937 resultados para Drug Rehabilitation Programs.
Resumo:
Mode of access: Internet.
Resumo:
Shipping list no.: 94-0200-P.
Resumo:
Mode of access: Internet.
Resumo:
Cover title.
Resumo:
"This reprint includes TN no. 1 through 22. TN no. 20; transmitted a new chapter, chapter 23."
Resumo:
Mode of access: Internet.
Resumo:
Mode of access: Internet.
Resumo:
"Dec. 8, 1969."
Resumo:
"FSS 70-12-1."
Resumo:
Hearings held Sept. 18-Nov. 3, 1969, in Washington, D.C.; Jan. 26, 1970, in Cherry Hill, N.J.
Resumo:
Prepared for the use of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare and the House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.
Resumo:
Objective To evaluate drug interaction software programs and determine their accuracy in identifying drug-drug interactions that may occur in intensive care units. Setting The study was developed in Brazil. Method Drug interaction software programs were identified through a bibliographic search in PUBMED and in LILACS (database related to the health sciences published in Latin American and Caribbean countries). The programs` sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were determined to assess their accuracy in detecting drug-drug interactions. The accuracy of the software programs identified was determined using 100 clinically important interactions and 100 clinically unimportant ones. Stockley`s Drug Interactions 8th edition was employed as the gold standard in the identification of drug-drug interaction. Main outcome Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values. Results The programs studied were: Drug Interaction Checker (DIC), Drug-Reax (DR), and Lexi-Interact (LI). DR displayed the highest sensitivity (0.88) and DIC showed the lowest (0.69). A close similarity was observed among the programs regarding specificity (0.88-0.92) and positive predictive values (0.88-0.89). The DIC had the lowest negative predictive value (0.75) and DR the highest (0.91). Conclusion The DR and LI programs displayed appropriate sensitivity and specificity for identifying drug-drug interactions of interest in intensive care units. Drug interaction software programs help pharmacists and health care teams in the prevention and recognition of drug-drug interactions and optimize safety and quality of care delivered in intensive care units.
Resumo:
This paper provides a descriptive overview of options for diversion of drug-related offenders from the criminal justice system. Drug-related offences include drug offences (for example, possession of a prohibited substance); offences that are directly linked to intoxication (for example, drink-driving or assault); and offences committed to support drug use (for example, theft). After an offence has been detected by police, multiple opportunities for diversion occur throughout the criminal justice process. (a) Pre-arrest: when an offence is first detected, prior to a charge being laid. This is known as police diversion and includes fines, warnings and cautions, sometimes with educational information or referral to assessment and treatment. (b) Pre-trial: when a charge is made but before the matter is heard at court. Examples are treatment as a condition of bail, conferencing and prosecutor discretion. (c) Pre-sentence: a delay of sentence while assessment and treatment are sought. (d) Post-sentence: as part of sentencing, for example suspended sentences, drug courts, noncustodial sentences and circle sentencing. (e) Pre-release: prior to release from a sentence, on parole. Issues for diversion programmes include net widening, the ethics of coercion to treatment, the needs of families and intersectoral collaboration. A framework for diversion is presented in which increasingly treatment-focused and coercive diversion strategies are used as offenders' criminal careers and drug problems increase.
Resumo:
Background: The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists is co-ordinating the development of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) in psychiatry, funded under the National Mental Health Strategy (Australia) and the New Zealand Health Funding Authority. This paper presents CPGs for schizophrenia and related disorders. Over the past decade schizophrenia has become more treatable than ever before. A new generation of drug therapies, a renaissance of psychological and psychosocial interventions and a first generation of reform within the specialist mental health system have combined to create an evidence-based climate of realistic optimism. Progressive neuroscientific advances hold out the strong possibility of more definitive biological treatments in the near future. However, this improved potential for better outcomes and quality of life for people with schizophrenia has not been translated into reality in Australia. The efficacy-effectiveness gap is wider for schizophrenia than any other serious medical disorder. Therapeutic nihilism, under-resourcing of services and a stalling of the service reform process, poor morale within specialist mental health services, a lack of broad-based recovery and life support programs, and a climate of tenacious stigma and consequent lack of concern for people with schizophrenia are the contributory causes for this failure to effectively treat. These guidelines therefore tackle only one element in the endeavour to reduce the impact of schizophrenia. They distil the current evidence-base and make recommendations based on the best available knowledge. Method: A comprehensive literature review (1990-2003) was conducted, including all Cochrane schizophrenia reviews and all relevant meta-analyses, and a number of recent international clinical practice guidelines were consulted. A series of drafts were refined by the expert committee and enhanced through a bi-national consultation process. Treatment recommendations: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the management of schizophrenia by treatment type and by phase of illness. The essential features of the guidelines are: (i) Early detection and comprehensive treatment of first episode cases is a priority since the psychosocial and possibly the biological impact of illness can be minimized and outcome improved. An optimistic attitude on the part of health professionals is an essential ingredient from the outset and across all phases of illness. (ii) Comprehensive and sustained intervention should be assured during the initial 3-5 years following diagnosis since course of illness is strongly influenced by what occurs in this 'critical period'. Patients should not have to 'prove chronicity' before they gain consistent access and tenure to specialist mental health services. (iii) Antipsychotic medication is the cornerstone of treatment. These medicines have improved in quality and tolerability, yet should be used cautiously and in a more targeted manner than in the past. The treatment of choice for most patients is now the novel antipsychotic medications because of their superior tolerability and, in particular, the reduced risk of tardive dyskinesia. This is particularly so for the first episode patient where, due to superior tolerability, novel agents are the first, second and third line choice. These novel agents are nevertheless associated with potentially serious medium to long-term side-effects of their own for which patients must be carefully monitored. Conventional antipsychotic medications in low dosage may still have a role in a small proportion of patients, where there has been full remission and good tolerability; however, the indications are shrinking progressively. These principles are now accepted in most developed countries. (vi) Clozapine should be used early in the course, as soon as treatment resistance to at least two antipsychotics has been demonstrated. This usually means incomplete remission of positive symptomatology, but clozapine may also be considered where there are pervasive negative symptoms or significant or persistent suicidal risk is present. (v) Comprehensive psychosocial interventions should be routinely available to all patients and their families, and provided by appropriately trained mental health professionals with time to devote to the task. This includes family interventions, cognitive-behaviour therapy, vocational rehabilitation and other forms of therapy, especially for comorbid conditions, such as substance abuse, depression and anxiety. (vi) The social and cultural environment of people with schizophrenia is an essential arena for intervention. Adequate shelter, financial security, access to meaningful social roles and availability of social support are essential components of recovery and quality of life. (vii) Interventions should be carefully tailored to phase and stage of illness, and to gender and cultural background. (viii) Genuine involvement of consumers and relatives in service development and provision should be standard. (ix) Maintenance of good physical health and prevention and early treatment of serious medical illness has been seriously neglected in the management of schizophrenia, and results in premature death and widespread morbidity. Quality of medical care for people with schizophrenia should be equivalent to the general community standard. (x) General practitioners (GPs)s should always be closely involved in the care of people with schizophrenia. However, this should be truly shared care, and sole care by a GP with minimal or no special Optimal treatment of schizophrenia requires a multidisciplinary team approach with a consultant psychiatrist centrally involved.
Resumo:
Objectives: To compare the population modelling programs NONMEM and P-PHARM during investigation of the pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus in paediatric liver-transplant recipients. Methods: Population pharmacokinetic analysis was performed using NONMEM and P-PHARM on retrospective data from 35 paediatric liver-transplant patients receiving tacrolimus therapy. The same data were presented to both programs. Maximum likelihood estimates were sought for apparent clearance (CL/F) and apparent volume of distribution (V/F). Covariates screened for influence on these parameters were weight, age, gender, post-operative day, days of tacrolimus therapy, transplant type, biliary reconstructive procedure, liver function tests, creatinine clearance, haematocrit, corticosteroid dose, and potential interacting drugs. Results: A satisfactory model was developed in both programs with a single categorical covariate - transplant type - providing stable parameter estimates and small, normally distributed (weighted) residuals. In NONMEM, the continuous covariates - age and liver function tests - improved modelling further. Mean parameter estimates were CL/F (whole liver) = 16.3 1/h, CL/F (cut-down liver) = 8.5 1/h and V/F = 565 1 in NONMEM, and CL/F = 8.3 1/h and V/F = 155 1 in P-PHARM. Individual Bayesian parameter estimates were CL/F (whole liver) = 17.9 +/- 8.8 1/h, CL/F (cutdown liver) = 11.6 +/- 18.8 1/h and V/F = 712 792 1 in NONMEM, and CL/F (whole liver) = 12.8 +/- 3.5 1/h, CL/F (cut-down liver) = 8.2 +/- 3.4 1/h and V/F = 221 1641 in P-PHARM. Marked interindividual kinetic variability (38-108%) and residual random error (approximately 3 ng/ml) were observed. P-PHARM was more user friendly and readily provided informative graphical presentation of results. NONMEM allowed a wider choice of errors for statistical modelling and coped better with complex covariate data sets. Conclusion: Results from parametric modelling programs can vary due to different algorithms employed to estimate parameters, alternative methods of covariate analysis and variations and limitations in the software itself.