INTRODUCTION: To investigate the longitudinal associations of bone mineral measures with antiepileptic drug (AED) use, including enzyme-inducing (EIAED) and non-enzyme-inducing (NEIAED) types, and other predictors of bone loss in a study of 48 same-sex twin/age-matched sibling pairs (40 female, 8 male) discordant for AED use.
METHODS: Using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), areal bone mineral density (aBMD) and content (BMC) at the hip regions, forearm, lumbar spine, and whole body were measured twice, at least 2 years apart. The mean within-pair difference (MWPD), MWPD%, and mean annual rate of aBMD change were adjusted for age, weight, and height. Predictors of bone loss were evaluated.
RESULTS: AED users, compared to non-users, at baseline and follow-up, respectively, had reduced aBMD at the total hip (MWPD% 3.8, 4.4%), femoral neck (4.7, 4.5%), and trochanter regions (4.1, 4.6%) (p 0.05) regions did not differ within pairs. Nevertheless, EIAED users had greater aBMD loss than non-users (n = 20 pairs) at the total hip (1.7 vs. 0.3%, p = 0.013) and whole body regions (0.7% loss vs. 0.1% BMD gain, p = 0.019), which was not found in NEIAED-discordant pairs (n = 16). AED use >20 years predicted higher aBMD loss at the forearm (p = 0.028), whole body (p = 0.010), and whole body BMC (p = 0.031).
CONCLUSIONS: AED users had reduced aBMD at the hip regions. Prolonged users and EIAED users had greater aBMD loss, predicting a higher risk of bone fragility. Further prospective studies of AED effects on bone microarchitecture are needed.
METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective, and single-blind randomized controlled trial conducted at the University Malaya Medical Centre. Patients older than 65 years presenting to the hospital emergency department or geriatric clinic with 1 injurious fall or 2 falls in the past year and with impaired functional mobility were included in the study. The intervention group received a modified OEP intervention (n = 34) for 3 months, while the control group received conventional care (n = 33). All participants were assessed at baseline and 6 months.
RESULTS: Twenty-four participants in both OEP and control groups completed the 6-month follow-up assessments. Within-group analyses revealed no difference in grip strength in the OEP group (P = 1.00, right hand; P = .55, left hand), with significant deterioration in grip strength in the control group (P = .01, right hand; P = .005, left hand). Change in grip strength over 6 months significantly favored the OEP group (P = .047, right hand; P = .004, left hand). Significant improvements were also observed in mobility and balance in the OEP group.
CONCLUSIONS: In addition to benefits in mobility and balance, the OEP also prevents deterioration in upper limb strength. Additional benefits of exercise interventions for secondary prevention of falls in term of sarcopenia and frailty should also be evaluated in the future.
METHOD: RCTs investigating falls prevention interventions conducted in Asian countries from (i) the most recent (2012) Cochrane community setting falls prevention review, and (ii) subsequent published RCTs meeting the same criteria were identified, classified and grouped according to the ProFANE intervention classification. Characteristics of included trials were extracted from both the Cochrane review and original publications. Where ≥2 studies investigated an intervention type in the Asian region, a meta-analysis was performed.
RESULTS: Fifteen of 159 RCTs in the Cochrane review were conducted in the Asian region (9%), and a further 11 recent RCTs conducted in Asia were identified (total 26 Asian studies: median 160 participants, mean age:75.1, female:71.9%). Exercise (15 RCTs) and home assessment/modification (n = 2) were the only single interventions with ≥2 RCTs. Intervention types with ≥1 effective RCT in reducing fall outcomes were exercise (6 effective), home modification (1 effective), and medication (vitamin D) (1 effective). One multiple and one multifactorial intervention also had positive falls outcomes. Meta-analysis of exercise interventions identified significant benefit (number of fallers: Odds Ratio 0.43 [0.34,0.53]; number of falls: 0.35 [0.21,0.57]; and number of fallers injured: 0.50 [0.35,0.71]); but multifactorial interventions did not reach significance (number of fallers OR = 0.57 [0.23,1.44]).
CONCLUSION: There is a small but growing research base of falls prevention RCTs from Asian countries, with exercise approaches being most researched and effective. For other interventions shown to be effective elsewhere, consideration of local issues is required to ensure that research and programs implemented in these countries are effective, and relevant to the local context, people, and health system. There is also a need for further high quality, appropriately powered falls prevention trials in Asian countries.