Background. The objective of this quasi-experimental study was to determine whether bolus vitamin D supplementation taken either regularly over the preceding year or after the diagnosis of COVID-19 was effective in improving survival among hospitalized frail elderly COVID-19 patients. Methods. Seventy-seven patients consecutively hospitalized for COVID-19 in a geriatric unit were included. Intervention groups were participants regularly supplemented with vitamin D over the preceding year (Group 1), and those supplemented with vitamin D after COVID-19 diagnosis (Group 2). The comparator group involved participants having received no vitamin D supplements (Group 3). Outcomes were 14-day mortality and highest (worst) score on the ordinal scale for clinical improvement (OSCI) measured during COVID-19 acute phase. Potential confounders were age, gender, functional abilities, undernutrition, cancer, hypertension, cardiomyopathy, glycated hemoglobin, number of acute health issues at admission, hospital use of antibiotics, corticosteroids, and pharmacological treatments of respiratory disorders. Results. The three groups (n = 77; mean ± SD, 88 ± 5 years; 49% women) were similar at baseline (except for woman proportion, p = 0.02), as were the treatments used for COVID-19. In Group 1 (n = 29), 93.1% of COVID-19 participants survived at day 14, compared to 81.2% survivors in Group 2 (n = 16) (p = 0.33) and 68.7% survivors in Group 3 (n = 32) (p = 0.02). While considering Group 3 as reference (hazard ratio (HR) = 1), the fully-adjusted HR for 14-day mortality was HR = 0.07 (p = 0.017) for Group 1 and HR = 0.37 (p = 0.28) for Group 2. Group 1 had longer survival time than Group 3 (log-rank p = 0.015), although there was no difference between Groups 2 and 3 (log-rank p = 0.32). Group 1, but not Group 2 (p = 0.40), was associated with lower risk of OSCI score ≥5 compared to Group 3 (odds ratio = 0.08, p = 0.03). Conclusions. Regular bolus vitamin D supplementation was associated with less severe COVID-19 and better survival in frail elderly.

To systematically review and quantitatively synthetize evidence on the use of PIPs linked to adverse health outcomes in older adults. A Medline, Embase® and Opengrey libraries search was conducted from 2004 to February 2021, using the PICO model: older people, psychotropic drugs, inappropriate prescribing, and adverse drug events. Fixed-effects and random-effects meta-analysis were performed from 3 eligible studies using an inverse-variance method. Of the 1943 originally identified abstracts, 106 met the inclusion criteria and 7 studies were included in this review. All were of good quality. The number of participants ranged from 318 to 383,150 older adults (54.5-74.4% women). Associations were found between PIPs use and decreased personal care activities of daily living (ADL), unplanned hospitalizations, falls and mortality. In the pooled analysis, association with falls was confirmed (1.23 [95%CI: 1.15;1.32]). Participants of 65 years and older treated with PIPs were more at risk of adverse health outcomes than those using no PIPs, including greater risks of falls, functional disabilities, unplanned hospitalizations, and mortality. Results of the present systematic review and meta-analysis provide additional evidence for an appropriate and safe use of psychotropics in older adults.

Aging is associated with a decline in functional capacities, which can lead to challenges in medication preparation. Identifying these issues appears essential. The objectives of this study were to describe the proportion of pharmaceutical interventions carried out following the identification of patient difficulties in preparing and administering medications, and to characterize the difficulties identified. Descriptive cross-sectional study with data collected during 42 pharmaceutical interviews with patients hospitalized on an acute geriatric ward. The interview consisted of two parts: i) a questionnaire assessing potential difficulties, and ii) direct observation of medication preparation using pharmaceutical forms similar to those usually prescribed to the patient. The main outcome was the occurrence of at least one pharmaceutical intervention following the identification of difficulties. Pharmaceutical intervention was suggested to 95.0 % of patients where a difficulty was identified, representing 45.2 % of patients included. Interventions included education on correct use (16.0 %), substitution of pharmaceutical forms (16.0 %), implementation of tools for patients (36.0 %) and home assistance (32.0 %). These interventions were accepted by the geriatrician in all cases and by the patient in 80.0 %. At least one difficulty was identified for 47.7 % of the patients. This study shows that identifying functional difficulties in medication preparation enables tailored interventions to address these issues. Observing older adults' abilities to manage their medication could reduce the risk of medication errors and probably enhance their daily quality of life.