Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
CJEM ; 24(5): 515-519, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35503402

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Emergency department (ED) visits for high blood pressure are increasing in frequency. We aimed to map those patients' trajectory, from referral sources to the type of care received at the ED to anticipated actions for future high blood pressure concerns, and to better understand their reasons for consulting the ED for high blood pressure values. METHODS: Between 2018 and 2020, patients who presented to the Montreal Heart Institute's ED for elevated blood pressure were recruited in a prospective observational study including a post hoc structured telephone interview and medical chart review. Five possible referral sources were predetermined. We provided proportions and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients were recruited (female: 59%, mean age: 69 ± 12). A majority (93%, 95% CI 88-98%) possessed a home blood pressure device, among which 46% (95% CI 36-56%) remembered receiving advice for its use. The main referral sources for high blood pressure to the ED were self-reference (53%, 95% CI 43-63%), advice of a lay person (19%, 95% CI 11-27%) or a nurse (13%, 95% CI 6-20%). Mainly, patients reported being concerned by concomitant symptoms or experiencing acute medical consequences (44%, 95% CI 34-54%), having followed the recommendation of a third party (33%, 95% CI 24-42%), or having concerns about their medication (6%, 95% CI 1-11%). Two weeks following their ED visits, consulting ED remained the main choice for future concerns about high blood pressure for 27% of participants. When specifically asked if they would return to the ED for elevated blood pressure, 73% (95% CI 64-83%) said yes. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients who consulted the ED for elevated blood pressure values were self-referred. More can be done to promote blood pressure education, effective use of personal blood pressure devices, and recommendations for patients and health professionals when confronted with high blood pressure results.


RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: Les visites aux services d'urgence pour hypertension artérielle (TA) sont de plus en plus fréquentes. Nous avons cherché à cartographier le parcours de ces patients, depuis les sources d'orientation jusqu'au type de soins reçus aux urgences, en passant par les mesures prévues en cas de problèmes futurs de tension artérielle élevée, et à mieux comprendre les raisons pour lesquelles ils consultent les urgences pour des valeurs de tension artérielle élevées. MéTHODES: Entre 2018 et 2020, les patients qui se sont présentés aux urgences de l'Institut de cardiologie de Montréal pour une TA élevée ont été recrutés dans le cadre d'une étude observationnelle prospective comprenant une entrevue téléphonique structurée post-hoc et un examen des dossiers médicaux. Cinq sources de référence possibles ont été prédéterminées. Nous avons fourni des proportions et des intervalles de confiance à 95 %. RéSULTATS: Au total, 100 patients ont été recrutés (femmes : 59 %, âge moyen : 69 ± 12). Une majorité (93%, IC à 95% 88-98%) possédait un tensiomètre à domicile, parmi lesquels 46% (IC à 95% 36-56%) se souvenaient avoir reçu des conseils pour son utilisation. Les principales sources d'orientation vers les urgences en cas de tension artérielle élevée étaient l'auto-référence (53 %, IC 95 % 43-63 %), le conseil d'un tiers non-professionnel de la santé (19 %, IC à 95 % 11-27 %) ou d'une infirmière (13 %, IC à 95 % 6-20 %). Principalement, les patients ont déclaré être préoccupés par des symptômes concomitants ou des conséquences médicales aiguës (44 %, IC à 95 %, 34-54 %), avoir suivi la recommandation d'un tiers (33 %, IC à 95 %, 24-42 %) ou avoir des préoccupations au sujet de leurs médicaments (6 %, IC à 95 %, 1-11 %). Deux semaines après leur visite au service d'urgence, la consultation du service d'urgence est restée le principal choix en cas de préoccupations futures concernant l'hypertension artérielle pour 27 % des participants. À la question spécifique de savoir s'ils retourneraient aux urgences pour une TA élevée, 73% (IC à 95% 64-83%) ont répondu oui. CONCLUSIONS: La plupart des patients qui ont consulté les urgences pour des valeurs élevées de la tension artérielle se sont adressés d'eux-mêmes. Il y a place à l'amélioration pour promouvoir l'éducation sur la TA, l'utilisation efficace des appareils de pression artérielle personnels et les recommandations aux patients et aux professionnels de la santé lorsqu'ils sont confrontés à des résultats élevés en matière de TA.


Subject(s)
Emergency Service, Hospital , Hypertension , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Hypertension/diagnosis , Hypertension/therapy , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Referral and Consultation
2.
Schizophr Res ; 185: 96-100, 2017 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28119036

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Superiority of long acting injectable antipsychotics (LAI) over oral antipsychotics remains controversial and dependent on study design and inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of 21 RCTs demonstrated no difference in their effectiveness, but meta-analysis of 25 mirror-image studies did. None of these included paliperidone palmitate (PP). METHODS: We challenged efficiency of PP in a multicentric mirror-image study. Primary outcome was total hospitalization days. Mirror periods were 365days either side of the first injection in model-1, and either side of index admission in model-2. Inclusion criteria were: 18 to 65years, schizophrenia spectrum disorder, ≥3 injections received, and oral antipsychotic prescriptions before PP trial. Exclusion criteria were: prior clozapine or LAI trial. Cost-effectiveness was calculated from a public payer's perspective. RESULTS: 114 patients were recruited (77% males, mean 37years, mean disease duration 10years). Oral antipsychotics adherence was 43%. Mean PP treatment lasted 297days (adherence 81%). Mean annual hospitalization days weren't significantly different in model-1 (45.8days vs 38.5days, p=0.058), but were significantly lower in model-2, (14.4days vs 24.2days, p=0.003). 1.9 admissions per patient-year fell to 0.64 on PP (p<0.0001). PP was approximately cost-neutral: differences were -$326 and $1788 for model-1 and model-2. DISCUSSION: PP as a first LAI improved adherence, decreased hospital visits and duration was cost neutral. Drawbacks are the retrospective design and lack of comparator and safety data. Strengths are naturalistic design and adherence calculation. A subset of patients responds well to LAI, leading to meaningful reductions in hospital services requirements.


Subject(s)
Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , Paliperidone Palmitate/therapeutic use , Schizophrenia/drug therapy , Secondary Prevention , Adolescent , Adult , Canada , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Hospitals, University , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Retrospective Studies , Secondary Prevention/methods , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...