134 resultados para Treatment guidelines
Resumo:
Current treatment guidelines consider diabetes to be equivalent to existing cardiovascular disease (CVD), but few data exist about the relative importance of these risk factors for total and CVD mortality in older women.We studied 9704 women aged >= 65 years enrolled in a prospective cohort study (Study of Osteoporotic Fracture) during a mean follow-up of 13 years and compared all-cause and CVD mortality among non-diabetic women without and with history of CVD at baseline and diabetic women without and with history of CVD. Diabetes mellitus and CVD were defined as self-report of physician diagnoses. Cause of death was adjudicated from death certificates and medical records when available. Ascertainment of vital status was 99% complete. Multivariate Cox hazard models adjusted for age, smoking, physical activity, systolic blood pressure, waist girth and education were used to compare mortality among the four groups with non-diabetic women without CVD as the referent group. At baseline mean age was 71.7 } 5.3 years, 7.0% reported diabetes mellitus and 14.5% reported prior CVD. 4257 women died during follow-up, 36.6% were attributed to CVD. Compared to non-diabetic women without prior CVD, the risk of CVD mortality was elevated among both non-diabetic women with CVD (HR = 1.82, 95% CI: 1.60-2.07, P <0.001) and diabetic women without prior CVD (HR = 2.24, CI: 1.87-2.69, P <0.001). CVD mortality was highest among diabetic women with CVD (HR = 3.41, CI: 2.61-4.45, P <0.001). Compared to non-diabetic women with CVD, diabetic women without prior CVD had a significantly higher adjusted HR for total and CVD mortality (P < 0.001 and P <0.05 respectively). Older diabetic women without prior CVD have a higher risk of all-cause and CVD mortality compared to nondiabetic women with pre-existing CVD. For older women, these data support the equivalence of prior CVD and diabetes mellitus in current guidelines for the prevention of CVD in primary care.
2nd ESMO Consensus Conference in Lung Cancer: locally advanced stage III non-small-cell lung cancer.
Resumo:
To complement the existing treatment guidelines for all tumour types, ESMO organises consensus conferences to focus on specific issues in each type of tumour. The 2nd ESMO Consensus Conference on Lung Cancer was held on 11-12 May 2013 in Lugano. A total of 35 experts met to address several questions on non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in each of four areas: pathology and molecular biomarkers, first-line/second and further lines of treatment in advanced disease, early-stage disease and locally advanced disease. For each question, recommendations were made including reference to the grade of recommendation and level of evidence. This consensus paper focuses on locally advanced disease.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE: Benzodiazepines (BZD) are recommended as first-line treatment for status epilepticus (SE), with lorazepam (LZP) and midazolam (MDZ) being the most widely used drugs and part of current treatment guidelines. Clonazepam (CLZ) is also utilized in many countries; however, there is no systematic comparison of these agents for treatment of SE to date. METHODS: We identified all patients treated with CLZ, LZP, or MDZ as a first-line agent from a prospectively collected observational cohort of adult patients treated for SE in four tertiary care centers. Relative efficacies of CLZ, LZP, and MDZ were compared by assessing the risk of developing refractory SE and the number of antiseizure drugs (ASDs) required to control SE. RESULTS: Among 177 patients, 72 patients (40.62%) received CLZ, 82 patients (46.33%) LZP, and 23 (12.99%) MDZ; groups were similar in demographics and SE characteristics. Loading dose was considered insufficient in the majority of cases for LZP, with a similar rate (84%, 95%, and 87.5%) in the centers involved, and CLZ was used as recommended in 52% of patients. After adjustment for relevant variables, LZP was associated with an increased risk of refractoriness as compared to CLZ (odds ratio [OR] 6.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.66-15.5) and with an increased number of ASDs needed for SE control (OR 4.35, 95% CI 1.8-10.49). SIGNIFICANCE: CLZ seems to be an effective alternative to LZP and MDZ. LZP is frequently underdosed in this setting. These findings are highly relevant, since they may impact daily practice.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: Gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) has been considered radiation-resistant, and radiotherapy is recommended only for palliation of bone metastases in current treatment guidelines. No registered prospective trial has evaluated GIST responsiveness to radiotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with GIST progressing at intra-abdominal sites or the liver were entered to this prospective Phase II multicenter study (identifier NCT00515931). Metastases were treated with external beam radiotherapy using either conformal 3D planning or intensity modulated radiotherapy and conventional fractionation to a cumulative planning target volume dose of approximately 40Gy. Systemic therapy was maintained unaltered during the study. RESULTS: Of the 25 patients entered, 19 were on concomitant tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy, most often imatinib. Two (8%) patients achieved partial remission, 20 (80%) had stable target lesion size for ⩾3months after radiotherapy with a median duration of stabilization of 16months, and 3 (12%) progressed. The median time to radiotherapy target lesion progression was 4-fold longer than the median time to GIST progression at any site (16 versus 4months). Radiotherapy was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Responses to radiotherapy were infrequent, but most patients had durable stabilization of the target lesions. GIST patients with soft tissue metastases benefit frequently from radiotherapy.
Resumo:
INTRODUCTION: With the ageing of the population and the general improvement of care, an increasing number of people are living with multiple chronic health conditions or 'multimorbidity'. Multimorbidity often implies multiple medical treatments. As a consequence, the risk of adverse events and the time spent by patients for their treatments increase exponentially. In many cases, treatment guidelines traditionally defined for single conditions are not easily applicable. Primary care for individuals with multimorbidity requires complex patient-centred care and good communication between the patient and the general practitioner (GP). This often includes prioritising among the different chronic conditions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The main objectives of this study are to describe the burden related to multimorbidity (disease-related burden and burden of treatment) in primary care and to identify the factors influencing it. Other objectives include evaluating patients' perception of treatment burden and quality of life, assessing factors influencing that perception, and investigating prioritisation in the management of multimorbidity from the perspectives of GPs and patients. For this cross-sectional study, patient enrolment will take place in GP's private practices across Switzerland. A convenient sample of 100 GPs will participate; overall, 1000 patients with at least three chronic health conditions will be enrolled. Data will be collected as paper-based questionnaires for GPs and delayed telephone interview questionnaires for patients. GPs will provide demographic and practice-related data. In addition, each GP will complete a paper-based questionnaire for each patient that they enrol. Each patient will complete a telephone interview questionnaire. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the research ethics committee of Canton Vaud, Switzerland (Protocol 315/14). The results of the study will be reported in international peer-reviewed journals.
Resumo:
INTRODUCTION: Many clinical practice guidelines (CPG) have been published in reply to the development of the concept of "evidence-based medicine" (EBM) and as a solution to the difficulty of synthesizing and selecting relevant medical literature. Taking into account the expansion of new CPG, the question of choice arises: which CPG to consider in a given clinical situation? It is of primary importance to evaluate the quality of the CPG, but until recently, there has been no standardized tool of evaluation or comparison of the quality of the CPG. An instrument of evaluation of the quality of the CPG, called "AGREE" for appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation was validated in 2002. AIM OF THE STUDY: The six principal CPG concerning the treatment of schizophrenia are compared with the help of the "AGREE" instrument: (1) "the Agence nationale pour le développement de l'évaluation médicale (ANDEM) recommendations"; (2) "The American Psychiatric Association (APA) practice guideline for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia"; (3) "The quick reference guide of APA practice guideline for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia"; (4) "The schizophrenia patient outcomes research team (PORT) treatment recommendations"; (5) "The Texas medication algorithm project (T-MAP)" and (6) "The expert consensus guideline for the treatment of schizophrenia". RESULTS: The results of our study were then compared with those of a similar investigation published in 2005, structured on 24 CPG tackling the treatment of schizophrenia. The "AGREE" tool was also used by two investigators in their study. In general, the scores of the two studies differed little and the two global evaluations of the CPG converged; however, each of the six CPG is perfectible. DISCUSSION: The rigour of elaboration of the six CPG was in general average. The consideration of the opinion of potential users was incomplete, and an effort made in the presentation of the recommendations would facilitate their clinical use. Moreover, there was little consideration by the authors regarding the applicability of the recommendations. CONCLUSION: Globally, two CPG are considered as strongly recommended: "the quick reference guide of the APA practice guideline for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia" and "the T-MAP".
Resumo:
A guideline group of pediatric rheumatologist experts elaborated guidelines related to the management of idiopathic juvenile arthritis in association with the Haute Autorité de santé (HAS). A systematic search of the literature published between 1998 and August 2008 and indexed in Pubmed was undertaken. Here, we present the guidelines for diagnosis and treatment in oligoarticular and polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis (except for spondylarthropathy and rheumatoid arthritis).
Resumo:
Dans le cadre d'une étude rétrospective au sein d'une unité de réhabilitation, nous avons cherché à examiner le degré de respect de recommandations de pratique clinique (RPC) abordant le traitement pharmacologique au long cours de la schizophrénie, par des médecins qui n'en ont qu'une connaissance indirecte. The Expert Consensus Guideline for the treatment of schizophrenia (ECGTS) a été retenu comme référence sur la base d'une comparaison avec cinq autres RPC principales. Sur un collectif de 20 patients, les recommandations de l'ECGTS sont totalement respectées dans 65 % des cas, partiellement respectées dans 10 % et non respectées dans 25 %, démontrant ainsi que la pratique clinique est clairement perfectible (principalement dans le traitement des symptômes psychotiques et dépressifs). Cependant, le respect des RPC ne garantit pas forcément la résolution de tous les problèmes cliniques rencontrés : 12 patients sur 20 présentent des effets secondaires à l'évaluation clinique et pour huit d'entre eux, les recommandations à ce niveau, sont respectées. Notre étude montre cependant que le choix et l'application d'une RPC ne sont pas simples. Les RPC actuelles donnent peu ou pas d'instruments de mesure, ni de critères précis pour évaluer les problèmes cliniques auxquels elles font référence. L'avenir appartient donc à des RPC qui proposent, outre les recommandations cliniques elles-mêmes, les moyens de leur vérification et de leur application sur le terrain.