The association between anticholinergic burden and constipation is not well defined and documented; for this reason, a systematic review was carried out in five databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, and Scopus), including studies assessing the correlation between anticholinergic burden, and constipation between January 2006 and December 2020. Data extraction was conducted independently by two researchers. Abstracts and titles were reviewed to determine eligibility for review with eligible articles read in full. From 2507 identified articles, 11 were selected for this review: six cross-sectional studies, four retrospective cohort studies, and a post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial. Overall, nine studies reported at least one statistical association between anticholinergic burden and constipation, finding 13 positive results out of 24 association measurements. A total of 211,921 patients were studied. The association between constipation and anticholinergic burden could be demonstrated in studies including 207,795 patients. Most studies were not designed to find differences in constipation prevalence and did not adjust the results by confounding factors. Our findings suggest that a correlation between anticholinergic burden and constipation exists. Higher quality-evidence studies are needed, including analysis that considers confounding factors, such as other non-pharmacological causes of constipation.

[corrected] To analyze the appropriateness of pharmacotherapy and, if necessary, carry out interventions for its improvement in a cohort of patients with multiple chronic conditions. Descriptive, prospective study of 21 months duration. Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío. Patients with multiple chronic conditions included in a project for integrated healthcare. The primary endpoint was the number of inappropriate treatments. To evaluate the appropriateness of pharmacotherapy, the specialist in hospital pharmacy followed a standardized procedure consisting of the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) questionnaire, modified as an implicit method, and the list of criteria of the Screening Tool of Older Person's Potentially Inappropriate Prescription/Screening Tool to Alert doctors to the Right (STOPP-START) as an explicit method. A total of 244 patients were included, with a mean age of 76 ± 8 (± SD) years. Half (50%) of the patients were men. The mean number of diagnoses per patient was 8 ± 3 (± SD) and 12 ± 4 drugs (± SD). A total of 840 inappropriate treatments were detected, most of them being due to the presence of interactions. The STOPP criteria most not complied with, were duplicate drug class, and prolonged use of benzodiazepines with long half-life or long-acting metabolites, and START for ACE inhibitors in chronic heart failure and statins and antiplatelets in diabetes mellitus, if one or more coexisting risk factors. We detected a large number of inappropriate treatments. This highlights the importance of evaluating the appropriateness of drug treatment in patients with multiple conditions. It is advisable to use a combined pharmacist intervention strategy that includes both an implicit method and an explicit method.

The development of health information technology available and accessible to professionals is increasing in the last few years. However, a low number of electronic health tools included some kind of information about medication reconciliation. To identify all the electronic medication reconciliation tools aimed at healthcare professionals and summarize their main features, availability, and clinical impact on patient safety. A systematic review of studies that included a description of an electronic medication reconciliation tool (web-based or mobile app) aimed at healthcare professionals was conducted. The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO: registration number CRD42022366662, and followed PRISMA guidelines. The literature search was performed using four healthcare databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus with no language or publication date restrictions. We identified a total of 1227 articles, of which only 12 met the inclusion criteria.Through these articles,12 electronic tools were detected. Viewing and comparing different medication lists and grouping medications into multiple categories were some of the more recurring features of the tools. With respect to the clinical impact on patient safety, a reduction in adverse drug events or medication discrepancies was detected in up to four tools, but no significant differences in emergency room visits or hospital readmissions were found. 12 e-MedRec tools aimed at health professionals have been developed to date but none was designed as a mobile app. The main features that healthcare professionals requested to be included in e-MedRec tools were interoperability, “user-friendly” information, and integration with the ordering process.