Pharmaceutical Treatment of People with Dementia during the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic in Germany: Polypharmacy, Anticholinergic Medication, and Antidementia Medication.

IF 1.6 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra Pub Date : 2025-06-30 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1159/000546708
Jennifer Scheel-Barteit, Caroline Floto, Henrike Höpfner, Thomas Kühlein, Ildikó Gágyor, Jochen Gensichen, Anita Hausen, Michael Hoelscher, Christian Janke, Armin Nassehi, Daniel Teupser, Tobias Dreischulte, Maria Sebastião
{"title":"Pharmaceutical Treatment of People with Dementia during the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic in Germany: Polypharmacy, Anticholinergic Medication, and Antidementia Medication.","authors":"Jennifer Scheel-Barteit, Caroline Floto, Henrike Höpfner, Thomas Kühlein, Ildikó Gágyor, Jochen Gensichen, Anita Hausen, Michael Hoelscher, Christian Janke, Armin Nassehi, Daniel Teupser, Tobias Dreischulte, Maria Sebastião","doi":"10.1159/000546708","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Dementia patients are at increased risk of polypharmacy and inappropriate medication, exacerbating cognitive decline. The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic constrained access to medical care and monitoring services for dementia patients, potentially worsening medication-related issues. We analyzed the medical treatment of dementia patients during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Bavaria, particularly regarding polypharmacy, anticholinergic medication, and antidementia medication.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Bavarian Ambulatory COVID-19 Monitor (BaCoM) is a longitudinal registry study conducted in Bavaria, Germany. Participants in need of nursing care with baseline data during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic were included in our detailed analysis (<i>N</i> = 345, dementia sample <i>n</i> = 96 with a dementia diagnosis and/or antidementia medication treatment). Descriptive statistics and group comparisons (dementia vs. non-dementia sample; within the dementia sample: participants with vs. without antidementia medication; participants with vs. without anticholinergic medication in both the non-dementia sample and the dementia sample) are provided.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the dementia sample, 91.7% of the patients received ≥4 medications (polypharmacy), 21.9% even ≥10 medications. Prescription of ≥1 anticholinergic medications was found in 65.6% and prescription of ≥1 antidementia medications in 31.2% of the dementia sample. Persons with versus without anticholinergic medication did not differ from each other in group comparisons.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite known risks and adverse effects, polypharmacy as well as the use of anticholinergic and antidementia medication were common among individuals with dementia. Compared to pre-pandemic studies, levels of polypharmacy and anticholinergic medication but not of antidementia medication appeared slightly elevated in people with dementia. Because of the associated risks, polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medication require regular review (and when possible reduction) in people with dementia. In crisis situations like a pandemic, an outreach approach might be necessary for this patient group.</p>","PeriodicalId":38017,"journal":{"name":"Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra","volume":"15 1","pages":"119-131"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12503483/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000546708","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Dementia patients are at increased risk of polypharmacy and inappropriate medication, exacerbating cognitive decline. The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic constrained access to medical care and monitoring services for dementia patients, potentially worsening medication-related issues. We analyzed the medical treatment of dementia patients during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in Bavaria, particularly regarding polypharmacy, anticholinergic medication, and antidementia medication.

Methods: The Bavarian Ambulatory COVID-19 Monitor (BaCoM) is a longitudinal registry study conducted in Bavaria, Germany. Participants in need of nursing care with baseline data during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic were included in our detailed analysis (N = 345, dementia sample n = 96 with a dementia diagnosis and/or antidementia medication treatment). Descriptive statistics and group comparisons (dementia vs. non-dementia sample; within the dementia sample: participants with vs. without antidementia medication; participants with vs. without anticholinergic medication in both the non-dementia sample and the dementia sample) are provided.

Results: In the dementia sample, 91.7% of the patients received ≥4 medications (polypharmacy), 21.9% even ≥10 medications. Prescription of ≥1 anticholinergic medications was found in 65.6% and prescription of ≥1 antidementia medications in 31.2% of the dementia sample. Persons with versus without anticholinergic medication did not differ from each other in group comparisons.

Conclusion: Despite known risks and adverse effects, polypharmacy as well as the use of anticholinergic and antidementia medication were common among individuals with dementia. Compared to pre-pandemic studies, levels of polypharmacy and anticholinergic medication but not of antidementia medication appeared slightly elevated in people with dementia. Because of the associated risks, polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medication require regular review (and when possible reduction) in people with dementia. In crisis situations like a pandemic, an outreach approach might be necessary for this patient group.

德国SARS-CoV-2大流行期间痴呆症患者的药物治疗:综合用药、抗胆碱能药物和抗痴呆药物。
导读:痴呆患者多药和用药不当的风险增加,加剧认知能力下降。SARS-CoV-2大流行限制了痴呆症患者获得医疗保健和监测服务的机会,可能加剧与药物相关的问题。我们分析了巴伐利亚州SARS-CoV-2大流行期间痴呆患者的医疗情况,特别是在多药、抗胆碱能药物和抗痴呆药物方面。方法:巴伐利亚州COVID-19动态监测(BaCoM)是一项在德国巴伐利亚州进行的纵向登记研究。在SARS-CoV-2大流行期间需要护理的基线数据的参与者被纳入我们的详细分析(N = 345,痴呆样本N = 96,痴呆诊断和/或抗痴呆药物治疗)。提供了描述性统计数据和组比较(痴呆与非痴呆样本;痴呆样本内:服用抗痴呆药物与不服用抗痴呆药物的参与者;非痴呆样本和痴呆样本中服用抗胆碱能药物与不服用抗痴呆药物的参与者)。结果:痴呆样本中91.7%的患者用药≥4种(多药),21.9%的患者用药≥10种。65.6%的痴呆患者处方≥1种抗胆碱能药物,31.2%的痴呆患者处方≥1种抗痴呆药物。服用抗胆碱能药物的人与未服用抗胆碱能药物的人在组间比较中没有差异。结论:尽管存在已知的风险和不良反应,但多种药物以及抗胆碱能和抗痴呆药物的使用在痴呆患者中很常见。与大流行前的研究相比,痴呆症患者中多药和抗胆碱能药物的水平略有升高,而抗痴呆药物的水平则没有升高。由于相关的风险,对痴呆症患者进行多药和可能不适当的药物治疗需要定期检查(并在可能时减少)。在大流行等危机情况下,可能需要对这一患者群体采取外展方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra
Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊介绍: This open access and online-only journal publishes original articles covering the entire spectrum of cognitive dysfunction such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease, Huntington’s chorea and other neurodegenerative diseases. The journal draws from diverse related research disciplines such as psychogeriatrics, neuropsychology, clinical neurology, morphology, physiology, genetic molecular biology, pathology, biochemistry, immunology, pharmacology and pharmaceutics. Strong emphasis is placed on the publication of research findings from animal studies which are complemented by clinical and therapeutic experience to give an overall appreciation of the field. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra provides additional contents based on reviewed and accepted submissions to the main journal Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders Extra .
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信