Amy Morris

UNLABELLED: : Inappropriate medication use and polypharmacy are extremely common among older adults. Numerous studies have discussed the importance of a comprehensive medication assessment in the general geriatric population. However, only a handful of studies have evaluated inappropriate medication use in the geriatric oncology patient. Almost a dozen medication screening tools exist for the older adult. Each available tool has the potential to improve aspects of the care of older cancer patients, but no single tool has been developed for this population. We extensively reviewed the literature (MEDLINE, PubMed) to evaluate and summarize the most relevant medication screening tools for older patients with cancer. Findings of this review support the use of several screening tools concurrently for the elderly patient with cancer. A deprescribing tool should be developed and included in a comprehensive geriatric oncology assessment. Finally, prospective studies are needed to evaluate such a tool to determine its feasibility and impact in older patients with cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The prevalence of polypharmacy increases with advancing age. Older adults are more susceptible to adverse effects of medications. "Prescribing cascades" are common, whereas "deprescribing" remains uncommon; thus, older patients tend to accumulate medications over time. Older patients with cancer are at high risk for adverse drug events, in part because of the complexity and intensity of cancer treatment. Additionally, a cancer diagnosis often alters assessments of life expectancy, clinical status, and competing risk. Screening for polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medications could reduce the risk for adverse drug events, enhance quality of life, and reduce health care spending for older cancer patients.

Historically poor success rates of nonoperative management of splenic injuries in elderly patients have led to recommendations for operative intervention in patients more than 55 years of age. Recent studies are in opposition to earlier recommendations revealing equal success rates of nonoperative management of splenic injuries in all age groups. A retrospective chart review was performed to assess factors related to the successful management of splenic injuries in patients over 55 years of age at a Level I trauma center. Thirty-seven patients over 55 presented with blunt splenic injuries during the 5-year study period. Thirteen patients were taken immediately to the operating room on the basis of clinical findings and/or abdomen/pelvis CT results. Nonoperative management was attempted in 24 patients on the basis of CT findings. Nonoperative management was successful in 15 patients (62.5%) and failed in eight patients (33.3%). Patients who failed nonoperative management had significantly higher American Association for the Surgery of Trauma splenic injury grade and associated pelvic free fluid. There were no deaths related to complications from failed nonoperative management. We conclude that nonoperative management of blunt splenic injuries in patients over 55 may be attempted. Patients with higher-grade injuries and pelvic free fluid are at greater risk for failure. Patients with these two findings must be monitored closely. The physicians caring for elderly patients with high-grade splenic injuries and free fluid in the pelvis must use clinical judgment regarding the need and timing of operative management.

Historically poor success rates of nonoperative management of splenic injuries in elderly patients have led to recommendations for operative intervention in patients more than 55 years of age. Recent studies are in opposition to earlier recommendations revealing equal success rates of nonoperative management of splenic injuries in all age groups. A retrospective chart review was performed to assess factors related to the successful management of splenic injuries in patients over 55 years of age at a Level I trauma center. Thirty-seven patients over 55 presented with blunt splenic injuries during the 5-year study period. Thirteen patients were taken immediately to the operating room on the basis of clinical findings and/or abdomen/pelvis CT results. Nonoperative management was attempted in 24 patients on the basis of CT findings. Nonoperative management was successful in 15 patients (62.5%) and failed in eight patients (33.3%). Patients who failed nonoperative management had significantly higher American Association for the Surgery of Trauma splenic injury grade and associated pelvic free fluid. There were no deaths related to complications from failed nonoperative management. We conclude that nonoperative management of blunt splenic injuries in patients over 55 may be attempted. Patients with higher-grade injuries and pelvic free fluid are at greater risk for failure. Patients with these two findings must be monitored closely. The physicians caring for elderly patients with high-grade splenic injuries and free fluid in the pelvis must use clinical judgment regarding the need and timing of operative management.