Dataset Information

Long-Term Non-invasive Ventilation: Do Patients Aged Over 75 Years Differ From Younger Adults?

ABSTRACT: Background: Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is accepted as standard of care for chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure (CHRF) and is being increasingly implemented in older subjects. However, little is known regarding the use of NIV on a long-term basis in the very old. The outcomes of this study were: 1/to report the proportion of patients ? 75 years old (elderly) among a large group of long-term NIV users and its trend since 2000; 2/to compare this population to a younger population (<75 years old) under long-term NIV in terms of diagnoses, comorbidities, anthropometric data, technical aspects, adherence to and efficiency of NIV. Methods: In a cross-sectional analysis of a multicenter cohort study on patients with CHRF under NIV, diagnoses, comorbidities, technical aspects, adherence to and efficiency of NIV were compared between patients ? 75 and <75 years old (chi-square or Welch Student tests). Results: Of a total of 489 patients under NIV, 151 patients (31%) were ? 75 years of age. Comorbidities such as systemic hypertension (86 vs. 60%, p < 0.001), chronic heart failure (30 vs. 18%, p = 0.005), and pulmonary hypertension (25 vs. 14%, p = 0.005) were more frequent in older subjects. In the older group, there was a trend for a higher prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (46 vs. 36%, p = 0.151) and a lower prevalence of neuromuscular diseases (NMD) (19 vs. 11%, p = 0.151), although not significant. Adherence to and efficacy of NIV were similar in both groups (daily use of ventilator: 437 vs. 419 min, p = 0.76; PaCO₂: 5.8 vs. 5.9 kPa, p = 0.968). Unintentional leaks were slightly higher in the older group (1.8 vs. 0.6 L/min, p = 0.018). Conclusions: In this cross-sectional study, one third of the population under NIV was ? 75 years old. Markers of efficacy of NIV, and adherence to treatment were similar when compared to younger subjects, confirming the feasibility of long-term NIV in the very old. Health-related quality of life was not assessed in this study and further research is needed to address this issue.

SUBMITTER: Cantero C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7686650 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Long-Term Non-invasive Ventilation: Do Patients Aged Over 75 Years Differ From Younger Adults?

Cantero Chloé C Adler Dan D Pasquina Patrick P Uldry Christophe C Egger Bernard B Prella Maura M Younossian Alain Bigin AB Soccal-Gasche Paola P Pépin Jean-Louis JL Janssens Jean-Paul JP

Frontiers in medicine 20201111

<b>Background:</b> Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is accepted as standard of care for chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure (CHRF) and is being increasingly implemented in older subjects. However, little is known regarding the use of NIV on a long-term basis in the very old. The outcomes of this study were: 1/to report the proportion of patients ≥ 75 years old (elderly) among a large group of long-term NIV users and its trend since 2000; 2/to compare this population to a younger population (<75 ...[more]

PMID: 33262990

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOlder adults are given high priority for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination; however, little is known about the safety of vaccines. This study was conducted to examine the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine for people who were ≥ 75 years of age, specifically those who first took two doses of the vaccine at the COVID-19 central vaccination center in South Korea.MethodsSafety monitoring after the BNT162b2 vaccine was conducted in three ways for older adults who received the first dose of the vaccine at our center between April 5 and April 23, 2021. For immediate adverse reactions, every person who was vaccinated was observed for 15-30 minutes after injection at the center. For active surveillance, a telephone interview was conducted for stratified randomly sampled people after 7 days of each vaccination to enquire regarding types of adverse reactions they experienced, and its severity and duration. For passive surveillance, reported adverse event data were collected from the COVID-19 vaccine adverse event following immunization (AEFI) surveillance system-run by the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency (KDCA). The data were then reviewed.ResultsIn total, 2,123 older adults received at least one vaccine dose during the study period. The frequency of acute adverse reactions that developed during the observed 15-30 minutes after injection was 8.5 cases per 1,000 doses. None of the reactions was assessed as acute allergic reactions to the vaccine and no cases required special treatment or drug administration. Overall, 638 people were followed up at least once by telephone interview 7 days post vaccination. The overall response rate was 82.3%. The rates of local reactions were 50.3% after the first dose and 45.2% after the second dose, and the rates of systemic reactions were 15.2% and 26.0%, respectively. During the study period, 23 medically attended adverse events (5.4 cases per 1,000 administered doses) were reported to the KDCA AEFI surveillance system. The most common symptoms of medically attended cases were nonspecific general weakness (26%) and dizziness (26%), followed by muscle pain (22%), headache (13%), fever (13%), and skin rash or urticaria (13%). Among them, there were five serious adverse events reported, which required hospitalization, including one death. However, most of them were not related to the vaccines.ConclusionBNT162b2 vaccination was tolerable among adults who were ≥ 75 years of age.

Project description:BackgroundWith the extended life expectancy of the Chinese population and improvements in surgery and anesthesia techniques, the number of aged patients undergoing surgery has been increasing annually. However, safety, effectiveness, and quality of life of aged patients undergoing surgery are facing major challenges. In order to standardize the perioperative assessment and procedures, we have developed a perioperative evaluation and auxiliary decision-making system named "Aged Patient Perioperative Longitudinal Evaluation-Multidisciplinary Trial (APPLE-MDT)".MethodsWe will conduct a perioperative risk evaluation and targeted intervention, with follow-ups at 1, 3, and 6?months after surgery. The primary objective of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the "Aged Patient Perioperative Longitudinal Evaluation-Multiple Disciplinary Trial Path" (hereinafter referred to as the APPLE-MDT path) in surgical decision-making for aged patients (?75?years) undergoing elective surgery under non-local anesthesia in the operating room. The secondary objectives of the study are to evaluate the postoperative outcome and health economics of the APPLE-MDT path applied to the surgical decision-making of aged patients (?75?years) undergoing elective surgery under non-local anesthesia and to optimize intervention strategies for aged patients undergoing surgery to reduce the occurrence of postoperative complications and improve the quality of life after surgery.DiscussionIt is necessary to formulate a reliable, effective, and concise evaluation tool, which can effectively predict the perioperative complications and mortality of aged patients, support targeted intervention strategies, and allow for a more comprehensive risk and benefit analysis, thereby forming an effective senile perioperative surgery management path. It is expected that the implementation of this protocol can reduce the occurrence of postoperative complications, improve the postoperative quality of life, shorten hospital stay, reduce hospitalization expenses, reduce social burden, and allow the elderly to have a good quality of life after surgery.Trial registrationChiCTR, ChiCTR1800020363 , Registered 15 December 2018.

Project description:BackgroundTreatment of postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) is more complicated in elderly patients, and multiple daily dosing, complex titration, and high incidences of adverse events can be limiting for many pharmacological treatment options.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to determine whether the efficacy and tolerability of once-daily gastroretentive gabapentin (G-GR) is similar between elderly patients (≥75 years) and younger patients (<75 years).MethodsData from two phase III, placebo-controlled studies of 1,800 mg G-GR once daily with dinner in patients with PHN were integrated and analyzed by age subgroups (<75 years, n = 527; ≥75 years, n = 192). Efficacy assessments at endpoint (week 10) included baseline-adjusted change in average daily pain (ADP) and average daily sleep interference (SIS) scores, the proportion of responders (≥30 % pain reduction), and the proportion of patients feeling "Much" or "Very Much" improved on the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC).ResultsCompared with placebo, patients in both age subgroups treated with G-GR (placebo/G-GR) had greater reductions in mean ADP (≥75: -21.9/-34.2 %, p = 0.0348; <75: -29.9/-38.3 %, p = 0.0079) and SIS (≥75: -1.3/-2.4, p = 0.0017; <75: -1.8/-2.7, p < 0.0001), more patients were responders (≥75: 30.4/52.0 %, p = 0.0025; <75: 45.0/54.7 %, p = 0.0265), and more felt "Much" or "Very Much" improved on the PGIC (≥75: 20.7/35.0 %, p = 0.0272; <75: 33.6/44.9 %, p = 0.0077). The most common (placebo/G-GR) adverse events (AEs) were dizziness (≥75: 3.3/12.0 %; <75: 1.8/10.4 %), nausea (≥75: 1.0/5.4 %; <75: 2.9/4.2 %), and somnolence (≥75: 0/5.0 %; <75: 3.7/4.2 %). For all patients, AEs rapidly decreased to low steady levels after 4-5 weeks of treatment. The incidence of serious AEs was low and they were reported more frequently in the placebo than in the G-GR group.ConclusionsTherapy with once-daily G-GR was as effective for treating pain associated with PHN in elderly patients as it was in younger patients. G-GR was well tolerated, and the incidence of the most common AEs did not appear to be age related.

Project description:Importance:Among older individuals with type 2 diabetes, those with poor health have greater risk and derive less benefit from tight glycemic control with insulin. Objective:To examine whether insulin treatment is used less frequently and discontinued more often among older individuals with poor health compared with those in good health. Design, Setting, and Participants:This longitudinal cohort study included 21?531 individuals with type 2 diabetes followed for up to 4 years starting at age 75 years. Electronic health record data from the Kaiser Permanente Northern California Diabetes Registry was collected to characterize insulin treatment and glycemic control over time. Data were collected from January 1, 2009, through December 31, 2017, and analyzed from February 2, 2018, through June 30, 2019. Exposures:Health status was defined as good (<2 comorbid conditions or 2 comorbidities but physically active), intermediate (>2 comorbidities or 2 comorbidities and no self-reported weekly exercise), or poor (having end-stage pulmonary, cardiac, or renal disease; diagnosis of dementia; or metastatic cancer). Main Outcomes and Measures:Insulin use prevalence at age 75 years and discontinuation among insulin users over the next 4 years (or 6 months prior to death if <4 years). Results:Of 21?531 patients, 10?396 (48.3%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 75 (0) years. Nearly one-fifth of 75-year-olds (4076 [18.9%]) used insulin. Prevalence and adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) of insulin use at age 75 years were higher in individuals with poor health (29.4%; aRR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.87-2.20; P?<?.01) and intermediate health (27.5%; aRR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.74-1.97; P?<?.01) relative to good health (10.5% [reference]). One-third (1335 of 4076 [32.7%]) of insulin users at age 75 years discontinued insulin within 4 years of cohort entry (and at least 6 months prior to death). Likelihood of continued insulin use was higher among individuals in poor health (aRR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.27-1.67; P?<?.01) and intermediate health (aRR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.05-1.30; P?<?.01) compared with good health (reference). These same prevalence and discontinuation patterns were present in the subset with tight glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c <7.0%). Conclusions and Relevance:In older individuals with type 2 diabetes, insulin use was most prevalent among those in poor health, whereas subsequent insulin discontinuation after age 75 years was most likely in healthier patients. Changes are needed in current practice to better align with guidelines that recommend reducing treatment intensity as health status declines.

Dataset Information

Long-Term Non-invasive Ventilation: Do Patients Aged Over 75 Years Differ From Younger Adults?

Publications

Long-Term Non-invasive Ventilation: Do Patients Aged Over 75 Years Differ From Younger Adults?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets