Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros










Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Alzheimers Dis Rep ; 8(1): 737-746, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38746628

RESUMEN

Background: Alzheimer's disease (AD) presents a significant global health challenge. Understanding the current and upcoming treatment landscape is crucial for effectively managing patients. Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the pattern of prescription and knowledge about new therapies by physicians who treat AD patients in Argentina. Methods: A cross- sectional and analytic study was conducted. A survey was elaborated about pharmacological treatment in AD. Statistical analysis of answers of specialists in cognitive disorders (SCD), non-specialists in cognitive disorders (NSCD), recommended treatment, non-recommended treatment (NRT), and off-label treatment was performed. Results: 155 physicians answered the survey. A 19.35%prescribed at least one NRT for dementia. 78.06%prescribed at least an off-label treatment or an NRT for mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 31%would prescribe monoclonal antibodies (MABs) against cerebral amyloid-ß (Aß) to AD patients, and 42.6%responded that they were not aware of any adverse effect of these. Quetiapine was the most frequent treatment for psychotic symptoms (88.4%) and escitalopram (32.3%) for apathy. A 70%of potential prescribers of MABs (n = 100) would request biomarkers of cerebral Aß in the initial assessment. There were significant differences between the responses of SCD and NSCD regarding the prescription of MABs (52.17%versus 23.08, respectively) and knowledge about adverse events (76.09%versus 38.46%, respectively). Conclusions: A considerable percentage of physicians indicated NRT and off-label medication in MCI and dementia. In Argentina, there are many physicians who would indicate a MABs for AD, but many are not completely aware of its safety profile.

2.
Rev. neuro-psiquiatr. (Impr.) ; 81(2): 103-112, abr. 2018. tab
Artículo en Español | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1014367

RESUMEN

La evaluación de la apatía en patología neuro-psiquiátrica es muy importante en la investigación y en la práctica clínica. Muchas veces sus síntomas son sub-diagnosticados o diagnosticados como depresión y otras condiciones. La presente revisión aborda las escalas más utilizadas las últimas décadas para la valoración de apatía y ofrece recomendaciones y apreciaciones generales sobre su uso y utilidad basada en la bibliografía disponible. Al margen de las diferencias entre escalas la tarea de estandarizar el diagnóstico de apatía en la práctica clínica y la investigación nacionales una necesidad que no debe postergarse al contar con herramientas suficientes y adecuadas a la fecha que han evolucionado desde la definición de Marin hasta la escala Dimensional Apathy Scale (DAS). Se sugiere estudios que validen y adapten culturalmente estas herramientas a nuestro entorno poblacional y pongan en práctica la medición cuantitativa de la apatía en la consulta clínica


The evaluation of apathy in neuropsychiatric pathology is very important in research and in clinical practice. Many times their symptoms are underdiagnosed as part of depression and other conditions. The present review addresses the scales most used in recent decades for the assessment of apathy and offers recommendations and general assessments of their use and utility based on the available literature. Apart from the differences between scales, the task of standardizing the diagnosis of apathy in clinical practice and national research is a need that should not be postponed by having sufficient and appropriate tools to date that have evolved from the definition of Marin to the Dimensional Apathy Scale (DAS). It is suggested that studies validate and culturally adapt these tools to our population environment and put into practice the quantitative measurement of apathy in the clinical environment.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA