38 resultados para Obesity primary prevention
Resumo:
Rationale: Experimental studies suggest that pretreatment with b-agonists might prevent acute lung injury (ALI).
Objectives: To determine if in adult patients undergoing elective esophagectomy, perioperative treatment with inhaled b-agonists effects the development of early ALI.
Methods:We conducted a randomized placebo-controlled trial in 12 UK centers (2008-2011). Adult patients undergoing elective esophagectomy were allocated to prerandomized, sequentially numbered treatment packs containing inhaled salmeterol (100 mg twice daily) or a matching placebo. Patients, clinicians, and researchers were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was development of ALI within 72 hours of surgery. Secondary outcomes were ALI within 28 days, organ failure, adverse events, survival, and health-related quality of life. An exploratory substudy measured biomarkers of alveolar-capillary inflammation and injury.
Measurements and Main Results: A total of 179 patients were randomized to salmeterol and 183 to placebo. Baseline characteristics were similar. Treatment with salmeterol did not prevent early lung injury (32 [19.2%] of 168 vs. 27 [16.0%] of 170; odds ratio [OR], 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-2.22). There was no difference in organ failure, survival, or health-related quality of life.Adverse events were less frequent in the salmeterol group (55 vs. 70; OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.39-0.99), predominantly because of a lower number of pneumonia (7 vs. 17; OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.16-0.96). Salmeterol reduced some biomarkers of alveolar inflammation and epithelial injury.
Conclusion: Perioperative treatment with inhaled salmeterol was well tolerated but did not prevent ALI.
Clinical trial registered with International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Register (ISRCTN47481946) and European Union database of randomized Controlled Trials (EudraCT 2007-004096-19).Copyright © 2014 by the American Thoracic Society.
Resumo:
Background: Obesity is a global public health problem. There are a range of treatments available with varying short and long term success rates. One option is the use of anti-obesity medication the prescription of which has increased dramatically in recent years. Despite this, little is known about the individual and GP practice factors that influence the prescription of anti-obesity medication. Methods: Multi-level logistic regression analysis was used to investigate factors associated with the prescription of anti-obesity medication in Northern Ireland using a population primary care prescribing database (~1.5 million people aged 16+ years) during 2009/10. Results: While 25.0% of people are obese, only 1.3% (2.1% of females, 0.6% of males) received anti-obesity medication. The relationship between medication rates and age differed by gender (P < 0.001) with prescriptions higher in younger females and older males. Prescribing of anti-obesity medication reflected obesity prevalence across urban/rural areas and deprivation. There was an unexplained two-fold difference, between the 25th and 75th percentile, in the GP practice prescription of anti-obesity medication. Conclusions: There is evidence of relative under-prescribing in males compared to females despite a similar prevalence of obesity. While the prevalence (and presumably the health consequences) of obesity worsens with age, younger females are more likely to be prescribed anti-obesity medication. This suggests an element of patient demand. Educational material to improve the understanding of the role of anti-obesity medication, for patients and practitioners, is recommended. But further study is needed to understand the factors responsible for the variation in prescribing between GP practices.
Resumo:
Background
Organ dysfunction consequent to infection (‘severe sepsis’) is the leading cause of admission to an intensive care unit (ICU). In both animal models and early clinical studies the calcium channel sensitizer levosimendan has been demonstrated to have potentially beneficial effects on organ function. The aims of the Levosimendan for the Prevention of Acute oRgan Dysfunction in Sepsis (LeoPARDS) trial are to identify whether a 24-hour infusion of levosimendan will improve organ dysfunction in adults who have septic shock and to establish the safety profile of levosimendan in this group of patients.
Methods/DesignThis is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel group, placebo-controlled trial. Adults fulfilling the criteria for systemic inflammatory response syndrome due to infection, and requiring vasopressor therapy, will be eligible for inclusion in the trial. Within 24 hours of meeting these inclusion criteria, patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio stratified by the ICU to receive either levosimendan (0.05 to 0.2 μg.kg-1.min-1 or placebo for 24 hours in addition to standard care. The primary outcome measure is the mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score while in the ICU. Secondary outcomes include: central venous oxygen saturations and cardiac output; incidence and severity of renal failure using the Acute Kidney Injury Network criteria; duration of renal replacement therapy; serum bilirubin; time to liberation from mechanical ventilation; 28-day, hospital, 3 and 6 month survival; ICU and hospital length-of-stay; and days free from catecholamine therapy. Blood and urine samples will be collected on the day of inclusion, at 24 hours, and on days 4 and 6 post-inclusion for investigation of the mechanisms by which levosimendan might improve organ function. Eighty patients will have additional blood samples taken to measure levels of levosimendan and its active metabolites OR-1896 and OR-1855. A total of 516 patients will be recruited from approximately 25 ICUs in the United Kingdom.
DiscussionThis trial will test the efficacy of levosimendan to reduce acute organ dysfunction in adult patients who have septic shock and evaluate its biological mechanisms of action.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Although observational studies have found regular aspirin use to be associated with a reduced risk of colorectal neoplasia, results from randomized trials using aspirin have been inconsistent. Dietary folate intake also has been found to be associated with a reduced risk of colorectal neoplasms in observational studies.
METHODS: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial of aspirin (300 mg/day) and folate supplements (0.5 mg/day) to prevent colorectal adenoma recurrence was performed using a 2 x 2 factorial design. All patients had an adenoma (>/=0.5 cm) removed in the 6 months before recruitment and were followed-up at 4-month intervals with a second colonoscopy after approximately 3 years. The primary outcome measure was a colorectal adenoma diagnosed after baseline.
RESULTS: A total of 945 patients were recruited into the study, of whom 853 (90.3%) underwent a second colonoscopy. In total, 99 (22.8%) of 434 patients receiving aspirin had a recurrent adenoma compared with 121 (28.9%) of 419 patients receiving placebo (relative risk, 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63-0.99). A total of 104 patients developed an advanced colorectal adenoma; 41 (9.4%) of these were in the aspirin group and 63 (15.0%) were in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.43-0.91). Folate supplementation was found to have no effect on adenoma recurrence (relative risk, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.85-1.34).
CONCLUSIONS: Aspirin (300 mg/day) but not folate (0.5 mg/day) use was found to reduce the risk of colorectal adenoma recurrence, with evidence that aspirin could have a significant role in preventing the development of advanced lesions.
Resumo:
Background: The incidence of delirium in ventilated patients is estimated at up to 82%, and it is associated with longer intensive care and hospital stays, and long-term cognitive impairment and mortality. The pathophysiology of delirium has been linked with inflammation and neuronal apoptosis. Simvastatin has pleiotropic properties; it penetrates the brain and, as well as reducing cholesterol, reduces inflammation when used at clinically relevant doses over the short term. This is a single centre randomised, controlled trial which aims to test the hypothesis that treatment with simvastatin will modify delirium incidence and outcomes.
Methods/Design: The ongoing study will include 142 adults admitted to the Watford General Hospital Intensive Care Unit who require mechanical ventilation in the first 72 hours of admission. The primary outcome is the number of delirium- and coma-free days in the first 14 days. Secondary outcomes include incidence of delirium, delirium- and coma-free days in the first 28 days, days in delirium and in coma at 14 and 28 days, number of ventilator-free days at 28 days, length of critical care and hospital stay, mortality, cognitive decline and healthcare resource use. Informed consent will be taken from patient's consultee before randomisation to receive either simvastatin (80 mg) or placebo once daily. Daily data will be recorded until day 28 after randomisation or until discharge from the ICU if sooner. Surviving patients will be followed up on at six months from discharge. Plasma and urine samples will be taken to investigate the biological effect of simvastatin on systemic markers of inflammation, as related to the number of delirium- and coma-free days, and the potential of cholinesterase activity and beta-amyloid as predictors of the risk of delirium and long-term cognitive impairment.
Discussion: This trial will test the efficacy of simvastatin on reducing delirium in the critically ill. If patients receiving the statin show a reduced number of days in delirium compared with the placebo group, the inflammatory theory implicated in the pathogenesis of delirium will be strengthened.
Resumo:
Objectives The increasing prevalence of overweight and obesity worldwide continues to compromise population health and creates a wider societal cost in terms of productivity loss and premature mortality. Despite extensive international literature on the cost of overweight and obesity, findings are inconsistent between Europe and the USA, and particularly within Europe. Studies vary on issues of focus, specific costs and methods. This study aims to estimate the healthcare and productivity costs of overweight and obesity for the island of Ireland in 2009, using both top-down and bottom-up approaches.
Methods Costs were estimated across four categories: healthcare utilisation, drug costs, work absenteeism and premature mortality. Healthcare costs were estimated using Population Attributable Fractions (PAFs). PAFs were applied to national cost data for hospital care and drug prescribing. PAFs were also applied to social welfare and national mortality data to estimate productivity costs due to absenteeism and premature mortality.
Results The healthcare costs of overweight and obesity in 2009 were estimated at €437 million for the Republic of Ireland (ROI) and €127.41 million for NI. Productivity loss due to overweight and obesity was up to €865 million for ROI and €362 million for NI. The main drivers of healthcare costs are cardiovascular disease, type II diabetes, colon cancer, stroke and gallbladder disease. In terms of absenteeism, low back pain is the main driver in both jurisdictions, and for productivity loss due to premature mortality the primary driver of cost is coronary heart disease.
Conclusions The costs are substantial, and urgent public health action is required in Ireland to address the problem of increasing prevalence of overweight and obesity, which if left unchecked will lead to unsustainable cost escalation within the health service and unacceptable societal costs.
Resumo:
Objective: To determine the long-term effectiveness of a complex intervention in primary care aimed at improving outcomes for patients with coronary heart disease.
Design: A 6-year follow-up of a cluster randomised controlled trial, which found after 18 months that both total and cardiovascular hospital admissions were significantly reduced in intervention practices (8% absolute reduction).
Setting: 48 general practices in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.
Participants: 903 patients with established coronary heart disease at baseline in the original trial.
Intervention: The original intervention consisted of tailored practice and patient plans; training sessions for practitioners in medication prescribing and behavioural change; and regular patient recall system. Control practices provided usual care. Following the intervention period, all supports from the research team to intervention practices ceased.
Outcome measures: Primary outcome: hospital admissions, all cause and cardiovascular; secondary outcomes: mortality; blood pressure and cholesterol control.
Results: At 6-year follow-up, data were collected from practice records of 696 patients (77%). For those who had died, we censored their data at the point of death and cause of death was established. There were no significant differences between the intervention and control practices in either total (OR 0.83 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.28)) or cardiovascular hospital admissions (OR 0.91 (95% CI 0.49 to 1.65)). We confirmed mortality status of 886 of the original 903 patients (98%). There were no significant differences in mortality (15% in intervention and 16% in control) or in the proportions of patients above target control for systolic blood pressure or total cholesterol.
Conclusions: Initial significant differences in the numbers of total and cardiovascular hospital admissions were not maintained at 6 years and no differences were found in mortality or blood pressure and cholesterol control. Policymakers need to continue to assess the effectiveness of previously efficacious programmes.
Trial registration number: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN24081411.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND Levosimendan is a calcium-sensitizing drug with inotropic and other properties that may improve outcomes in patients with sepsis.
METHODS We conducted a double-blind, randomized clinical trial to investigate whether levosimendan reduces the severity of organ dysfunction in adults with sepsis. Patients were randomly assigned to receive a blinded infusion of levosimendan (at a dose of 0.05 to 0.2 μg per kilogram of body weight per minute) for 24 hours or placebo in addition to standard care. The primary outcome was the mean daily Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score in the intensive care unit up to day 28 (scores for each of five systems range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating more severe dysfunction; maximum score, 20). Secondary outcomes included 28-day mortality, time to weaning from mechanical ventilation, and adverse events.
RESULTS The trial recruited 516 patients; 259 were assigned to receive levosimendan and 257 to receive placebo. There was no significant difference in the mean (±SD) SOFA score between the levosimendan group and the placebo group (6.68±3.96 vs. 6.06±3.89; mean difference, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], −0.07 to 1.29; P=0.053). Mortality at 28 days was 34.5% in the levosimendan group and 30.9% in the placebo group (absolute difference, 3.6 percentage points; 95% CI, −4.5 to 11.7; P=0.43). Among patients requiring ventilation at baseline, those in the levosimendan group were less likely than those in the placebo group to be successfully weaned from mechanical ventilation over the period of 28 days (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.60 to 0.97; P=0.03). More patients in the levosimendan group than in the placebo group had supraventricular tachyarrhythmia (3.1% vs. 0.4%; absolute difference, 2.7 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.1 to 5.3; P=0.04).
CONCLUSIONS The addition of levosimendan to standard treatment in adults with sepsis was not associated with less severe organ dysfunction or lower mortality. Levosimendan was associated with a lower likelihood of successful weaning from mechanical ventilation and a higher risk of supraventricular tachyarrhythmia. (Funded by the NIHR Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme and others; LeoPARDS Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN12776039.)