Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
1.
J Clin Psychopharmacol ; 35(3): 324-8, 2015 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25928700

RESUMO

The assessment of adverse effects of psychiatric medications is important in clinical and research settings because they are often associated with medication discontinuation, symptom exacerbation, and reduced quality of life. Currently available assessment tools are either limited with regard to the number and variety of included adverse effects or are not practical for use in most clinical or research settings owing to specialized rater training required and administration length. This report describes a modification of the Monitoring of Side Effects Scale (MOSES), an established adverse effect rating scale, by adding severity anchors to improve its reliability and ease of use. Interrater reliability was good for 7 of the 8 bodily adverse effects assessed, with intraclass correlation coefficients ranging from 0.76 to 0.91 in a sample of patients with severe mental illness. This modified version of the Monitoring of Side Effects Scale holds promise as a useful tool for assessing medication adverse effects in clinical and research settings.


Assuntos
Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/diagnóstico , Variações Dependentes do Observador , Psicotrópicos/efeitos adversos , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Transtornos Mentais/tratamento farmacológico , Psicotrópicos/uso terapêutico , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Índice de Gravidade de Doença
2.
Clin J Pain ; 32(4): 279-84, 2016 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26102320

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Physicians are a key stakeholder in the epidemic of prescription opioid abuse. Therefore, we assessed their knowledge of opioid abuse and diversion, as well as their support for clinical and regulatory interventions to reduce opioid-related morbidity and mortality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a nationally representative postal mail survey of 1000 practicing internists, family physicians, and general practitioners in the United States between February and May 2014. RESULTS: The adjusted response rate was 58%, and all physicians (100%) believed that prescription drug abuse was a problem in their communities. However, only two-thirds (66%) correctly reported that the most common route of abuse was swallowing pills whole, and nearly one-half (46%) erroneously reported that abuse-deterrent formulations were less addictive than their counterparts. In addition, a notable minority of physicians (25%) reported being "not at all" or "only slightly concerned" about the potential for opioid diversion from the licit to the illicit market when this practice is common at all levels of the pharmaceutical supply chain. Most physicians supported clinical and regulatory interventions to reduce prescription opioid abuse, including the use of patient contracts (98%), urine drug testing (90%), requiring prescribers to check a centralized database before prescribing opioids (88%), and instituting greater restrictions on the marketing and promotion of opioids (77% to 82%). Despite this, only one-third of physicians (33%) believed that interventions to reduce prescription opioid abuse had a moderate or large effect on preventing patients' clinically appropriate access to pain treatment. DISCUSSION: Although physicians are unaware of some facets of prescription opioid-related morbidity, most support a variety of clinical and regulatory interventions to improve the risk-benefit balance of these therapies.


Assuntos
Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/tratamento farmacológico , Médicos de Atenção Primária , Médicos/psicologia , Uso Indevido de Medicamentos sob Prescrição/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/epidemiologia , Inquéritos e Questionários , Estados Unidos
3.
Diabetes Care ; 37(4): 985-92, 2014 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24198301

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE Type 2 diabetes is increasingly common and associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. This study examines trends in the patterns and costs of drug treatment of type 2 diabetes from 1997 to 2012. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We conducted descriptive analyses of cross-sectional data using the IMS Health National Disease and Therapeutic Index, a nationally representative audit of ambulatory physician practices in the U.S. We focused on visits for diabetes among patients 35 years of age or older. We used the IMS Health National Prescription Audit of pharmacy dispensing to derive information about drug expenditures. RESULTS Ambulatory diabetes visits increased from 23 million treatment visits in 1997 (95% CI 21-25) to 35 million (32-37) in 2007 and declined to 31 million visits by 2012 (27-31). Between 1997 and 2012 biguanide use increased, from 23% (20-26) to 53% (50-56) of treatment visits. Glitazone use grew from 6% (4-8) in 1997 (41% [39-43] of all visits in 2005), but declined to 16% (14-18) by 2012. Since 2005, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor use increased steadily, representing 21% (18-23) of treatment visits by 2012. Glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) agonists accounted for 4% of treatment visits in 2012. Visits where two or more drug compounds were used increased nearly 40% from 1997 to 2012. Between 2008 and 2012, drug expenditures increased 61%, driven primarily by use of insulin glargine and DPP-4 inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS Declining sulfonylurea and glitazone use has been offset by increases in DPP-4 inhibitor use and, to a lesser degree, use of GLP-1 agonists. Treatment of diabetes has grown in complexity while older treatments continue to be replaced or supplemented by newer therapies.


Assuntos
Assistência Ambulatorial , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêutico , Idoso , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Humanos , Hipoglicemiantes/classificação , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estados Unidos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA