RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Translate, cross-culturally adapt and validate the Rapid Geriatric Assessment (RGA) for Brazilian community-dwelling adults. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study, using a quantitative approach. SETTING: Urban population from the city of São Carlos, located in the interior of São Paulo State, Brazil. PARTICIPANTS: 148 individuals aged 60 or over. MEASUREMENTS: Participants were assessed using the RGA, Fried Frailty Phenotype, International Physical Activity Questionnaire - long version, Addenbrooke´s Cognitive Exam - Revised Version, Mini Nutritional Assessment, short Form - 36, EuroQol 5-Dimension, Geriatric Depression Scale - short version, in addition to performing Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry to diagnose sarcopenia, according to the criteria established by the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People. RESULTS: In the translation and adaption process of the RGA, steps recommended by the literature were followed: initial translation, synthesis of translations, backward translation, evaluation from the panel of judges, and pre-test. When evaluating the psychometric properties of the scale, satisfactory reliability (internal consistency and stability) and validity (content, concurrent criterion and convergent, divergent and discriminant construct) were verified. CONCLUSION: The Brazilian version of the RGA is reliable and valid, and can be used in the Brazilian context to evaluate the elderly population.

Assuntos

RESUMO

This study aimed to investigate a vulnerable population living in the context of poverty in a Brazilian municipality, in order to identify the factors that are associated with frailty syndrome in elderly people. From the total population living in the area, a random sample of 363 community-dwelling people, 60 years and older, age and gender-stratified, was selected to participate in the research. After losses, a sample of 304 older adults was classified as non-frail, pre-frail and frail. According to the Fried frailty criteria, the prevalence was 12.2% for non-frail individuals, 60.5% pre-frail and 27.3% frail. The main factors associated with frailty in the studied sample were low level of physical activity (OR: 5.2, 95%CI: 2.5-11.0), the occurrence of two or more falls within 12 months (OR: 3.1, 95%CI: 1.4-7.1), mobility deficits (OR: 3.0, 95%CI: 1.5-5.8), and depressive symptoms (OR: 1.9, 95%CI: 1.1-3.7). This study identified the most important factors that must be evaluated to identify frailty syndrome in a socially vulnerable population in the context of poverty. The data should help to encourage effective strategies concerning public health policies for this population.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The BCRF II study presents a systematic review of the norms, recommendations and guidelines that are considered medical care standards (MCS) for breast cancer in 12 Latin American and Caribbean countries. Three key questions from the BCRF I survey data on early detection and diagnosis are presented to identify implementation practice patterns related to MCS. METHODS: Information related to MCS was requested from governmental health authorities, cancer institutes, and national scientific and professional societies in 12 Latin American and Caribbean countries. Documents received were reviewed by breast cancer experts from each respective country. Three key survey questions from the BCRF I survey on early detection and diagnosis were reprocessed to provide information related to implementation practice of existing MCS. RESULTS: All countries included in the BCRF II study had medical care standards (MCS) whether published by governmental authorities, national professional or scientific associations, cancer institutes, or adoption of international MCS. Experts reported different practice patterns at a Country level versus a Center level. Overall, 85% of the experts reported that less than 50% of the women with no symptoms undergo a mammography at the Country level compared to 43% at the Center level. For diagnostic suspicion of breast cancer, 80% of experts considered the diagnostic suspicion at a Country level to come from the patient compared to 50% at a Center level. About 30% of patients waited for more than 3 months for a diagnosis at the Country level compared to 7% at the Center level. CONCLUSION: All the Latin America and Caribbean countries in the study reported the use of similar MCS for breast cancer care. The reported difference between care practiced at a Country level versus a Center level suggests the challenge is not in generating new MCS, but in implementing policies and control mechanisms for compliance with existing MCS, guaranteeing their applicability to all populations.

Assuntos

RESUMO

La incidencia del cáncer de mama en países latinoamericanos es menor que en países más desarrollados, mientras que la tasa de mortalidad es mayor. Estas diferencias están relacionadas probablemente con diferencias en estrategias de despistaje y acceso al tratamiento. Se necesitan datos basados en población a fin de que sea posible tomar decisiones informadas. En el año 2006 se llevó a cabo una encuesta telefónica de 65 preguntas, que incluyó a 100 expertos en cáncer de mama de 12 países latinoamericanos, efectuando un análisis exploratorio del estado actual del tratamiento de cáncer de mama en estas regiones, tanto a nivel país como a nivel centro. Más del 90% de los países no tienen ley nacional o guía para screening mamográfico. La tasa de acceso a mamografía fue del 66,3% a nivel país y del 47,0% a nivel centro. La diferencia en la atención, basada en el nivel (país versus centro), fue indicada por la iniciación del tratamiento luego del diagnóstico, el tiempo desde el diagnóstico inicial al tratamiento y el tiempo desde la cirugía hasta la quimioterapia inicial. Sin embargo, las pruebas diagnósticas más sofisticadas para receptores hormonales y moleculares están disponibles en la mayoría de los centros (>80%), y en total, casi el 80% de las pacientes comenzaron el tratamiento dentro de los 3 meses del diagnóstico. La variación en la atención entre el nivel del centro versus el nivel del país para la atención del cáncer de mama, indica una necesidad de programas nacionales para el cuidado del cáncer. También se concluye que son necesarias estrategias alternativas de recolección de datos, a fin de comprender mejor el estado de los programas de control del cáncer de mama en países en desarrollo

Assuntos

RESUMO

La incidencia del cáncer de mama en países latinoamericanos es menor que en países más desarrollados, mientras que la tasa de mortalidad es mayor. Estas diferencias están relacionadas probablemente con diferencias en estrategias de despistaje y acceso al tratamiento. Se necesitan datos basados en población a fin de que sea posible tomar decisiones informadas. En el año 2006 se llevó a cabo una encuesta telefónica de 65 preguntas, que incluyó a 100 expertos en cáncer de mama de 12 países latinoamericanos, efectuando un análisis exploratorio del estado actual del tratamiento de cáncer de mama en estas regiones, tanto a nivel país como a nivel centro. Más del 90% de los países no tienen ley nacional o guía para screening mamográfico. La tasa de acceso a mamografía fue del 66,3% a nivel país y del 47,0% a nivel centro. La diferencia en la atención, basada en el nivel (país versus centro), fue indicada por la iniciación del tratamiento luego del diagnóstico, el tiempo desde el diagnóstico inicial al tratamiento y el tiempo desde la cirugía hasta la quimioterapia inicial. Sin embargo, las pruebas diagnósticas más sofisticadas para receptores hormonales y moleculares están disponibles en la mayoría de los centros (>80%), y en total, casi el 80% de las pacientes comenzaron el tratamiento dentro de los 3 meses del diagnóstico. La variación en la atención entre el nivel del centro versus el nivel del país para la atención del cáncer de mama, indica una necesidad de programas nacionales para el cuidado del cáncer. También se concluye que son necesarias estrategias alternativas de recolección de datos, a fin de comprender mejor el estado de los programas de control del cáncer de mama en países en desarrollo

Assuntos

Assuntos

Assuntos

RESUMO

The antiemetic effect of tropisetron was studied in 97 cancer patients (67 men, 30 women) receiving cisplatin in doses of 75 mg/m2 or higher. On 279 chemotherapy cycles studied (max 6 per patient) 5 mg of tropisetron was administered once a day i.v on day 1 and p.o. on days 2 to 6. Efficacy preventing vomiting and nausea was measured in 24 hour period as: complete control O episodes, major control 1 to 2 episodes, minor control 3 to 4 episodes and no control 5 or more episodes. Satisfactory vomiting control (complete and major) was 69%, 63%, 82%, 88%, 96% and 96% in days 1 to 6 of cycle 1. Satisfactory nausea control (complete and major) for the same days was 70%, 66%, 72%, 85%, 92% and 97%. Similar data was obtained for the subsequent cycles. Complete vomiting control was obtained in 47%, 35%, 56%, 72%, 81% and 84% and for nausea in 42%, 39%, 48%, 64%, 81% and 87%. 19 patients presented adverse effects (19.6%). Only 2 headache episodes had a definite relation with the antiemetic drug. 12 patients discontinued the medication; 6 due to drug inefficacy, 2 to illness unrelated to the drug, 1 to lack of collaboration, and 3 due to other reasons. We conclude that tropisetron allows satisfactory control of acute and delayed vomiting in a high percentage of patients treated with high doses of cisplatin. The drug does not have significant secondary effects. Tropisetron administration in only one daily dose implies an evident advantage and a treatment cost reduction.

Assuntos