Home › Research › Clinical safety
New insights: dose-response relationship between psychotropic drugs and falls: a study in nursing home residents with dementia
Sterke CS, van Beeck EF, van der Velde N, Ziere G, Petrovic M, Looman CW, van der Cammen TJ.. Journal of clinical pharmacology, 2011-05-31
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
The contribution of specific psychotropic drugs to fall risk in patients with dementia has not been quantified precisely until now. The authors evaluated the dose-response relationship between psychotropic drugs and falls in nursing home residents with dementia. Daily drug use and daily falls were recorded in 248 nursing home residents with dementia from January 1, 2006, to January 1, 2008. For each day of the study period, data on drug use were abstracted from the prescription database, and falls were retrieved from a standardized incident report system, resulting in a data set of 85 074 person-days. The authors found significant dose-response relationships for the use of antipsychotics (hazard ratio [HR], 2.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.49-5.17), anxiolytics (1.60; 1.20-2.14), hypnotics and sedatives (2.58; 1.42-4.68), and antidepressants (2.84; 1.93-4.16). Fall risk increased significantly with 28% at 0.25 of the defined daily dose (DDD) of an antipsychotic or antidepressant, with 8% at 0.2 of the DDD of an anxiolytic, and with 56% at 0.5 of the DDD of a hypnotic or sedative; it increased further with dose increments and with combinations of psychotropics. Even at low dosages, psychotropic drugs are associated with increased fall risk in nursing home residents with dementia.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Sterke, C. S., van Beeck, E. F., van der Velde, N., Ziere, G., Petrovic, M., Looman, C. W., et al. (2012). New insights: dose-response relationship between psychotropic drugs and falls: a study in nursing home residents with dementia. Journal of clinical pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091270011405665
Vancouver
Sterke CS, van Beeck EF, van der Velde N, Ziere G, Petrovic M, Looman CW, et al. New insights: dose-response relationship between psychotropic drugs and falls: a study in nursing home residents with dementia. Journal of clinical pharmacology. 2012. doi:10.1177/0091270011405665. PMID: 21628599.
BibTeX
@article{sterke2012-21628599,
author = {Sterke, C. S. and van Beeck, E. F. and van der Velde, N. and Ziere, G. and Petrovic, M. and Looman, C. W. and van der Cammen, T. J.},
title = {{New insights: dose-response relationship between psychotropic drugs and falls: a study in nursing home residents with dementia}},
journal = {Journal of clinical pharmacology},
year = {2012},
doi = {10.1177/0091270011405665},
pmid = {21628599},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/0091270011405665}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- The authors found significant dose-response relationships for the use of antipsychotics (hazard ratio [HR], 2.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.49-5.17), anxiolytics (1.60; 1.20-2.14), hypnotics and sedatives (2.58; 1.42-4.68), and antidepressants (2.84; 1.93-4.16).
- Fall risk increased significantly with 28% at 0.25 of the defined daily dose (DDD) of an antipsychotic or antidepressant, with 8% at 0.2 of the DDD of an anxiolytic, and with 56% at 0.5 of the DDD of a hypnotic or sedative; it increased further with dose increments and with combinations of psychotropics.
- Even at low dosages, psychotropic drugs are associated with increased fall risk in nursing home residents with dementia.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
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.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of clinical pharmacology) |
| 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 21628599) |
| 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 Clinical safety
Also tagged “controlled”
1,118 studies in the library carry the topic tag “controlled”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,118 tagged studies.