RESUMEN
Introduction: Positive and negative treatment expectations are powerful modulators of health and treatment outcomes. A substantial part of treatment success is due to contextual factors modulating patient's expectations towards a treatment. Consequently, treatment expectations should be a target of therapeutic interventions themselves. Objectives: This article highlights the neurobiological underpinnings of treatment expectations as well as strategies to modulate contextual factors to optimize treatment outcomes in daily clinical settings. Methods: This clinical update aligns with the 2022 IASP Global Year Translating Pain Knowledge into Practice and selectively reviews the best available evidence and practice. Results: The effects of treatment expectations, also known as placebo and nocebo effects, are observed in various clinical conditions and physiological systems. However, most of our knowledge comes from the field of pain, where expectation effects substantially contribute to overall analgesic treatment outcomes. Experimental placebo analgesia paradigms provide the best illustration of how analgesic effects can be attributed not only to a pharmacological or specific treatment, but instead are the result of the expectation towards the treatment. The impact of expectations on treatment outcome is highly variable between individuals, and the identification of factors predicting an individual's response has proven to be challenging. Further research is required to provide personalized treatment strategies for the daily clinical practice. Conclusion: Patient's previous experiences and expectations are powerful modulators of treatment efficacy, tolerability, and adherence. By providing a comprehensive overview of recent advances in this field, this review offers valuable insights for clinicians and researchers seeking to improve patient-clinician interaction.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and the characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in a tertiary outpatient clinic of asthma patients, find the predisposing asthma phenotype to COVID-19, and to see their adherence to asthma treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective, cross-sectional, real life study was conducted via phone interviews with the patients being followed in the asthma outpatient clinic. From the files of the patient information was obtained about their demographics, asthma phenotype, co-morbidity, prick tests, spirometry test results and their medications at the last visit before the COVID-19 pandemic. Information's about asthma exacerbations, ACT, asthma treatment adherence and history of COVID-19 were obtained via telephone interviews. RESULTS: Of the 573 patients with asthma, 13 (2.26%) had COVID-19 history. The mean age of patients with asthma and COVID-19 was 51.84±14.92 year. Two patients were on mepolizumab and one was on omalizumab treatment. Mean ACT was 19.84±2.73. Lack of adherence was reported in 8% of all patients with asthma compared to 23% in the patients who had COVID-19. Asthma exacerbation was seen during the course of SARS-CoV2 infection in 3 of 13 patients with asthma. Asthma exacerbations were reported during the period of one month following COVID-19 in 2 patients. CONCLUSION: The most common asthma phenotype in the cases of COVID-19 was obese phenotype. Rates of using biological agents and non-adherence to the treatment were found to be higher. Asthma exacerbation may be seen during course of COVID-19 albeit being less common.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Infliximab (IFX) is increasingly being used for the treatment of severe manifestations of Behçet's syndrome (BS). However, emergence of new manifestations has also been occasionally reported during IFX treatment. We aimed to assess the frequency of new manifestations in our BS patients treated with IFX. METHODS: A chart review was conducted to identify all BS patients treated with IFX in our clinic between 2004 and 2020. Demographic data, indications for IFX initiation, concomitant treatments and outcomes were recorded. A new manifestation was defined as the emergence of a new organ involvement or mucocutaneous manifestation developing for the first time during IFX treatment or within 12 weeks after the last infusion of IFX. RESULTS: Among our 282 patients who used IFX, 19 (7%) patients had developed a total of 23 new manifestations during a mean follow-up of 20.0 (15.3) months. Patients with vascular involvement were more likely to develop a new manifestation (12/19, 63%). Initial manifestations that required IFX were in remission at the time of new manifestation in 14/19 patients. IFX treatment was intensified (n = 6) and/or glucocorticoids, immunosuppressives or colchicine was added to IFX (n = 21). IFX was switched to another agent for the remaining manifestations (n = 8). These treatment modifications led to remission in 17/19 patients. CONCLUSION: New manifestations developed during IFX treatment in 7% of our patients with BS. They could be managed by intensifying IFX treatment or adding other agents in the majority of these manifestations.
