Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. End-of-life care

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Older people reaching end-of-life status are particularly at risk of adverse effects of drug therapy. Polypharmacy, declining organ function, co-morbidity, malnutrition, cachexia and changes in body composition all sum up to increase the risk of many drug-related problems in individuals who receive end-of-life care. End of life is defined by a limited lifespan or advanced disability. Optimal prescribing for end-of-life patients with multimorbidity, especially in those dying from non-cancer conditions, remains mostly unexplored, despite the increasing recognition that the management goals for patients with chronic diseases should be redefined in the setting of reduced life expectancy. Most drugs used for symptom palliation in end-of-life care of older patients are used without solid evidence of their benefits and risks in this particularly frail population. Appropriate dosing or optimal administration routes are in most cases unknown. Avoiding or discontinuing drugs that aim to prolong life or prevent disability is usually common sense in end-of-life care, particularly when the time needed to obtain the expected benefits from the drug is longer than the life expectancy of a particular individual. However, discontinuation of drugs is not standard practice, and prescriptions are usually not adapted to changes in the course of advanced diseases. Careful consideration of remaining life expectancy, time until benefit, goals of care and treatment targets for each drug seems to be a sensible framework for decision making. In this article, some key issues on drug therapy at the end of life are discussed, including principles of decision making about drug treatments, specific aspects of drug therapy in some common geriatric conditions (heart failure and dementia), treatment of acute concurrent problems such as infections, evidence to guide the choice and use of drugs to treat symptoms in palliative care, and avoidance of some long-term therapies in end-of-life care. Solid evidence is lacking to guide optimal pharmacotherapy in most end-of-life settings, especially in non-cancer diseases and very old patients. Some open questions for research are suggested.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Cruz-Jentoft, A. J., Boland, B., & Rexach, L. (2012). Drug therapy optimization at the end of life. Drugs & aging. https://doi.org/10.2165/11631740-000000000-00000

Vancouver

Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Boland B, Rexach L. Drug therapy optimization at the end of life. Drugs & aging. 2012. doi:10.2165/11631740-000000000-00000. PMID: 22642784.

BibTeX

@article{cruzjentoft2012-22642784,
  author  = {Cruz-Jentoft, A. J. and Boland, B. and Rexach, L.},
  title   = {{Drug therapy optimization at the end of life}},
  journal = {Drugs \& aging},
  year    = {2012},
  doi     = {10.2165/11631740-000000000-00000},
  pmid    = {22642784},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.2165/11631740-000000000-00000}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 36/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 21 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 36 of 100. Total 36 of 100.21 of the 58 points we could judge = 36 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Drugs & aging)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 2012 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 0 / 4 Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 0 / 3 Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 22642784)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 21 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100.
Total 36 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Related studies in End-of-life care

Also tagged “mortality”

858 studies in the library carry the topic tag “mortality”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 858 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on End-of-life care

See all studies in End-of-life care →