77 resultados para InP(001)


Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Purpose: To analyze the effects of 100 mg of sildenafil citrate (Viagra®) on the retrobulbar circulation and visual field. Methods: A double masked, placebo controlled study was conducted in 10 males with a mean age of 27.7 + 5.68 years. The right eye of each volunteer underwent orbital color Doppler imaging and automated perimetry (Humphrey, program 30-2, Full-Threshold Strategy) at 3 occasions: baseline, 1 hour after placebo and 1 hour after 100 mg of sildenafil. The foveal threshold and the mean deviation (MD) were analyzed by automated perimetry on the three occasions. Color Doppler imaging allowed the measurement of the peak systolic velocity (PSV), end diastolic velocity (EDV) and Pourcelot index (PI) in the central retinal artery and ophthalmic artery. Results: The foveal threshold and the mean deviation did not show a significant change following the administration of sildenafil. The ophthalmic artery peak systolic velocity and end diastolic velocity significantly increased after the administration of sildenafil (p<0.001). The hemodynamic parameters in the central retinal artery and the ophthalmic artery PI did not significantly change. Conclusions: Sildefanil citrate increased the blood flow velocities in the ophthalmic artery in normal subjects, with no significant changes in the foveal threshold and mean deviation in the automated perimetry.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

PURPOSE: To compare intraocular pressure (IOP) rise in normal individuals and primary open-angle glaucoma patients and the safety and efficacy of ibopamine eye drops in different concentrations as a provocative test for glaucoma. METHODS: Glaucoma patients underwent (same eye) the ibopamine provocative test with two concentrations, 1% and 2%, in a random sequence at least 3 weeks apart, but not more than 3 months. The normal individuals were randomly submitted to one of the concentrations of ibopamine (1% and 2%). The test was considered positive if there was an IOP rise greater than 3 or 4 mmHg at 30 or 45 minutes to test which subset of the test has the best sensitivity (Se)/specificity (Sp). RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in any of the IOP measurements, comparing 1% with 2% ibopamine. The IOP was significantly higher at 30 and 45 minutes with both concentrations (p<0.001). The best sensitivity/specificity ratio was achieved with the cutoff point set as greater than 3 mmHg at 45 minutes with 2% ibopamine (area under the ROC curve: 0.864, Se: 84.6%; Sp:73.3%). All patients described a slight burning after ibopamine's instillation. CONCLUSION: 2% ibopamine is recommended as a provocative test for glaucoma. Because both concentrations have similar ability to rise IOP, 1% ibopamine may be used to treat ocular hypotony.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

PURPOSE: To evaluate the knowledge glaucoma patients have about their disease and its treatment. METHODS: One hundred and eighty-three patients were interviewed at the Glaucoma Service of Wills Eye Hospital (Philadelphia, USA, Group 1) and 100 at the Glaucoma Service of University of Campinas (Campinas, Brazil, Group 2). An informal, relaxed atmosphere was created by the interviewer before asking a list of 18 open-ended questions. RESULTS: In Group 1, 44% of the 183 patients did not have an acceptable idea about what glaucoma is, 30% did not know the purpose of the medications they were taking, 47% were not aware of what was an average intraocular pressure, and 45% did not understand why visual fields were examined. In Group 2, 54% gave unsatisfactory answers to the question What is glaucoma?, 54% did not know the purpose of the medications they were taking, 80% were not aware of what was an average intraocular pressure, and 94% did not understand why visual fields were examined (p<0.001). Linear regression analysis demonstrated that level of education was positively correlated to knowledge about glaucoma in both groups (r=0.65, p=0.001). CONCLUSION: This study showed that patients' knowledge about glaucoma varies greatly, and that in an urban, American setting, around one third of the patients have minimal understanding, whereas in an urban setting in Brazil around two thirds of patients were lacking basic information about glaucoma. Innovative and effective methods are needed to correct this situation.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

PURPOSE: To evaluate the need for artificial tears by glaucoma patients under topical hypotensive treatment and to identify risk factors associated with it. METHODS: The charts of 175 glaucoma patients under medical treatment and 175 age-matched controls were reviewed. Age, gender, use of artificial tears, number of glaucoma medications used, and duration of treatment were recorded. RESULTS: Significantly more glaucoma patients (n=92; 52.6%) used artificial tears compared to age-matched controls (n=31; 17.7%) (p<0.001). Significantly more females (n=81; 39%) than males (n=42; 28.9%) used artificial tears (p=0.036). When the whole population was analyzed, female gender (OR=1.63) and the presence of glaucoma (OR= 5.14) were risk factors for the use of artificial tears (p<0.05). When the glaucoma population was analyzed, female gender (OR=2.57), number of medications >2 (OR=1.92), and duration of treatment >5 years (OR=2.93) were risk factors for the use of artificial tears (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Topical treatment with antiglaucoma medication is a risk factor for the use of artificial tears. Female gender and long-term treatment of glaucoma with two or more medications were aggravating factors for the need for artificial tears.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

PURPOSE: To compare clinical trials published in Brazilian journals of ophthalmology and in foreign journals of ophthalmology with respect to the number of citations and the quality of reporting [by applying the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement writing standards]. METHODS: The sample of this systematic review comprised the two Brazilian journals of ophthalmology indexed at Science Citation Index Expanded and six of the foreign journals of ophthalmology with highest Impact Factor® according ISI. All clinical trials (CTs) published from January 2009 to December 2010 at the Brazilians journals and a 1:1 randomized sample of the foreign journals were included. The primary outcome was the number of citations through the end of 2011. Subgroup analysis included language. The secondary outcome included likelihood of citation (cited at least once versus no citation), and presence or absence of CONSORT statement indicators. RESULTS: The citation counts were statistically significantly higher (P<0.001) in the Foreign Group (10.50) compared with the Brazilian Group (0.45). The likelihood citation was statistically significantly higher (P<0.001) in the Foreign Group (20/20 - 100%) compared with the Brazilian Group (8/20 - 40%). The subgroup analysis of the language influence in Brazilian articles showed that the citation counts were statistically significantly higher in the papers published in English (P<0.04). Of 37 possible CONSORT items, the mean for the Foreign Group was 20.55 and for the Brazilian Group was 13.65 (P<0.003). CONCLUSION: The number of citations and the quality of reporting of clinical trials in Brazilian journals of ophthalmology still are low when compared with the foreign journals of ophthalmology with highest Impact Factor®.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

PURPOSE: To determine the association between language and number of citations of ophthalmology articles published in Brazilian journals. METHODS: This study was a systematic review. Original articles were identified by review of documents published at the two Brazilian ophthalmology journals indexed at Science Citation Index Expanded - SCIE [Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia (ABO) and Revista Brasileira de Oftalmologia (RBO)]. All document types (articles and reviews) listed at SCIE in English (English Group) or in Portuguese (Portuguese Group) from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2009 were included, except: editorial materials; corrections; letters; and biographical items. The primary outcome was the number of citations through the end of second year after publication date. Subgroup analysis included likelihood of citation (cited at least once versus no citation), journal, and year of publication. RESULTS: The search at the web of science revealed 382 articles [107 (28%) in the English Group and 275 (72%) in the Portuguese Group]. Of those, 297 (77.7%) were published at the ABO and 85 (23.3%) at the RBO. The citation counts were statistically significantly higher (P<0.001) in the English Group (1.51 - SD 1.98 - range 0 to 11) compared with the Portuguese Group (0.57 - SD 1.06 - range 0 to 7). The likelihood citation was statistically significant higher (P<0.001) in the English Group (70/107 - 65.4%) compared with the Portuguese Group (89/275 - 32.7%). There were more articles published in English at the ABO (98/297 - 32.9%) than at the RBO (9/85 - 10.6%) [P<0.001]. There were no significant difference (P=0.967) at the proportion of articles published in English at the years 2008 (48/172 - 27.9%) and 2009 (59/210 - 28.1%). CONCLUSION: The number of citations of articles published in Portuguese at Brazilian ophthalmology journals is lower than the published in English. The results of this study suggest that the editorial boards should strongly encourage the authors to adopt English as the main language in their future articles.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física