potential for drug interactions among the sampled patient population. Conclusion A comprehensive consideration of disease management guidelines, patient factors, and rational medicine review could be measurable strategies towards improving medicine use. This would also limit the occurrence of significant drug interactions among the geriatric patient population. A national study is required to determine if differences occur across hospitals and regions.

Explainable Artificial Intelligence-Based Decision Support System for Assessing the Nutrition-Related Geriatric Syndromes

The use of artificial intelligence in geriatrics is very promising and relevant, as the diagnosis of a geriatric patient is a complex, experience-based, and time-consuming process that involves a variety of questionnaires and subjective and inaccurate patient responses. This paper proposes the explainable artificial intelligence-based (XAI) clinical decision support system (CDSS) to assess nutrition-related factors (symptoms) and to determine the likelihood of geriatric patient health risks associated with four syndromes: malnutrition, oropharyngeal dysphagia, dehydration, and eating disorders in dementia. The proposed system’s prototype was tested under real conditions at the geriatric department of Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Kaunas Hospital. The subjects of this study were 83 geriatric patients with various health conditions. The assessments of the nutritional status and syndromes of the patients provided by the CDSS were compared with the diagnoses of the physicians obtained using standard assessment methods. The results show that proposed CDSS can efficiently diagnose nutrition-related geriatric syndromes with high accuracy: 87.95% for malnutrition, 87.95% for oropharyngeal dysphagia, 90.36% for eating disorders in dementia, and 86.75% for dehydration. The research confirms that the proposed XAI-based CDSS is an effective tool, able to assess nutrition-related health risk factors and their dependencies and, in some cases, makes even a more accurate decision than a less experienced physician.

Hypofractionated preoperative radiotherapy for high risk soft tissue sarcomas in a geriatric patient population

Background Standard therapy for localised, resectable high risk soft tissue sarcomas consists of wide excision and radiotherapy over several weeks. This treatment schedule is hardly feasible in geriatric and frail patients. In order not to withhold radiotherapy from these patients, hypofractionated radiotherapy with 25 Gy in 5 fractions was evaluated in a geriatric patient population. Patients and methods A retrospective analysis was performed of 18 geriatric patients with resectable high risk soft tissue sarcomas of extremities and thoracic wall. Wound healing and short term oncologic outcome were analysed. In addition, dose constraints for radiotherapy of the extremities were transferred from normofractionated to hypofractionated radiotherapy regimens. Results Feasibility was good with 17/18 patients completing treatment as planned. Wound healing complication rate was in the range of published data. Two patients developed local and distant recurrence, two patients isolated distant recurrences. No isolated local recurrences were observed. Keeping the constraints was possible in all cases without compromising the coverage of the target volume. Conclusions Hypofractionated radiotherapy and surgery was well tolerated even in this specific patient population. With feasibility concerning early wound healing problems and adapted constraints, which allow for the treatment of most resectable extremity tumours, the concept warrants further evaluation in patients unfit for standard radiotherapy.

Factors that Predict Survival From Mesenteric Ischemia in the Geriatric Patient: Not a Death Sentence

Background The mortality rate from mesenteric ischemia is reported to be as high as 80%. The goal of our study was to identify demographic and clinical predictors of post-operative mortality and discharge disposition among elderly patients with mesenteric ischemia. Methods All patients 65 years and older who underwent emergency surgery (ES) for the management of mesenteric ischemia in the American College of Surgeons–National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2007 to 2017 were included. Univariate analyses and logistic regressions were used to identify independent predictors of mortality and discharge disposition. Results A total of 2438 patients met inclusion criteria, with a median age of 77 years and 60.8% being female. The 30-day mortality of the overall cohort was 31.5% and the 30-day morbidity was 65.3%. The following were the major predictors of 30-day mortality: pre-operative diagnosis of septic shock [OR: 2.46, (95% CI: 1.94-3.13)], dialysis dependence [OR: 2.05, (95% CI: 1.45-2.90)], recent weight loss [OR: 1.80, (95% CI: 1.16-2.79)], age ≥80 years [OR: 1.67, (95% CI: 1.25-2.23)], and ventilator dependence [OR: 1.65, (95% CI: 1.23-2.23)]. In the absence of these predictors, survival rate was 84%. The major predictors of discharge to post-acute care (PAC) included age ≥80 years [OR: 3.70, (95% CI: 2.50-5.47)] and pre-operative septic shock [OR: 2.20, (95% CI: 1.42-3.41)]. Conclusion In the geriatric patient, a diagnosis of mesenteric ischemia does not equate to an automatic death sentence. The presence of certain pre-operative risk factors confers a high risk of mortality, whereas their absence is associated with a high chance of survival.

Letter to editor: is laboratory index really a practical and valid tool to predict mortality?

We carefully studied the article titled “A practical laboratory index to predict institutionalization and mortality – an 18-year population-based follow-up study” written by Heikkilä et al. and published in BMC Geriatrics on 25 February 2021 with great interest. We would like to make some comments regarding this article and tool. Laboratory Index (LI) has been executed with the data of 728 patients who had followed-up in our center, however the LI score was not able to predict the 10-year and 18-year mortality. Therefore, a question mark has been aroused in our minds at some points. Neither frailty nor comorbidities were considered in this index. For a geriatric patient, it would be inadequate to evaluate laboratory results regardless of the clinical status. Similarly, it would not be appropriate to predict mortality only on the basis of laboratory results without considering the clinical status of the patient.We think that although the recent study has a great impact, it can be improved by incorporating data on the comorbidities and frailty status of the patients into the analysis.