aged

Evaluating and Treating Alcohol Use in Older Adult Patients

Author/s: 
Frank, Chris, Molnar, Rummell, Sonja, Chan, Peter

Clinical question
How do I evaluate and treat alcohol use in older
adult patients?
Bottom line
Although older adults generally drink less alcohol than
their younger counterparts,1 the consequences of use
are more severe. Older adults are more susceptible to
alcohol-related toxicity due to physiologic changes.2
The health impacts of heavy alcohol intake include
increased risks of cardiovascular disease, stroke, liver
disease, cancer, and mortality.3 Acute and chronic
alcohol use contributes to geriatric syndromes, such as
cognitive impairment, falls, frailty, and malnutrition.4

Hearing Aids for Adults With Mild to Moderate Hearing Loss

Author/s: 
Karina C. De Sousa, De Wet Swanepoel

Hearing loss is defined as an impaired ability to hear sounds at thresholds considered to be normal. Projections based on audiometric data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey estimate that by 2030, approximately 55 million US adults will have hearing loss, including 35 million with mild loss (25-40 dB) and nearly 20 million with moderate or greater loss (>40 dB).1 The most common cause of hearing loss among hearing aid users is bilateral sensorineural hearing loss due to cochlear hair cell or auditory nerve degeneration. Functional effects of hearing loss differ with severity. Mild hearing loss may affect the ability to understand speech in noisy environments; moderate or greater hearing loss affects the ability to have individual conversations in a quiet room.

Untreated hearing loss is associated with social isolation that can reduce quality of life.2 A meta-analysis of 5 randomized trials (825 adults with mild to moderate hearing loss) that compared those not receiving hearing aids with those who received hearing aids that amplified sounds via air conduction had improved ability to discriminate sound and speech and hearing-related quality of life based on Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly,2 which quantifies self-perceived functional and emotional hearing handicap (such as negative feelings and psychological distress from communication problems). The Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly scores (lower scores indicate less handicap; scale, 0-100) improved by −26.5 (95% CI, −42.2 to −10.8) points with hearing aids, exceeding the minimal clinically important difference of 18.7 points.2

Amplification with hearing aids is the primary treatment for hearing loss, but use is limited. Traditional Medicare does not cover hearing aids, and coverage for associated services remains limited. In a nationally representative cohort using data from the National Health and Aging Trends Study, hearing aid use among US adults aged 71 years and older with hearing loss was 29.2% in 2021, including 14.4% among those with mild loss and 45.3% among those with moderate hearing loss.3 Although reasons for nonuse were not directly assessed, lower-income individuals, along with those who have milder degrees of hearing loss, are less likely to use hearing aids.3 Until recently, hearing aids in the US could only be obtained through licensed hearing care professionals such as audiologists. However, since October 2022, the US Food and Drug Administration has allowed adults to buy hearing aid devices without a medical examination, prescription, or professional fitting. This regulatory change has enabled over-the-counter (OTC) direct-to-consumer hearing aids, with potential to broaden access.

Statin Therapy for Primary Prevention and Clinical Outcomes in Adults Aged 80 and Older: A Retrospective Comparative Cohort Study

Author/s: 
Ophir Lavon, Wafaa Hamodi, Sameer Kassem

Background: Evidence supporting the use of statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in individuals aged ≥ 80 years remains limited. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term clinical benefits and safety of statins for primary prevention in patients aged 80 years and older.

Methods: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study using electronic medical records and pharmacy dispensing data from Clalit Health Services in Israel, covering the period from January 2015 to December 2020. Patients aged ≥ 80 years without prior CVD who were persistent statin users were compared with similar patients not receiving statins. Exclusions included prior CVD, dialysis, or death within 1 year of follow-up. Outcomes included all-cause mortality, new coronary events, myopathy, dementia, and diabetes mellitus. Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for potential confounders, were used to assess the association between statin use and clinical outcomes.

Results: Among 15,745 patients (mean age 84.5 years; 66% female), 8413 were statin users. Over a 4-year mean follow-up, statin use was associated with a 31% reduction in mortality (HR 0.69; 95% CI: 0.34-0.74; p < 0.001) and a 20% reduction in new coronary events (HR 0.80; 95% CI: 0.68-0.94; p = 0.008). No significant differences were observed in the incidence of myopathy, diabetes, or dementia. Benefits were not observed in patients who discontinued statins before age 80.

Conclusions: In patients aged ≥ 80 years, statin therapy for primary prevention was associated with reduced all-cause mortality and coronary morbidity, without increased risk of adverse events. Early discontinuation diminished these benefits.

Evidence-Based Footwear Recommendations for Older Adults: Enhancing Mobility, Comfort, and Fall Prevention

Author/s: 
C Ray Cheever, Hyoungjun Sim, Mohamed Y. Ahmidouch, Jaewon Moon, Anissa Powell, Rayad B. Shams, Matthew Wang, Madison Hunter, Samantha Kodikara, Lindsay A. Wilson, Michael T. Gross

Background: Older adults often struggle to find footwear suitable for their clinical needs, thus affecting mobility, safety, and quality of life. Proper footwear is important due to fall risk, balance impairments, knee osteoarthritis (OA), hallux rigidus, plantar fasciitis, diabetic neuropathy, and limb length discrepancies (LLDs). Barriers such as inadequate clinical guidance and limited patient understanding persist. This paper provides updated, evidence-based recommendations for these challenges.

Methods: A topic review was conducted to evaluate shoe wear characteristics that address geriatric needs. Recommendations were synthesized from more than 45 years of clinical experience in physical therapy and categorized by clinical conditions. Evidence identified effective shoe features, including sole stiffness, tread patterns, heel elevation, and orthotic modifications to improve function, reduce pain, and reduce fall risk.

Results: Balance and fall risk: Shoes with wide soles, medium-firm materials, low heels, and high collars improved stability and reduced postural sway. Cupped, rigid insoles enhanced dynamic control, while treaded rubber outsoles minimized slipping. Knee OA: Flexible shoes with laterally wedged insoles and minimal heel lift reduced medial knee loads and pain. Supportive shoes and medially wedged insoles decreased lateral knee loads and pain. Hallux rigidus/bunions: Rocker-bottom shoes and stiffer soles accommodate deformities, improving function and comfort. Plantar fasciitis: Orthoses, supportive therapies, and stretching regimens were efficacious. Diabetic neuropathy: Rigid rocker soles and custom insoles reduced plantar pressure and ulcer recurrence. LLDs: Gradual shoe lift introduction alleviated low back pain. General recommendations: Properly fitted, comfortable shoes with moderately firm insoles, slip-resistant outsoles, and secure fastening mechanisms improve safety and function.

Conclusions: Footwear significantly impacts the mobility, safety, and well-being of older adults. Tailored recommendations enhance pain management, independence, and fall prevention. Providers should involve patients in decisions and counsel against the use of slippers or excessively elevated heels.

Keywords: fall prevention; older adults; orthoses; pain; shoes.

Hypertension and alcohol: a cross-sectional study comparing PEth with AUDIT and AUDIT-C in primary care

Author/s: 
Åsa Thurfjell, Maria Hagströmer, Charlotte Ivarsson, Anders Norrman, Johanna Adami, Lena Lundh, Jan Hasselström

Background: This cross-sectional study aimed to describe proportions of patients with indications of alcohol consumption using phosphatidylethanol (PEth), the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), and its consumption-focused version (AUDIT-C), in relation to blood pressure (BP) control, overall and by sex.

Methods: A total of 270 hypertensive primary care patients (ICD-10: I10.9) were stratified into BP control groups: controlled (<140/90 mmHg), uncontrolled (≥140/90 mmHg), and apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (aTRH; ≥140/90 mmHg with ≥3 antihypertensive drugs). A randomized sample from each stratum was invited, baseline data were collected. Alcohol consumption using predefined categories for PEth and AUDIT, and hazardous use (PEth ≥ 0.122 µmol/L; AUDIT ≥ 8; AUDIT-C ≥ 5 for men, ≥4 for women), were analyzed in relation to BP control groups.

Results: Mean age was 67 ± 11 years; 42% were women. PEth indicated high and regular alcohol consumption in 6.4% of controlled, 5.3% of uncontrolled, and 19.2% of aTRH patients (controlled vs. aTRH, P = .027; uncontrolled vs. aTRH, P = .013). AUDIT showed no significant differences in hazardous use between BP groups (P = .865). AUDIT-C identified slightly higher proportions of hazardous use than PEth, across BP groups and sexes. No significant differences were found between BP groups for hazardous use by PEth (P = .339) or AUDIT-C (P = .150).

Conclusions: PEth revealed significantly higher alcohol use in the aTRH group, undetected by AUDIT. AUDIT-C and PEth identified more hazardous use than AUDIT, suggesting their potential to prompt alcohol-related discussions and support evidence-based hypertension care. PEth correlated more strongly with AUDIT-C than with AUDIT.

Clinical trial registration: Retrospectively registered in Clinical Trials, SLSO2022-0143, 2022-12-10.

Keywords: alcohol use disorder; cardiovascular disorders (hypertension/DVT/atherosclerosis); hypertension (high blood pressure); prevention; primary care; screening.

The association between medication use and vitamin B12 deficiency in the elderly population: a cross- sectional study

Author/s: 
Monique P H Tillemans, Thijs J Giezen, Toine C G Egberts, Kees J Kalisvaart

Background
Vitamin B12 deficiency is common in the elderly population and can cause severe complications. The use of certain medication has in previous studies been associated with vitamin B12 deficiency in the general population. To identify elderly patients at risk for vitamin B12 deficiency due to medication use, we evaluated the association between medication use and vitamin B12 deficiency in the elderly population.

Methods
Hospitalized geriatric patients 65 years of age or over with a serum vitamin B12 measurement within one week of the admittance date were included. Patients were classified as either B12 normal (258–635 pmol/L) or B12 deficient (< 148 pmol/L). Upon hospital admission patients’ medication use was verified. The association between vitamin B12 deficiency and the use of antacid, antiepileptic, antidiabetic, lipid lowering and other medication was evaluated by univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results
Of the 7132 patients included in the study, 532 (7.5%) had vitamin B12 deficiency and 3433 (48.1%) patients had normal vitamin B12 concentrations. Metformin use was significantly and independently (adjusted OR 2.5; 95% CI 1.7–3.6) associated with a dose-dependent higher risk of vitamin B12 deficiency. The use of other medication evaluated in this study was not associated with vitamin B12 deficiency.

Conclusions
Metformin use is significantly associated with vitamin B12 deficiency in the elderly, and this risk rises with higher metformin doses. Monitoring and timely start of vitamin B12 supplementation along with the lowest possible metformin dose are essential to prevent complications.

Online Unsupervised Tai Chi Intervention for Knee Pain and Function in People With Knee Osteoarthritis: The RETREAT Randomized Clinical Trial

Author/s: 
Shiyi Julia Zhu, Rana S. Hinman, Rachel K. Nelligan

Importance Tai chi is a type of exercise recommended for knee osteoarthritis, but access to in-person tai chi can be limited.

Objective To evaluate the effects of an unsupervised multimodal online tai chi intervention on knee pain and function for people with knee osteoarthritis.

Design, Setting, and Participants The RETREAT study was a 2-group superiority randomized clinical trial enrolling participants who met clinical criteria for knee osteoarthritis in Australian communities from August 2023 and November 2024.

Interventions Participants in the control group received access to a purpose-built website containing information about osteoarthritis and exercise benefits. Participants in the intervention group received the My Joint Tai Chi intervention comprising access to the same website plus tai chi information, a 12-week unsupervised video-based Yang-style tai chi program, and encouragement to use an app to facilitate program adherence.

Main Outcomes and Measures Changes in knee pain during walking (Numeric Rating Scale; range 0-10 with higher scores indicating greater pain) and difficulty with physical function (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index; range 0-68 with higher scores indicating greater dysfunction) during 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included another knee pain measure, sport and recreation function, quality of life, physical and mental well-being, fear of movement, self-efficacy, balance confidence, positive activated affect, sleep quality, global improvement, and oral medication use.

Results Of 2106 patients screened, 178 met inclusion criteria and were randomized, 89 (mean [SD] age, 61.0 [8.7] years; 66 female [74%] and 23 [26%] male participants) to the control group and 89 (mean [SD] age, 62.1 [7.3] years; 59 [66%] female and 30 male [34%] participants) to the tai chi intervention. Of the total, 170 (96%) completed both of the primary outcomes at 12 weeks. The tai chi group reported greater improvements in knee pain (control, −1.3; tai chi, −2.7; mean difference, −1.4 [95% CI, −2.1 to −0.7] units; P < .001) and function (control, −6.9; tai chi, −12.0; mean difference, −5.6 [95% CI, −9.0 to −2.3] units; P < .001) compared to the control group. More participants in the tai chi than in the control group achieved a minimal clinically important difference in pain (73% vs 47%; risk difference, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1 to 0.4; P < .001) and function (72% vs 52%; risk difference, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.1 to 0.3; P = .007). Between-group differences for most secondary outcomes favored tai chi, including another knee pain measure, sport and recreation function, quality of life, physical and mental well-being, global improvement, pain self-efficacy, and balance confidence. No associated serious adverse events were reported.

Conclusions and Relevance This randomized clinical trial found that this unsupervised multimodal online tai chi intervention improved knee pain and function compared with the control at 12 weeks. This free-to-access web-based intervention offers an effective, safe, accessible, and scalable option for guideline-recommended osteoarthritis exercise.

Pharmacologic Treatment of Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: An Updated Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Author/s: 
Bart J. van Essen, Daan C.H. Ceelen, Wouter Ouwerkerk, Tiew-Hwa K. Teng, Ganash N. Tharshana, Fook Ming Hew, Javed Butler, Faiez Zannad, Carolyn S. Lam, Justin Ezekowitz, Adriaan A. Voors, Jasper Tromp

Background: In 2022, a network meta-analysis showed that a combination of β-blockers, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNi), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) was most effective in reducing all-cause mortality in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). This study updates the treatment benefit by including additional large randomized controlled trials (RCTs) since 2022, including the VICTOR (Vericiguat Global Study in Participants with Chronic Heart Failure) trial.

Objectives: The goal of this study was to evaluate and compare regimens of pharmacotherapy in patients with HFrEF.

Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched for RCTs in patients with HFrEF through April 2025. Using frequentist network meta-analysis, HRs for all-cause mortality (primary outcome), cardiovascular death, and the composite of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization (secondary outcomes) were estimated. Absolute benefits were quantified as life-years gained by using BIOSTAT-CHF (Biology Study to Tailored Treatment in Chronic Heart Failure) and ASIAN-HF (Asian Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure) cohort data.

Results: The analysis included 103,754 patients across 89 randomized controlled trials. Relative to placebo, quintuple therapy with ARNi, β-blockers, MRAs, SGLT2i, and vericiguat most effectively reduced all-cause mortality (HR: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.27-0.45), followed by quadruple therapy with ARNi, β-blockers, MRAs, and SGLT2i (HR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.32-0.49). For a representative 70-year-old patient, quadruple therapy (ARNi/β-blockers/MRAs/SGLT2i) provided 5.3 additional life-years (95% CI: 2.8-7.7) vs no treatment, while quintuple therapy (ARNi/β-blockers/MRA/SGLT2i/vericiguat) provided 6.0 additional life-years (95% CI: 3.7-8.4).

Conclusions: This analysis reinforces the substantial mortality and morbidity benefit associated with the currently recommended quadruple therapy regimen (ARNi, β-blockers, MRAs, and SGLT2i) in patients with HFrEF. The addition of vericiguat may provide an incremental survival gain of approximately 0.7 year beyond that achieved with quadruple therapy. However, these results should be regarded as exploratory, as they are derived from a secondary endpoint of a single trial.

Keywords: HFrEF; drug therapy; pharmacotherapy.

Screening for Intimate Partner Violence and Caregiver Abuse of Older or Vulnerable Adults

Author/s: 
US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement, Michael Silverstein, John B Wong, Esa M Davis, David Chelmow, Tumaini Rucker Coker, Alicia Fernandez, Ericka Gibson, Carlos Roberto Jaén, Marie Krousel-Wood, Sei Lee, Wanda K Nicholson, Goutham Rao, John M Ruiz, James Stevermer, Joel Tsevat, Sandra Millon Underwood, Sarah Wiehe

IMPORTANCE: Intimate partner violence (IPV) affects millions of US residents across the lifespan and is often unrecognized. Abuse of older or vulnerable adults by a caregiver or someone else they may trust is common and can result in significant injury, death, and long-term adverse health consequences.
OBJECTIVE: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for IPV, abuse of older adults, and abuse of vulnerable adults.
POPULATION: The recommendation on screening for IPV applies to adolescents and adults who are pregnant or postpartum, and women of reproductive age. The recommendation on screening in older and vulnerable adults applies to persons without recognized signs and symptoms of abuse or neglect.
EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT: The USPSTF concludes that screening for IPV in women of reproductive age, including those who are pregnant and postpartum, and providing or referring those who screen positive to multicomponent interventions has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the benefits and harms of screening for caregiver abuse and neglect in older or vulnerable adults are uncertain and that the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined.
RECOMMENDATION: The USPSTF recommends that clinicians screen for IPV in women of reproductive age, including those who are pregnant and postpartum. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for caregiver abuse and neglect in older or vulnerable adults.

Early Invasive or Conservative Strategies for Older Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Meta-Analysis

Author/s: 
Rohin K Reddy, David Koeckerling, Christian Eichhorn, Yasser Jamil, Maddalena Ardissino, Volker Braun, Haitham Abu Sharar, Norbert Frey, James P Howard, Yousif Ahmad

Importance: The optimal management strategy for older patients who present with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains unclear due to a paucity of randomized evidence. New large and longer-term randomized data are available.

Objective: To test the association of an early invasive strategy vs a conservative strategy with clinical outcomes for patients 70 years or older who present with ACS.

Data sources: A literature search strategy was designed in collaboration with a medical librarian. MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched ,with no language restrictions from inception through October 2024. Bibliographies of previous reviews and conference abstracts from major cardiovascular scientific meetings were handsearched.

Study selection: Studies were deemed eligible following review by 2 independent, masked investigators if they randomly allocated patients 70 years or older who presented with ACS to early invasive or conservative management and reported clinical end points. Observational analyses were excluded. No trials were excluded based on sample size or follow-up duration.

Data extraction and synthesis: Data were extracted independently and in triplicate. Clinical end points were pooled in meta-analyses that applied fixed-effects and random-effects modeling to calculate summary estimates for relative risks (RRs) and hazard ratios, along with their corresponding 95% CIs.

Main outcomes and measures: The prespecified primary end point was all-cause death. Secondary end points included recurrent myocardial infarction (MI), repeated coronary revascularization, major bleeding, cardiovascular death, death or MI, stroke, heart failure hospitalization, major adverse cardiac events, major adverse cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events, and length of hospital stay.

Results: The sample size-weighted mean age of participants across included trials was 82.6 years, and 46% were female. In the pooled analysis, there was no significant difference in all-cause death between the invasive and conservative strategies (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.98-1.11; P = .15; I2 = 0%). An early invasive strategy was associated with a reduced risk of recurrent MI of 22% (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.67-0.91; P = .001; I2 = 0%) and repeated coronary revascularization during follow-up of 57% (RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.30-0.60; P < .001; I2 = 33.3%). However, an invasive strategy was associated with an increased risk of major bleeding (RR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.01-2.53; P = .05; I2 = 16.7). No differences were observed in secondary end points. Results in the non-ST-elevation ACS population were consistent with the overall findings.

Conclusions and relevance: The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that, in older patients with ACS, an early invasive strategy was not associated with reduced all-cause death compared with conservative management. An early invasive strategy was associated with reduced recurrent MI and repeated coronary revascularization during follow-up but increased risk of major bleeding. Competing risks associated with an early invasive strategy should be weighed in shared therapeutic decision-making for older patients with ACS.

Subscribe to aged