2 resultados para Post classification method
em Reposit
Resumo:
STUDY OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of adolescent pregnancy in the future contraceptive choices. A secondary aim is to verify whether these choices differ from those made after an abortion. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING:Adolescent Unit of a tertiary care center. PARTICIPANTS:212 pregnant teenagers. INTERVENTIONS: Medical records review. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Intended pregnancy rate and contraceptive methods used before and after pregnancy. For contraceptive choices after pregnancy we considered: Group 1 - teenagers who continued their pregnancy to delivery (n = 106) and Group 2 - the same number of adolescents who chose to terminate their pregnancy. RESULTS: The intended pregnancy rate was 14.2%. Prior to a pregnancy continued to delivery, the most widely used contraceptive method was the male condom (50.9%), followed by oral combined contraceptives (28.3%); 18.9% of adolescents were not using any contraceptive method. After pregnancy, contraceptive implant was chosen by 70.8% of subjects (P < .001) and the oral combined contraceptives remained the second most frequent option (17.9%, P = .058). Comparing these results with Group 2, we found that the outcome of the pregnancy was the main factor in the choices that were made. Thus, after a pregnancy continued to delivery, adolescents prefer the use of LARC [78.4% vs 40.5%, OR: 5,958 - 95% (2.914-12.181), P < .001)], especially contraceptive implants [70.8% vs 38.7%, OR: 4.371 - 95% (2.224-8.591), P < .001], to oral combined contraceptives [17.9% vs 57.5%, OR: 0.118 - 95% CI (0.054-0.258), P < .001]. CONCLUSION:Adolescent pregnancy and its outcome constitute a factor of change in future contraceptive choice.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The efficacy and tolerability of faldaprevir, a potent hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS3/4A protease inhibitor, plus peginterferon (PegIFN) and ribavirin (RBV) was assessed in a double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study of treatment-naïve patients with HCV genotype-1 infection. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned (1:2:2) to PegIFN/RBV plus: placebo (arm 1, n = 132) for 24 weeks; faldaprevir (120 mg, once daily) for 12 or 24 weeks (arm 2, n = 259); or faldaprevir (240 mg, once daily) for 12 weeks (arm 3, n = 261). In arms 2 and 3, patients with early treatment success (HCV-RNA <25 IU/ml at week 4 and undetectable at week 8) stopped all treatment at week 24. Other patients received PegIFN/RBV until week 48 unless they met futility criteria. The primary endpoint was sustained virologic response 12 weeks post-treatment (SVR12). RESULTS: SVR12 was achieved by 52%, 79%, and 80% of patients in arms 1, 2, and 3, respectively (estimated difference for arms 2 and 3 vs. arm 1: 27%, 95% confidence interval 17%-36%; and 29%, 95% confidence interval, 19%-38%, respectively; p < 0.0001 for both). Early treatment success was achieved by 87% (arm 2) and 89% (arm 3) of patients, of whom 86% and 89% achieved SVR12. Adverse event rates were similar among groups; few adverse events led to discontinuation of all regimen components. CONCLUSIONS: Faldaprevir plus PegIFN/RBV significantly increased SVR12, compared with PegIFN/RBV, in treatment-naïve patients with HCV genotype-1 infection. No differences were seen in responses of patients given faldaprevir once daily at 120 or 240 mg.