RESUMEN
Using 10 years' enrollment history, patients with non-drug-induced Parkinson's disease were identified, and the prevalence of Parkinson's disease-induced psychosis (PDP) was estimated using three different claims algorithms based on an expert working group criteria. The estimated prevalence of PDP ranged from 4 to 45/1,000 Parkinson's disease patients. PDP patients were just as likely to be male as female and were significantly older than Parkinson's disease patients without PDP. PDP patients more commonly had evidence of dementia and use of atypical antipsychotics. PDP occurs in up to 45,000 Parkinson's disease patients in the United States but represents a unique neuropsychiatric finding with important treatment implications.
Asunto(s)
Programas Controlados de Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Enfermedad de Parkinson/psicología , Trastornos Psicóticos/diagnóstico , Trastornos Psicóticos/etiología , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Vigilancia de la Población/métodos , Prevalencia , Trastornos Psicóticos/epidemiología , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
This study examined achievement of blood pressure (BP) goals, changes in antihypertensive therapy and reasons for these changes among adults with hypertension initiating angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) or calcium channel blockers (CCBs). Claims data were examined for changes to medication regimens. Patient charts for 501 patients provided BP levels and reasons for changing medications. BP goal achievement was highest for initiators of ARBs (81.4%), compared with ACEIs (75.5%; P=NS) and CCBs (68.9%; P<0.01). Changes in antihypertensive therapy were least likely among ARB recipients (59.9%) compared with ACEIs (71.86%; P=0.02) and CCBs (74.85%; P<0.01). Failure to achieve BP goals was the most common reason for change in therapy (ARB, 32.9%; ACEI, 42.5%, P=NS; CCB, 47.9%, P<0.01). Although most patients achieved target BP goals, many required changes in treatment regimens. Initial choice of antihypertensive therapy may mitigate changes in therapies and better achieve BP goals.
Asunto(s)
Antihipertensivos/uso terapéutico , Presión Sanguínea/efectos de los fármacos , Sustitución de Medicamentos , Hipertensión/tratamiento farmacológico , Seguro de Servicios Farmacéuticos , Programas Controlados de Atención en Salud , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Adulto , Anciano , Bloqueadores del Receptor Tipo 1 de Angiotensina II/uso terapéutico , Inhibidores de la Enzima Convertidora de Angiotensina/uso terapéutico , Bloqueadores de los Canales de Calcio/uso terapéutico , Prescripciones de Medicamentos , Femenino , Adhesión a Directriz , Humanos , Hipertensión/fisiopatología , Seguro de Servicios Farmacéuticos/estadística & datos numéricos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Programas Controlados de Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Oportunidad Relativa , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To assess the process related to each infusible biologic used in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with regard to patient and physician engagement in the infusion process, ancillary services required, and participant preferences. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional survey of patients with RA and their physicians. Biologic-naïve patients with RA starting abatacept, infliximab, or rituximab were included. Both patients and physicians completed detailed questionnaires related to the infusion and satisfaction with the process. RESULTS: A total of 205 patients were enrolled: abatacept (n=102), infliximab (n=74), rituximab (n=29). Patients were primarily female (75%), Caucasian (85%), with a mean age of 58 years. Patients had a mean disease duration of approximately 8 years and had typically failed multiple DMARDs. Rituximab required the most pre-infusion preparation and the longest infusion time. Abatacept was associated with a shorter mean infusion time (42 minutes) than infliximab (131 minutes; p<0.0001) or rituximab (274 minutes; p<0.0001) and required less time away from work/home (p=0.01 and p<0.0001, respectively). Abatacept patients reported significantly less discomfort than rituximab patients (p=0.03), while discomfort was similar between abatacept and infliximab. From the physicians' perspective, compared to infliximab and rituximab abatacept was very easy to administer (57% vs. 27% and 5%, respectively), caused no pain/discomfort (52% vs. 42% and 31%), and had very infrequent infusion reactions (75% vs. 30% and 44%). CONCLUSION: The process involved in infusion administration, as perceived by both the patient and physician, seems to differ across the three infusible biologic agents and may have an impact on the decision-making process regarding which infusible biologic to use.
Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales/administración & dosificación , Artritis Reumatoide/terapia , Inmunoconjugados/administración & dosificación , Satisfacción del Paciente , Abatacept , Anciano , Anticuerpos Monoclonales de Origen Murino , Antirreumáticos/administración & dosificación , Costo de Enfermedad , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Humanos , Infliximab , Infusiones Intravenosas/psicología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Médicos , Calidad de Vida , Rituximab , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Ketorolac's efficacy as a postoperative analgesic has been shown to be comparable to that of narcotic analgesics, but with significantly fewer narcotic-related adverse events. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the choice of postoperative analgesic, narcotic or ketorolac, has an impact on healthcare resource utilization and cost durng inpatients' recovery period. DESIGN: Retrospective, multicenter, controlled, parallel, cost-minimization analysis. SETTING: Six US teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: This study included 559 patients that underwent either a spine or joint procedure and received adequate doses of narcotic (n = 284 of either morphine or meperidine) or ketorolac (n = 275). MEASUREMENTS: Time to reach recovery milestones, average utilization of healthcare resources, and average per-case postoperative treatment cost. RESULTS: Several recovery milestones, including time to first bowel movement, first oral intake, and first unassisted ambulation, were reached sooner in the ketorolac group, with a resultant shorter mean length of postoperative stay (narcotic 3.78 d, ketorolac 2.80 d; p = 0.01). Total per-patient cost of treatment was 32% greater in the narcotic group, resulting primarily from higher costs associated with hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the higher acquisition cost of medication, healthcare resource utilization and total per-patient cost of treatment were lower for patients in the ketorolac group compared with patients in the narcotic analgesic study group. The majority of patients in the ketorolac group were also given concurrent narcotic analgesics; therefore, the beneficial effects observed may be secondary to the combination of ketorolac and narcotic analgesics.
Asunto(s)
Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapéutico , Antiinflamatorios no Esteroideos/uso terapéutico , Articulaciones/cirugía , Ketorolaco/uso terapéutico , Procedimientos Ortopédicos , Dolor Postoperatorio/tratamiento farmacológico , Columna Vertebral/cirugía , Analgésicos Opioides/economía , Antiinflamatorios no Esteroideos/economía , Hospitalización/economía , Humanos , Ketorolaco/economía , Dolor Postoperatorio/economía , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of antiemetic selection on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and patient satisfaction after ambulatory surgery. DESIGN: Prospective, observational study. SETTING: Ambulatory surgery center in an academic medical center. PATIENTS: Five hundred fifty-four consecutive patients undergoing ambulatory surgical procedures of any kind. INTERVENTION: Data on antiemetic utilization, occurrence of PONV, and patient satisfaction were collected perioperatively. Multiple regression analyses for antiemetic choice were performed. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Prophylactic antiemetic therapy was administered to 292 (52.7%) patients, most often with droperidol (200 patients), metoclopramide (134), or dexamethasone (55). Forty-one (7.4%) patients had an episode of emesis in the postanesthesia care unit. Choice of antiemetic was not a significant predictor of PONV. Patient satisfaction for all patients was 9.5 on a 10-point scale, with no agent more or less successful than any other. CONCLUSION: As choice of antiemetic drug given for prophylaxis had little impact on clinical outcome or patient satisfaction, traditional agents should form the core of antiemetics used for PONV prophylaxis in ambulatory surgery patients.