Browsing by Subject "80 and over"

Sort by: Order: Results:

Now showing items 1-4 of 4
  • Raunio, Anna; Kivistö, Ville; Kero, Mia; Tuimala, Jarno; Savola, Sara; Oinas, Minna; Kok, Eloise; Colangelo, Kia; Paetau, Anders; Polvikoski, Tuomo; Tienari, Pentti J.; Puttonen, Henri; Myllykangas, Liisa (2022)
    Evolving evidence has supported the existence of two anatomically distinct Lewy-related pathology (LRP) types. Investigation of spinal cord and peripheral LRP can elucidate mechanisms of Lewy body disorders and origins of synuclein accumulation. Still, very few unselected studies have focused on LRP in these regions. Here we analysed LRP in spinal cord, dorsal root ganglion, and adrenal gland in the population-based Vantaa 85 + study, including every ≥ 85 years old citizen living in the city of Vantaa in 1991 (n = 601). Samples from spinal cord (C6-7, TH3-4, L3-4, S1-2) were available from 303, lumbar dorsal root ganglion from 219, and adrenal gland from 164 subjects. Semiquantitative scores of LRP were determined from immunohistochemically stained sections (anti-alpha-synuclein antibody 5G4). LRP in the ventral and dorsal horns of spinal cord, thoracic intermediolateral column, dorsal root ganglion and adrenal gland were compared with brain LRP, previously determined according to DLB Consortium criteria and by caudo-rostral versus amygdala-based LRP classification. Spinal LRP was found in 28% of the total population and in 61% of those who had LRP in the brain. Spinal cord LRP was found only in those subjects with LRP in the brain, and the quantity of spinal cord LRP was associated with the severity of brain LRP (p 
  • Dent, E.; Morley, J. E.; Cruz-Jentoft, A. J.; Woodhouse, L.; Rodriguez-Manas, L.; Fried, L. P.; Woo, J.; Aprahamian; Sanford, A.; Lundy, J.; Landi, F.; Beilby, J.; Martin, F. C.; Bauer, J. M.; Ferrucci, L.; Merchant, R. A.; Dong, B.; Arai, H.; Hoogendijk, E. O.; Won, C. W.; Abbatecola, A.; Cederholm, T.; Strandberg, T.; Gutierrez Robledo, L. M.; Flicker, L.; Bhasin, S.; Aubertin-Leheudre, M.; Bischoff-Ferrari, H. A.; Guralnik, J. M.; Muscedere, J.; Pahor, M.; Ruiz, J.; Negm, A. M.; Reginster, J. Y.; Waters, D. L.; Vellas, B. (2019)
    Objective The task force of the International Conference of Frailty and Sarcopenia Research (ICFSR) developed these clinical practice guidelines to overview the current evidence-base and to provide recommendations for the identification and management of frailty in older adults. Methods These recommendations were formed using the GRADE approach, which ranked the strength and certainty (quality) of the supporting evidence behind each recommendation. Where the evidence-base was limited or of low quality, Consensus Based Recommendations (CBRs) were formulated. The recommendations focus on the clinical and practical aspects of care for older people with frailty, and promote person-centred care. Recommendations for Screening and Assessment The task force recommends that health practitioners case identify/screen all older adults for frailty using a validated instrument suitable for the specific setting or context (strong recommendation). Ideally, the screening instrument should exclude disability as part of the screening process. For individuals screened as positive for frailty, a more comprehensive clinical assessment should be performed to identify signs and underlying mechanisms of frailty (strong recommendation). Recommendations for Management A comprehensive care plan for frailty should address polypharmacy (whether rational or nonrational), the management of sarcopenia, the treatable causes of weight loss, and the causes of exhaustion (depression, anaemia, hypotension, hypothyroidism, and B12 deficiency) (strong recommendation). All persons with frailty should receive social support as needed to address unmet needs and encourage adherence to a comprehensive care plan (strong recommendation). First-line therapy for the management of frailty should include a multi-component physical activity programme with a resistance-based training component (strong recommendation). Protein/caloric supplementation is recommended when weight loss or undernutrition are present (conditional recommendation). No recommendation was given for systematic additional therapies such as cognitive therapy, problem-solving therapy, vitamin D supplementation, and hormone-based treatment. Pharmacological treatment as presently available is not recommended therapy for the treatment of frailty.
  • Paulamäki, Jasmin; Jyrkkä, Johanna; Hyttinen, Virva; Jämsen, Esa (2023)
    BackgroundThere are several national and international criteria available for identifying potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) for older people. The prevalence of PIM use may vary depending on the criteria used. The aim is to examine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication use in Finland according to the Meds75+ database, developed to support clinical decision-making in Finland, and to compare it with eight other PIM criteria.MethodsThis nationwide register study consisted of Finnish people aged 75 years or older (n = 497,663) who during 2017-2019 purchased at least one prescribed medicine considered as a PIM, based on any of the included criteria. The data on purchased prescription medicines was collected from the Prescription Centre of Finland.ResultsThe annual prevalence of 10.7-57.0% was observed for PIM use depending on which criteria was used. The highest prevalence was detected with the Beers and lowest with the Laroche criteria. According to the Meds75+ database, annually every third person had used PIMs. Regardless of the applied criteria, the prevalence of PIM use decreased during the follow-up. The differences in the prevalence of medicine classes of PIMs explain the variance of the overall prevalence between the criteria, but they identify the most commonly used PIMs quite similarly.ConclusionPIM use is common among older people in Finland according to the national Meds75+ database, but the prevalence is dependent on the applied criteria. The results indicate that different PIM criteria emphasize different medicine classes, and clinicians should consider this issue when applying PIM criteria in their daily practice.
  • Alakare, Janne; Kemp, Kirsi Maria; Strandberg, Timo; Castren, Maaret; Jakovljevic, Dimitrije; Tolonen, Jukka Petri; Harjola, Veli-Pekka (2021)
    BackgroundComprehensive geriatric assessment provided in hospital wards in frail patients admitted to hospital has been shown to reduce mortality and increase the likelihood of living at home later. Systematic geriatric assessment provided in emergency departments (ED) may be effective for reducing days in hospital and unnecessary hospital admissions, but this has not yet been proven in randomised trials.MethodsWe conducted a single-centre, randomised controlled trial with a parallel-group, superiority design in an academic hospital ED.ED patients aged >= 75 years who were frail, or at risk of frailty, as defined by the Clinical Frailty Scale, were included in the trial. Patients were recruited during the period between December 11, 2018 and June 7, 2019, and followed up for 365 days.For the intervention group, systematic geriatric assessment was added to their standard care in the ED, whereas the control group received standard care only.The primary outcome was cumulative hospital stay during 365-day follow-up. The secondary outcomes included: admission rate from the index visit, total hospital admissions, ED-readmissions, proportion of patients living at home at 365 days, 365-day mortality, and fall-related ED-visits.ResultsA total of 432 patients, 63% female, with median age of 85 years, formed the analytic sample of 213 patients in the intervention group and 219 patients in the control group.Cumulative hospital stay during one-year follow-up as rate per 100 person-years for the intervention and control groups were: 3470 and 3149 days, respectively, with rate ratio of 1.10 (95% confidence interval, 0.55-2.19, P=.78). Admission rates to hospital wards from the index ED visit for the intervention and control groups were: 62 and 70%, respectively (P=.10). No significant differences were observed between the groups for any outcomes.ConclusionSystematic geriatric assessment for older adults with frailty in the ED did not reduce hospital stay during one-year follow-up. No statistically significant difference was observed for any secondary outcomes. More coordinated, continuous interventions should be tested for potential benefits in long-term outcomes.Trial registrationThe trial was registered in the (registration number and date NCT03751319 23/11/2018).