Home › Research › Digital health tools
Multiple anticholinergic medication use and risk of hospital admission for confusion or dementia
Kalisch Ellett LM, Pratt NL, Ramsay EN, Barratt JD, Roughead EE.. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2014-10-03
Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety
Objectives To identify the association between use of multiple anticholinergic medications and risk of hospitalization for confusion or dementia. Design Retrospective cohort study conducted over 2 years between July 2010 and June 2012, using administrative claims data from the Australian Department of Veterans' Affairs. Setting Australia. Participants Australian veterans dispensed at least one moderately or highly anticholinergic medication in the year before study start. Measurements Cumulative anticholinergic use on each day of the study period was determined. The association between hospitalization for confusion or dementia and number of anticholinergic medications used at the time of admission was compared against times during which participants were not taking anticholinergic medications. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken limiting the outcome to admissions for acute confusion and excluding individuals taking antipsychotics. Results Adjusted results showed a significantly greater risk of hospitalization for confusion or dementia when individuals were taking two or more anticholinergic medications. The adjusted incident rate ratios (IRRs) were 2.58 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.91-3.48) for those taking two anticholinergics and 3.87 (95% CI = 1.83-8.21) for those taking three or more. Sensitivity analyses in which participants taking antipsychotic medications were excluded and the outcome was limited to acute confusion also found similar risks for those taking two (IRR 1.82, 95% CI = 1.18-2.80) and three or more (IRR = 3.98 95% CI = 1.50-10.58) anticholinergic medications. Conclusion Taking more anticholinergic medications is associated with greater risk of hospitalization for confusion or dementia. Strategies to reduce anticholinergic medication burden are likely to translate into significant health benefits.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Kalisch Ellett, L. M., Pratt, N. L., Ramsay, E. N., Barratt, J. D., & Roughead, E. E. (2014). Multiple anticholinergic medication use and risk of hospital admission for confusion or dementia. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.13054
Vancouver
Kalisch Ellett LM, Pratt NL, Ramsay EN, Barratt JD, Roughead EE. Multiple anticholinergic medication use and risk of hospital admission for confusion or dementia. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2014. doi:10.1111/jgs.13054. PMID: 25284144.
BibTeX
@article{kalischellett2014-25284144,
author = {Kalisch Ellett, L. M. and Pratt, N. L. and Ramsay, E. N. and Barratt, J. D. and Roughead, E. E.},
title = {{Multiple anticholinergic medication use and risk of hospital admission for confusion or dementia}},
journal = {Journal of the American Geriatrics Society},
year = {2014},
doi = {10.1111/jgs.13054},
pmid = {25284144},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.13054}
}
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
- Results Adjusted results showed a significantly greater risk of hospitalization for confusion or dementia when individuals were taking two or more anticholinergic medications.
- Conclusion Taking more anticholinergic medications is associated with greater risk of hospitalization for confusion or dementia.
- Strategies to reduce anticholinergic medication burden are likely to translate into significant health benefits.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Digital health →
Study details
- Study designcohort study
- Effect sizeRR 1.82; RR = 3.98
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 57/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a cohort study following people over time. Scored zero for sample size, 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 33 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 57 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of the American Geriatrics Society) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A cohort study following people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2014 — 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 | 3 / 3 | Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar) |
| 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 25284144) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 33 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 33 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 57 out of 100. |
| Total | 57 / 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 the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Digital health tools
Also tagged “galantamine”
271 studies in the library carry the topic tag “galantamine”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 271 tagged studies.