Pre-Appointment Nurse Navigation: Patient-Centered Findings From a Survey of Patients With Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Research indicates that nurse navigators can play key roles in promoting empowerment for patients with cancer through advocacy, educational support, resource navigation, and psychosocial care. OBJECTIVES: This study attempted to elucidate the efficacy of nurse navigation in patient knowledge, care coordination, and well-being before a breast oncology appointment. METHODS: Staff provided a nine-question survey to 50 newly referred patients before their initial appointment. After survey completion, patients had the option to participate in an open-ended interview about their experience. FINDINGS: A greater proportion of patients with initial nurse navigation than those without felt informed before their appointment and thought that their care was effectively coordinated. Although some patients without nurse navigation experienced delays and confusion in scheduling their appointment, no patients with nurse navigators reported such issues.

Bioavailability of oral carisoprodol 250 and 350 mg and metabolism to meprobamate: A single-dose crossover study.

BACKGROUND: Carisoprodol is a skeletal muscle relaxant indicated for use in the treatment of acute, painful musculoskeletal conditions. Two randomized, controlled clinical trials have reported that carisoprodol 250 mg QID was equally effective as and better tolerated than carisoprodol 350 mg QID. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of the current study was to determine the relative bioavailability of carisoprodol and its metabolite, meprobamate, with singledose administration of 250- and 350-mg tablets. A secondary objective of the study was to determine whether lowering the carisoprodol dose would decrease plasma meprobamate concentrations. METHODS: This single-dose, randomized, open-label, crossover study enrolled healthy volunteers. Each dose was administered with water in the morning; after a 7-day washout, subjects received the alternate dose. Blood samples were drawn at prespecified times over a 48-hour period. For tolerability assessment, subjects underwent a physical examination, including 12-lead ECG. RESULTS: A total of 24 subjects were enrolled (12 men, 12 women; mean age, 22.8 years). The dose-adjusted AUC0-∞ values for carisoprodol were 5.29 µg/mL/h with the 250-mg tablet and 5.75 µg/mL/h with the 350-mg tablet (relative bioavailability, 92%). The mean (SD) Cmax values of carisoprodol and meprobamate after administration of the 250-mg carisoprodol tablet were 1.24 (0.49) and 1.84 (0.31) µg/mL, respectively, compared with 1.78 (0.97) and 2.46 (0.47) µg/mL with the 350-mg tablet. AUC0-∞ was dose proportional, and the apparent t1/2 values at the terminal phase were 1.74 hours with the 250-mg tablet and 1.96 hours with the 350-mg tablet. There were 3 mild adverse events considered possibly treatment related (weakness, dizziness, and drowsiness); these were reported in 2 subjects with 350-mg carisoprodol. CONCLUSIONS: In this small study in healthy fasting subjects, the exposure to carisoprodol and meprobamate was dose proportional between the single 250- and 350-mg doses. Both doses were generally well tolerated.

Onset of action of azelastine nasal spray compared with mometasone nasal spray and placebo in subjects with seasonal allergic rhinitis evaluated in an environmental exposure chamber.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to determine the onset of action of azelastine hydrochloride nasal spray compared with placebo and an intranasal steroid, mometasone furoate, in subjects with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). METHODS: Subjects with a history of SAR and symptomatic while exposed to ragweed pollen in an environmental exposure chamber (EEC) were randomized to azelastine nasal spray (n=150), mometasone nasal spray (n=150), or placebo (n=150) and recorded total nasal symptom scores (TNSS), consisting of sneezing, nasal pruritus, rhinorrhea, and congestion, during an 8-hour study period. RESULTS: Azelastine nasal spray showed a statistically significant improvement in the TNSS at 15 minutes compared with placebo. The effect was durable at each time point during the 8-hour study. Azelastine nasal spray also was significantly more effective than mometasone at each time point. CONCLUSION: Azelastine nasal spray has a rapid (15 minute) onset of action. Azelastine nasal spray was superior to both placebo and imometasone nasal spray in reducing nasal symptoms of SAR occurring within 8 hours after an allergen challenge.