Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Am J Psychiatry ; 169(5): 531-6, 2012 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22764364

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The majority of drug addicts are polydrug dependent, and no effective pharmacological treatment is currently available for them. The authors studied the overall real-world effectiveness of naltrexone implant in this patient population. METHOD: The authors assessed the effectiveness of a naltrexone implant in the treatment of coexisting heroin and amphetamine polydrug dependence in 100 heroin- and amphetamine-dependent outpatients in a 10-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. The main outcome measures were retention in the study, proportion of drug-free urine samples, and improvement score on the Clinical Global Impressions Scale (CGI). Analyses were conducted in an intent-to-treat model. RESULTS: At week 10, the retention rate was 52% for patients who received a naltrexone implant and 28% for those who received a placebo implant; the proportions of drug-free urine samples were 38% and 16%, respectively, for the two groups. On the CGI improvement item, 56% of the patients in the naltrexone group showed much or very much improvement, compared with 14% of those in the placebo group (number needed to treat=3). CONCLUSIONS: Naltrexone implants resulted in higher retention in the study, decreased heroin and amphetamine use, and improved clinical condition for patients, thus providing the first evidence of an effective pharmacological treatment for this type of polydrug dependence.


Assuntos
Naltrexona/uso terapêutico , Antagonistas de Entorpecentes/uso terapêutico , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Anfetaminas/complicações , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Anfetaminas/tratamento farmacológico , Método Duplo-Cego , Implantes de Medicamento , Feminino , Dependência de Heroína/complicações , Dependência de Heroína/tratamento farmacológico , Humanos , Masculino , Naltrexona/administração & dosagem , Antagonistas de Entorpecentes/administração & dosagem , Resultado do Tratamento , Sexo sem Proteção/efeitos dos fármacos
2.
Addiction ; 107(10): 1741-6, 2012 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21992550

RESUMO

The Department of Alcohol, Drugs and Addiction started operations on 1 January 2009, when the National Institute of Public Health (KTL) and the National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health (STAKES) were merged. The newly formed institute, called the National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL), operates under the Finnish Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. The scope of the research and preventive work conducted in the Department covers alcohol, drugs, tobacco and gambling issues. The two main tasks of the Department are (i) to research, produce and disseminate information on alcohol and drugs, substance use, addictions and their social and health-related effects and (ii) to develop prevention and good practices with a view to counteracting the onset and development of alcohol and drug problems and the damaging effects of smoking and other addictions. The number of staff hovers at approximately 60 people. The Department is organized into three units, one specialized in social sciences (the Alcohol and Drug Research Unit), another in laboratory analytics (the Alcohol and Drug Analytics Unit) and the third primarily in preventive work (the Addiction Prevention Unit). These units incorporate a rich variety and long traditions of both research and preventive work. The mixture of different disciplines creates good opportunities for interdisciplinary research projects and collaboration within the Department. Also, the fact that in the same administrative context there are both researchers and people specialized in preventive work opens up interesting possibilities for combining efforts from these two branches. Nationally, the Department is a key player in all its fields of interest. It engages in a great deal of cooperation both nationally and internationally, and among its strengths are the high-quality, regularly collected long-term data sets.


Assuntos
Academias e Institutos/organização & administração , Pesquisa Biomédica/organização & administração , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias/prevenção & controle , Academias e Institutos/tendências , Pesquisa Biomédica/tendências , Criatividade , Finlândia , Previsões , Humanos , Relações Interprofissionais
3.
Arch Gen Psychiatry ; 64(1): 19-28, 2007 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17199051

RESUMO

CONTEXT: Recent general population surveys of psychotic disorders have found low lifetime prevalences. However, this may be owing to methodological problems. Few studies have reported the prevalences of all specific psychotic disorders. OBJECTIVE: To provide reliable estimates of the lifetime prevalences of specific psychotic disorders. DESIGN: General population survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A nationally representative sample of 8028 persons 30 years or older was screened for psychotic and bipolar I disorders using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview, self-reported diagnoses, medical examination, and national registers. Those selected by the screens were then re-interviewed with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV. Best-estimate DSM-IV diagnoses were formed by combining the interview and case note data. Register diagnoses were used to estimate the effect of the nonresponders. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Diagnosis of any psychotic or bipolar I disorder according to the DSM-IV criteria. RESULTS: The lifetime prevalence of all psychotic disorders was 3.06% and rose to 3.48% when register diagnoses of the nonresponder group were included. Lifetime prevalences were as follows: 0.87% for schizophrenia, 0.32% for schizoaffective disorder, 0.07% for schizophreniform disorder, 0.18% for delusional disorder, 0.24% for bipolar I disorder, 0.35% for major depressive disorder with psychotic features, 0.42% for substance-induced psychotic disorders, and 0.21% for psychotic disorders due to a general medical condition. The National Hospital Discharge Register was the most reliable of the screens (kappa = 0.80). Case notes supplementing the interviews were essential for specific diagnoses of psychotic disorders. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple sources of information are essential for accurate estimation of lifetime prevalences of psychotic disorders. The use of comprehensive methods reveals that their lifetime prevalence exceeds 3%.


Assuntos
Transtorno Bipolar/epidemiologia , Transtornos Psicóticos/epidemiologia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Transtorno Bipolar/diagnóstico , Transtorno Depressivo Maior/diagnóstico , Transtorno Depressivo Maior/epidemiologia , Manual Diagnóstico e Estatístico de Transtornos Mentais , Feminino , Finlândia/epidemiologia , Nível de Saúde , Inquéritos Epidemiológicos , Humanos , Masculino , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Prevalência , Escalas de Graduação Psiquiátrica/estatística & dados numéricos , Transtornos Psicóticos/diagnóstico , Sistema de Registros , Projetos de Pesquisa , Esquizofrenia/diagnóstico , Esquizofrenia/epidemiologia , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Inquéritos e Questionários
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA