997 resultados para Coeficiente de eficácia
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.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: To collect information and opinions from a group of diabetic patients regarding diabetic retinopathy and its treatment, in order to get reliable information that can help to improve programs and actions to control and prevent this ocular disease. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed. The sample was from 980 diabetic patients seen in a diabetic association. A previous questionnaire was made with general questions about the main subject. Thereafter, an appropriate questionnaire was prepared. RESULTS: The sample showed that among 299 patients with age ranging from 16 to 83 years, with a mean of 57 years, mainly female (67.91%) did not know how severe their disease was (30.8%), or believed that it was not a serious problem (19.7%). The laser technique to solve diabetic retinopathy was known by 60.2% of the patients. It was reported as the only treatment available by 24.1%. Among the reasons for no treatment 59.8% reported that they did not think it was necessary and 29.7% could not afford it. CONCLUSIONS: Patients showed lack of knowledge about how serious is diabetic retinopathy, the possibility of using laser technique for it and the severity of the disease. Some patients believed in the efficacy of the treatment and some patients did not, but all of them reported that they were afraid of submitting to it.
Resumo:
Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física
Resumo:
Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física
Resumo:
Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física
Resumo:
Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física
Resumo:
Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física
Resumo:
Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física
Resumo:
Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física
Resumo:
Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física
Resumo:
Universidade Estadual de Campinas. Faculdade de Educação Física
Resumo:
Universidade Estadual de Campinas. Faculdade de Educação Física
Resumo:
Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física
Resumo:
Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física
Resumo:
Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física