Advertisement

Higher Fit-fOR-The-Aged (FORTA) Scores Comprising Medication Errors are Associated with Impaired Cognitive and Physical Function Tests in the VALFORTA Trial

  • Farhad Pazan
  • Heinrich Burkhardt
  • Helmut Frohnhofen
  • Christel Weiss
  • Christina Throm
  • Alexandra Kuhn-Thiel
  • Martin WehlingEmail author
Original Research Article
  • 51 Downloads

Abstract

Background

The Fit fOR The Aged (FORTA) list, a drug classification combining positive and negative labelling of drugs, has been clinically (VALFORTA-trial) validated to improve medication quality and clinical endpoints.

Objective

The objective of this study was to determine the association of medication quality with functional abilities tested in cognitive and physical function tests.

Patients and Methods

Data from the prospective, randomized controlled VALFORTA trial on 409 geriatric (mean age 81.53 years) in-hospital patients were tested for associations between the FORTA score (sum of over- and under-treatment errors) on admission and cognitive and physical function tests. Univariate and multivariate linear correlations corrected for age, sex, number of medications, number of chronic conditions, and body mass index as well as comparisons between high and low FORTA-score (cut-off 3) patients were performed.

Results

The FORTA score was significantly correlated with Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (p < 0.0001), the Tinetti test (p < 0.002), Essen Questionnaire on Age and Sleepiness (p < 0.0001), Mini-Mental State Examination (p < 0.0001), and handgrip strength (p < 0.04) in the univariate analysis, and with Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (p < 0.003), the Tinetti test (p < 0.003), and the Essen Questionnaire on Age and Sleepiness (p < 0.0001) in the multivariate analysis. Effect size was weak for Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (R-squared = 0.12) and the Tinetti test (R-squared = 0.03) and medium for the Essen Questionnaire on Age and Sleepiness (R-squared = 0.22). Significant differences between patients with high and low FORTA scores were found for Instrumental Activities of Daily Living, the Tinetti test, mini-nutritional assessments, Mini-Mental State Examination, Essen Questionnaire on Age and Sleepiness, and the Geriatric Depression Scale. All significant tests revealed that higher FORTA scores (lower medication quality) were associated with less favorable test outcomes.

Conclusions

The FORTA score is associated with relevant aspects of comprehensive geriatric assessment, underlining the importance of medication quality for the functional and cognitive well-being of older patients.

Trial Registration Number

DRKS00000531.

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Funding

The study was funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation (WE 1184/15-1 to Martin Wehling and Heinrich Burkhardt, FR2997/2-1 to Helmut Frohnhofen).

Conflict of Interest

Martin Wehling was employed by AstraZeneca R&D, Mölndal, as the director of discovery medicine (translational medicine) from 2003 to 2006, while on sabbatical leave from his professorship at the University of Heidelberg. Since returning to this position in January 2007, he has received lecturing and consulting fees from Sanofi-Aventis, Bayer, Berlin-Chemie, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Aspen, Novartis, Takeda, Roche, Pfizer, Bristol-Myers, Daichii-Sankyo, Lilly, Otsuka, Novo-Nordisk, Shire, and LEO Pharma. Helmut Frohnhofen received lecturing and consulting fees from Amgen. Farhad Pazan, Heinrich Burkhardt, Christina Throm, Alexandra Kuhn-Thiel, and Christel Weiss have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the contents of this study.

Ethical Approval

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University and the Ethics Committee of the University of Witten-Herdecke.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Supplementary material

40266_2018_626_MOESM1_ESM.docx (175 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 175 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Maher RL, Hanlon J, Hajjar ER. Clinical consequences of polypharmacy in elderly. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2014;13:57–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barnett K, Mercer SW, Norbury M, et al. Epidemiology of multimorbidity and implications for health care, research, and medical education: a cross-sectional study. Lancet. 2012;380:37–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    McNamara KP, Breken BD, Alzubaidi HAT, et al. Health professional perspectives on the management of multimorbidity and polypharmacy for older patients in Australia. Age Ageing. 2017;46:291–9.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Molokhia M, Majeed A. Current and future perspectives on the management of polypharmacy. BMC Fam Pract. 2017;18:70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hamilton HJ, Gallagher PF, O’Mahony D. Inappropriate prescribing and adverse drug events in older people. BMC Geriatr. 2009;9:5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wauters M, Elseviers M, Vaes B, et al. Too many, too few, or too unsafe? Impact of inappropriate prescribing on mortality, and hospitalization in a cohort of community-dwelling oldest old. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2016;82:1382–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cadogan CA, Ryan C, Hughes CM. Appropriate polypharmacy and medicine safety: when many is not too many. Drug Saf. 2016;39:109–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hall CD, Karpen SC, Odle B, et al. Development and evaluation of the medication-based index of physical function (MedIP). Age Ageing. 2017;46:761–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Morley JE. Inappropriate drug prescribing and polypharmacy are major causes of poor outcomes in long-term care. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2014;15:780–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wehling M. Drug therapy for the elderly. Vienna: Springer; 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wehling M. Guideline-driven polypharmacy in elderly, multimorbid patients is basically flawed: there are almost no guidelines for these patients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2011;59:376–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Crome P, Lally F, Cherubini A, et al. Exclusion of older people from clinical trials: professional views from nine European countries participating in the PREDICT study. Drugs Aging. 2011;28:667–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Watts G. Why the exclusion of older people from clinical research must stop. BMJ. 2012;344:e3445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Clegg A, Relton C, Young J, et al. Improving recruitment of older people to clinical trials: use of the cohort multiple randomised controlled trial design. Age Ageing. 2015;44:547–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shenoy P, Harugeri A. Elderly patients’ participation in clinical trials. Perspect Clin Res. 2015;6:184–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    The American Geriatrics Society 2015 Beers Criteria Update Expert Panel, American Geriatrics Society. Updated Beers criteria for potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2015;2015(63):2227–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gallagher P, Ryan C, Byrne S, et al. STOPP (screening tool of older person’s prescriptions) and START (screening tool to alert doctors to right treatment): consensus validation. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2008;46:72–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wehling M. Drug therapy in the elderly: too much or too little, what to do? A new assessment system: fit for the aged FORTA. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2008;133:2289–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wehling M. Multimorbidity and polypharmacy: how to reduce the harmful drug load and yet add needed drugs in the elderly? Proposal of a new drug classification: fit for the aged. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2009;57:560–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kuhn-Thiel AM, Weiss C, Wehling M, The FORTA Authors/Expert Panel Members. Consensus validation of the FORTA (Fit fOR The Aged) list: a clinical tool for increasing the appropriateness of pharmacotherapy in the elderly. Drugs Aging. 2014;31:131–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pazan F, Weiss C, Wehling M. The FORTA (Fit fOR The Aged) list 2015: update of a validated clinical tool for improved pharmacotherapy in the elderly. Drugs Aging. 2016;33:447–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pazan F, Weiss C, Wehling M, et al. The EURO-FORTA (Fit fOR The Aged) list: international consensus validation of a clinical tool for improved drug treatment in older people. Drugs Aging. 2018;35:61–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pazan F, Burkhardt H, Frohnhofen H, et al. Changes in prescription patterns in older hospitalized patients: the impact of FORTA on disease-related over- and under-treatments. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2018;74:339–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wehling M, Burkhardt H, Kuhn-Thiel A, et al. VALFORTA: a randomised trial to validate the FORTA (Fit fOR The Aged) classification. Age Ageing. 2016;45:262–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Michalek C, Wehling M, Schlitzer J, Frohnhofen H. Effects of “Fit fOR The Aged” (FORTA) on pharmacotherapy and clinical endpoints: a pilot randomized controlled study. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2014;70:1261–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wickop B, Härterich S, Sommer C, et al. Potentially inappropriate medication use in multimorbid elderly inpatients: differences between the FORTA, PRISCUS and STOPP ratings. Drugs Real World Outcomes. 2016;3:317–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gamé X, Peyronnet B, Cornu JN. Fesoterodine: pharmacological properties and clinical implications. Eur J Pharmacol. 2018;15(833):155–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Parker SG, McCue P, Phelps K, et al. What is comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA)? An umbrella review. Age Ageing. 2018;47:149–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Frohnhofen H, Fulda S, Frohnhofen K, et al. Validation of the Essener Questionnaire of Age and Sleepiness in the elderly using pupillometry. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2013;755:125–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988. p. 79–80.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Altman DG. Relation between two continuous variables. In: Altman DG, editor. Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman and Hall/CRC; 1990. p. 277–324.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wu YH, Wang CJ, Hung CH, et al. Association between using medications with anticholinergic properties and short-term cognitive decline among older men: a retrospective cohort study in Taiwan. Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2017;17(Suppl 1):57–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Langeard A, Pothier K, Morello R, et al. Polypharmacy cut-off for gait and cognitive impairments. Front Pharmacol. 2016;7:296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wehling M. Older people, a plethora of drugs, and drug list approaches: useful, efficacious, or a waste of time? J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2016;1(17):1073–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Van der Cammen TJ, Rajkumar C, Onder G, et al. Drug cessation in complex older adults: time for action. Age Ageing. 2014;43:20–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Landi F, Russo A, Liperoti R, et al. Impact of inappropriate drug use on physical performance among a frail elderly population living in the community. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;63:791–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Koyama A, Steinman M, Ensrud K, et al. Long-term cognitive and functional effects of potentially inappropriate medications in older women. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2014;69:423–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Farhad Pazan
    • 1
  • Heinrich Burkhardt
    • 2
  • Helmut Frohnhofen
    • 3
  • Christel Weiss
    • 4
  • Christina Throm
    • 5
  • Alexandra Kuhn-Thiel
    • 6
  • Martin Wehling
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Medical Faculty Mannheim, Institute for Clinical PharmacologyRuprecht-Karls-University HeidelbergMannheimGermany
  2. 2.IV. Medical Department, Geriatrics, University Hospital MannheimHeidelberg UniversityMannheimGermany
  3. 3.Department of Medicine, Faculty of HealthUniversity Witten-HerdeckeWittenGermany
  4. 4.Department of Medical Statistics, Biomathematics and Information Processing, Medical Faculty MannheimHeidelberg UniversityMannheimGermany
  5. 5.Department of Cardiology and AngiologyAgaplesion Markus HospitalFrankfurtGermany
  6. 6.MEDIAN Klinik SonnenwendeBad DürkheimGermany

Personalised recommendations