Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Patient Prefer Adherence ; 17: 2915-2925, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38027086

RESUMO

Introduction:  Non-adherence in kidney transplants is diversely defined. Immunosuppression non-adherence (INA) is the most used definition and has been associated with graft loss and acute rejection. But INA assesses only one fraction of adherence. Therefore, we analyzed the association of a holistic non-adherence definition with transplant outcomes and compared its prediction performance with other definitions. Methods:  We retrospectively included 739 kidney recipients between 2019 and 2021. We evaluated holistic non-adherence (HNA), suboptimal-immunosuppressor levels (SIL), appointment non-adherence (ANA), procedure non-adherence (PNA) and INA. The main outcomes were graft loss, graft rejection, and mortality. A backward logistic regression was performed estimating adjusted and un-adjusted odds ratio (OR) for each outcome. Finally, we compared the non-adherence definitions' prediction for the main outcomes using the area under the curve. Results: HNA was present in 28.7% of patients. Non-adherent patients had an adjusted OR of 2.66 (1.37-5.15) for mortality, 6.44 for graft loss (2.71-16.6), and 2.28 (1.15-4.47) for graft rejection. INA and PNA presented a moderate discrimination for graft loss and HNA and ANA mild-to-moderate discrimination for graft loss and death. Conclusion: Holistic non-adherence was associated with worst outcomes in kidney recipients and had a significant prediction performance for graft loss and mortality.

2.
Patient Prefer Adherence ; 17: 2201-2213, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37701427

RESUMO

Introduction: In renal transplant recipients, compliance with medical therapy is vital. Non-adherence is considered a risk factor for worst outcomes in kidney recipients, with attributed outcomes of 64% for graft loss and 80% for late acute rejection. Most literature defines adherence as self-based immunosuppression compliance but does not consider other relevant factors such as consult and procedure compliance. Therefore, this study aims to describe adherence prevalence in kidney transplant recipients and the factors related to non-adherence. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 1030 renal transplant patients followed by Colombiana de Trasplantes between January 2019 and July 2021. Sociodemographic and clinical variables were obtained based on clinical records. The mental-health group diagnosed holistic adherence in a semi-structured interview. The diagnosis considered medication intake failure, frequency and number of failures to medical controls or other procedures, suspicious non-adherence behaviors, and serum levels of immunosuppressants. A bivariate followed a descriptive analysis, and a forward logistic regression was performed for non-adherence. Results: Patients had a median of 47 years, and 58.1% were male. Non-adherence was presented in 30.7% of patients. The non-adherence patients were younger, with a higher prevalence of males, single, divided transplant care, had a longer time after transplantation, psychopathological diagnosis, and more reinforcement education by only nursing. Older age and multidisciplinary reinforcement education were protective factors. On the other hand, poor social support, psychopathology diagnosis, and longer time after transplant presented as non-adherence risk factors. Conclusion: Holistic non-adherence was diagnosed in approximately one-third of renal transplant recipients. Its definition included more than just medication non-compliance and could identify more non-adherent patients. Notably, there is a need to consider the related factors in the health follow-up and encourage future research in modifiable factor interventions aiming to increase adherence and achieve better outcomes for renal transplant patients.

3.
Rev. colomb. psiquiatr ; 46(supl.1): 9-17, oct.-dic. 2017. tab
Artigo em Espanhol | LILACS, COLNAL | ID: biblio-960152

RESUMO

Resumen Introducción y objetivos: La apatía, entendida como un déficit para el inicio y el mantenimiento de la acción, es un síntoma que afecta a los pacientes con diversas enfermedades psiquiátricas y neuropsiquiátricas, como demencias, secuelas de traumatismo craneal, esquizofrenia y depresión y enfermedad de Parkinson (EP). La apatía afecta negativamente a la funcionalidad y la calidad de vida de los pacientes con EP y es fuente importante de estrés del cuidador. El tratamiento farmacológico de la apatía en la EP es el foco de esta revisión sistemática. Métodos: Se realizó una búsqueda con selección sistemática de artículos originales sobre el tratamiento de la apatía en la EP en diferentes bases de datos, se consolidaron los resultados, se realizó lectura crítica de los artículos y se discutieron los hallazgos. Resultados: Se incluyeron 11 estudios. Aunque algunos mostraron eficacia, todos presentaban limitaciones metodológicas importantes, que no permitían considerar que se pueda tomar en cuenta los resultados de dichos ensayos clínicos como evidencia para guiar las decisiones clínicas. Conclusiones: Hasta el momento no se puede ofrecer recomendaciones basadas en la evidencia para el tratamiento farmacológico de la apatía en la EP. Hacen falta estudios con mejor calidad metodológica. Es un área de investigación potencialmente fructífera y muy necesaria para los pacientes con EP y sus familiares.


Abstract Introduction and objectives: Apathy, defined as a deficit for initiating and maintaining action, is a symptom affecting patients with diverse psychiatric and neuropsychiatric diseases, including dementia, sequelae of traumatic brain injury, schizophrenia, depression, and Parkinson's disease (PD). Apathy negatively affects function and quality of life of PD patients, and it is an important cause of caregiver's distress. The pharmacological treatment of apathy in PD is the focus of this systematic review. Methods: A comprehensive search and systematic selection was performed in different databases of original research papers on the treatment of apathy in PD. The results were then consolidated, and a critical analysis was made of the research papers. The results are then discussed according to the methodological standards for systematic reviews of the literature. Results: A total of 11 studies were included. Although some studies showed efficacy, all of them had important methodological limitations that hampered the interpretation of results. The results of the examined studies cannot be considered as evidence for guiding clinical decisions. Conclusions: So far, no evidence-based recommendations can be offered for the treatment of apathy in PD. More studies with better methodological quality are needed. It is a potentially fruitful area for research and one badly needed by both PD patients and their caregivers.


Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Doença de Parkinson , Terapêutica , Apatia , Qualidade de Vida , Esquizofrenia , Afeto , Demência , Depressão , Tratamento Farmacológico , Transtornos Mentais , Métodos
4.
Rev Colomb Psiquiatr ; 46 Suppl 1: 9-17, 2017 Oct.
Artigo em Espanhol | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29037342

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Apathy, defined as a deficit for initiating and maintaining action, is a symptom affecting patients with diverse psychiatric and neuropsychiatric diseases, including dementia, sequelae of traumatic brain injury, schizophrenia, depression, and Parkinson's disease (PD). Apathy negatively affects function and quality of life of PD patients, and it is an important cause of caregiver's distress. The pharmacological treatment of apathy in PD is the focus of this systematic review. METHODS: A comprehensive search and systematic selection was performed in different databases of original research papers on the treatment of apathy in PD. The results were then consolidated, and a critical analysis was made of the research papers. The results are then discussed according to the methodological standards for systematic reviews of the literature. RESULTS: A total of 11 studies were included. Although some studies showed efficacy, all of them had important methodological limitations that hampered the interpretation of results. The results of the examined studies cannot be considered as evidence for guiding clinical decisions. CONCLUSIONS: So far, no evidence-based recommendations can be offered for the treatment of apathy in PD. More studies with better methodological quality are needed. It is a potentially fruitful area for research and one badly needed by both PD patients and their caregivers.


Assuntos
Apatia/efeitos dos fármacos , Doença de Parkinson/tratamento farmacológico , Qualidade de Vida , Cuidadores/psicologia , Humanos , Doença de Parkinson/fisiopatologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA