167 resultados para Self monitoring blood glycose
Resumo:
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is being used increasingly in both clinical practice and hypertension research. Although there are many guidelines that emphasize the indications for ABPM, there is no comprehensive guideline dealing with all aspects of the technique. It was agreed at a consensus meeting on ABPM in Milan in 2011 that the 34 attendees should prepare a comprehensive position paper on the scientific evidence for ABPM.This position paper considers the historical background, the advantages and limitations of ABPM, the threshold levels for practice, and the cost-effectiveness of the technique. It examines the need for selecting an appropriate device, the accuracy of devices, the additional information and indices that ABPM devices may provide, and the software requirements.At a practical level, the paper details the requirements for using ABPM in clinical practice, editing considerations, the number of measurements required, and the circumstances, such as obesity and arrhythmias, when particular care needs to be taken when using ABPM.The clinical indications for ABPM, among which white-coat phenomena, masked hypertension, and nocturnal hypertension appear to be prominent, are outlined in detail along with special considerations that apply in certain clinical circumstances, such as childhood, the elderly and pregnancy, and in cardiovascular illness, examples being stroke and chronic renal disease, and the place of home measurement of blood pressure in relation to ABPM is appraised.The role of ABPM in research circumstances, such as pharmacological trials and in the prediction of outcome in epidemiological studies is examined and finally the implementation of ABPM in practice is considered in relation to the issue of reimbursement in different countries, the provision of the technique by primary care practices, hospital clinics and pharmacies, and the growing role of registries of ABPM in many countries.
Resumo:
This document summarizes the available evidence and provides recommendations on the use of home blood pressure monitoring in clinical practice and in research. It updates the previous recommendations on the same topic issued in year 2000. The main topics addressed include the methodology of home blood pressure monitoring, its diagnostic and therapeutic thresholds, its clinical applications in hypertension, with specific reference to special populations, and its applications in research. The final section deals with the problems related to the implementation of these recommendations in clinical practice.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Poor long-term adherence is an important cause of uncontrolled hypertension. We examined whether monitoring drug adherence with an electronic system improves long-term blood pressure (BP) control in hypertensive patients followed by general practitioners (GPs). METHODS: A pragmatic cluster randomised controlled study was conducted over one year in community pharmacists/GPs' networks randomly assigned either to usual care (UC) where drugs were dispensed as usual, or to intervention (INT) group where drug adherence could be monitored with an electronic system (Medication Event Monitoring System). No therapy change was allowed during the first 2 months in both groups. Thereafter, GPs could modify therapy and use electronic monitors freely in the INT group. The primary outcome was a target office BP<140/90 mmHg. RESULTS: Sixty-eight treated uncontrolled hypertensive patients (UC: 34; INT: 34) were enrolled. Over the 12-month period, the likelihood of reaching the target BP was higher in the INT group compared to the UC group (p<0.05). At 4 months, 38% in the INT group reached the target BP vs. 12% in the UC group (p<0.05), and 21% vs. 9% at 12 months (p: ns). Multivariate analyses, taking account of baseline characteristics, therapy modification during follow-up, and clustering effects by network, indicate that being allocated to the INT group was associated with a greater odds of reaching the target BP at 4 months (p<0.01) and at 12 months (p=0.051). CONCLUSION: GPs monitoring drug adherence in collaboration with pharmacists achieved a better BP control in hypertensive patients, although the impact of monitoring decreased with time.
Resumo:
Non-invasive ambulatory blood pressure monitoring has proved to be very useful in evaluating hypertensive patients. However, most previous studies were performed in specialised centres. Here the results of two trials are presented in which private physicians used ambulatory BP monitoring to assess the efficacy of antihypertensive drugs. The results were very similar to those observed previously in specialised clinics. In the individual patient, the level of ambulatory recorded pressure could not be predicted based on BP readings taken at the doctor's office. Also, the BP response to antihypertensive therapy was more reproducible when evaluated by ambulatory BP monitoring than by the doctor. Thus, the use of noninvasive ambulatory BP monitoring is also very appropriate in everyday practice for the management of hypertensive patients.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE: To examine the compliance to medication among newly diagnosed hypertensive patients screened from the general population of the Seychelles, a rapidly developing country. METHODS: Among the 1067 participants to a population-based survey for cardiovascular risk factors, hypertension was discovered in 50 (previously unaware of having hypertension and having blood pressure > or = 160/95 mmHg over 3 visits). These 50 patients were placed on a daily one-pill regimen of medication (bendrofluazide, atenolol, or a combination of hydrochlorothiazide and atenolol) and compliance to the regimen was assessed over 12 months using electronic pill containers. Satisfactory compliance was defined as taking the medication on 6 or 7 days a week on average (which corresponds to a mean compliance level of > or = 86%). FINDINGS: In the first month, fewer than half (46%) of the new hypertension patients achieved satisfactory compliance, and only about one-quarter (26%) achieved this level by the twelfth month. Compliance was better among the 23 participants who regularly attended medical follow-up, with nearly three-quarters of these patients (74%) achieving satisfactory compliance during the first month and over one-half (55%) by the twelfth month. There was a direct association between mean 12-month compliance level and having a highly skilled occupation; having good health awareness; and regularly attending medical appointments. In contrast, there was an inverse relationship between mean compliance level and heavy drinking. CONCLUSION: The low proportion of people selected from the general population who were capable of sustaining satisfactory compliance to antihypertension medication may correspond to the maximum effectiveness of medication interventions based on a screening and treatment strategy in the general population. The results stress the need for both high-risk and population approaches to improve hypertension control.
Resumo:
In this retrospective analysis, we assessed the usefulness of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in the evaluation of elderly hypertensive patients. Thirty-eight untreated and 31 treated hypertensives aged 70 years or more had a systolic blood pressure greater than or equal to 160 mmHg and/or a diastolic blood pressure greater than or equal to 95 mmHg in the clinic. All 69 patients underwent blood pressure monitoring during their customary daily activities using a portable semi-automatic blood pressure recorder (Remier M2000). The mean of all blood pressures obtained with this device was taken as the ambulatory recorded blood pressure. Recorded blood pressures were greater than or equal to 160 mmHg systolic and greater than or equal to 90 mmHg diastolic in 17 untreated and 17 treated patients. In these patients, the introduction of antihypertensive therapy, or its modification, markedly reduced blood pressure during a 4-8 month follow-up. A further 21 untreated and 14 treated patients had recorded blood pressures of less than 160/90 mmHg. The treatment status of these patients was left unchanged for 4-8 months of follow-up. Nevertheless, office blood pressure in these groups, with no change in treatment, decreased significantly during the observation period. At the last visit to the outpatient clinic, there was no significant difference in blood pressure between the four subgroups of patients. Thus, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring appears to be useful in the elderly hypertensive patient in detecting those patients whose blood pressure is elevated only in the clinic. Blood pressure profiles obtained outside the clinic may therefore be useful in making therapeutic decisions in the aged hypertensive.
Resumo:
The current issues debate brings together experts around the themes of self-sufficiency (in its national and European aspects) and of needs in cellular blood products. The point of view of the manufacturer and prescribers of blood products are confronted.
Resumo:
Purpose: Concerns about self-reports have led to calls for objective measures of blood alcohol concentration (BAC). The present study compared objective measures with self-reports. Methods: BAC from breath or blood samples were obtained from 272 randomly sampled injured patients who were admitted to a Swiss emergency department (ED). Self-reports were compared a) between those providing and refusing a BAC test, and b) to estimated peak BAC (EPBAC) values based on BACs using the Widmark formula. Results: Those providing BACs were significantly (P < 0.05) younger, more often male, and less often reported alcohol consumption before injury, but consumed higher quantities when drinking. Eighty-eight percent of those with BAC measures gave consistent reports (positive or negative). Significantly more patients reported consumption with negative BAC measures (N = 29) than vice versa (N = 3). Duration of consumption and times between injury and BAC measurement predicted EPBAC better than did the objective BAC measure. Conclusions: There is little evidence that patients who provide objective BAC measures deliberately conceal consumption. ED studies must rely on self-reports, eg, take the time period between injury and ED admission into account. Clearly, objective measures are of clinical relevance, eg, to provide optimal treatment in the ED. However, they may be less relevant to establishing effects in an epidemiologic sense, such as estimating risk relationships. In this respect, efforts to increase the validity and reliability of self-reports should be preferred over the collection of additional objective measures.
Resumo:
AIMS: Managing patients with alcohol dependence includes assessment for heavy drinking, typically by asking patients. Some recommend biomarkers to detect heavy drinking but evidence of accuracy is limited. METHODS: Among people with dependence, we assessed the performance of disialo-carbohydrate-deficient transferrin (%dCDT, ≥1.7%), gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT, ≥66 U/l), either %dCDT or GGT positive, and breath alcohol (> 0) for identifying 3 self-reported heavy drinking levels: any heavy drinking (≥4 drinks/day or >7 drinks/week for women, ≥5 drinks/day or >14 drinks/week for men), recurrent (≥5 drinks/day on ≥5 days) and persistent heavy drinking (≥5 drinks/day on ≥7 consecutive days). Subjects (n = 402) with dependence and current heavy drinking were referred to primary care and assessed 6 months later with biomarkers and validated self-reported calendar method assessment of past 30-day alcohol use. RESULTS: The self-reported prevalence of any, recurrent and persistent heavy drinking was 54, 34 and 17%. Sensitivity of %dCDT for detecting any, recurrent and persistent self-reported heavy drinking was 41, 53 and 66%. Specificity was 96, 90 and 84%, respectively. %dCDT had higher sensitivity than GGT and breath test for each alcohol use level but was not adequately sensitive to detect heavy drinking (missing 34-59% of the cases). Either %dCDT or GGT positive improved sensitivity but not to satisfactory levels, and specificity decreased. Neither a breath test nor GGT was sufficiently sensitive (both tests missed 70-80% of cases). CONCLUSIONS: Although biomarkers may provide some useful information, their sensitivity is low the incremental value over self-report in clinical settings is questionable.