burden of treatment
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

141
(FIVE YEARS 72)

H-INDEX

21
(FIVE YEARS 5)

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 7-12
Author(s):  
M.V. Khaitovych

A search was performed in the Scopus, Web of Science, MedLine, The Cochrane Library databases. The term “polypharmacy”, in contrast to the term “polypragmasia”, does not always has a negative meaning and is often used to describe the simultaneous use of five or more drugs, and polypharmacy is considered intensive, when the patient takes 10 or more drugs at the same time. One of the main causes of polypharmacy is polymorbidity. Severe condition of the patient, self-medication and inappropriate recommendations can also cause polypharmacy, as well as some demographic factors (age, gender, level of education) and the level of the health care system development. Polypharmacy can be appropriate when the prescription of a large number of drugs is justified, and inappropriate (problematic) when the number of prescribed drugs is incorrect and/or unbalanced. Problematic polypharmacy is a manifestation of polypragmasia, with several drugs prescribed improperly that does not allow realizing the expected advantage of these drugs. The risk of harm from treatment outweighs the benefits due to drug interactions, adverse reactions, increasing economic burden of treatment. Problematic polypharmacy is especially dangerous for critically ill patients. The management of problematic polypharmacy should be based on its transition into an appropriate form. The combination of drugs is substantiated, which allows treating the patient effectively, safely and economically expediently through the prevention of drug interaction and adverse effects. Deprescribing of certain drugs can be used as a therapeutic intervention, it should be performed in each individual patient through the assessment of benefits and risks. Beers criteria, ARMOR, STOPP-START criteria are offered for prevention and correction of problematic polypharmacy in the elderly.


BMJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. n2909
Author(s):  
Frances S Mair ◽  
Victor M Montori ◽  
Carl R May

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer E. Clark ◽  
Kasey R. Boehmer ◽  
Maggie Breslin ◽  
Shanzay Haider ◽  
Weronika Pasciak ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Diabetes care has been traditionally focused on targeting certain levels of glycemic control. This narrow emphasis may impose burdens on patients, including high treatment costs, illness-related work, or side effects from medications, while leaving other patient needs and goals under-addressed. The authors aim to shift the paradigm of care for people with diabetes, to focus on quality of life, burden of treatment, safety, and avoidance of future events: the QBSAfe domains. Methods We describe a single-arm pilot study to assess the feasibility and acceptability of using the QBSAfe agenda setting kit (ASK) during routine clinical visits. The set of 14 conversation aid cards was co-developed with patients, family caregivers, and clinicians. The ASK will be used in the context of a clinic visit, which will be recorded by members of the study team to identify patterns of clinician-patient conversations. Feasibility will be measured by the number of participants recruited, time to goal accrual, and completeness of data collection; acceptability will be assessed using post-visit surveys of patients and clinicians. A subgroup of patients will be invited to participate in post-visit qualitative semi-structured interviews for additional feedback. This study will be conducted across three medical centers in the Midwest and East Coast of the USA. Discussion Current healthcare infrastructure and associated demands and pressures on clinicians make changes in care difficult. However, this intervention has the potential to shift conversations during clinical encounters so they can address and directly respond to patient needs, symptoms, and capacity. As part of the QBSAfe ASK, the authors are also actively collaborating with a variety of stakeholders to create tools to help clinicians respond more effectively to patient concerns as they are raised during the clinical encounters. Additional insights about the use of the QBSAfe approach in the virtual space will be gathered during the process of our study due to restrictions imposed upon face to face visit during the COVID-19 pandemic. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04514523. Registered 17 August 2020—retrospectively registered.


2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard G. Gower ◽  
Mary Wilber

Abstract Background Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a rare genetic disorder characterized by unpredictable localized episodes of edema, which is frequently managed with long-term prophylactic medications. Until recently, long-term prophylaxis has predominantly required regular intravenous or subcutaneous administration, however the recent approval of berotralstat (Orladeyo™) offers an orally administered prophylactic which may be associated with a lower burden of treatment compared to injectable options for some patients. Case presentation This report describes four participants in the APeX-S trial who transitioned from subcutaneously administered lanadelumab (Takhzyro®) to daily oral berotralstat for long-term HAE prophylaxis. Lanadelumab dosing continued after berotralstat commencement in all patients and was tapered before discontinuation in three of the four patients. No substantial increases in HAE attack rates were observed after the transition to berotralstat monotherapy. One patient experienced a treatment-related adverse event (dyspepsia), which was mild and self-resolving. Conclusions All four patients described in this case series successfully transitioned from lanadelumab to berotralstat monotherapy for long-term prophylaxis without significant complications and without the use of a complex transition protocol. The decision to transition to berotralstat monotherapy and how the transition should be achieved was discussed between patient and physician, ensuring that the comfort and perspectives of the patients were considered during the treatment transition. This report highlights the importance of individualization of HAE management plans to address both the disease and treatment burdens of HAE, and thus to provide the best possible quality of life for each patient.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. e047060
Author(s):  
Rosalynn C Austin ◽  
Lisette Schoonhoven ◽  
Mike Clancy ◽  
Alison Richardson ◽  
Paul R Kalra ◽  
...  

ObjectiveExplore the interaction between patient experienced symptoms and burden of treatment (BoT) theory in chronic heart failure (CHF). BoT explains how dynamic patient workload (self-care) and their capacity (elements influencing capability), impacts on patients’ experience of illness.DesignReview of qualitative research studies.Data sourcesCINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Science were searched between January 2007 and 2020.Eligibility CriteriaJournal articles in English, reporting qualitative studies on lived experience of CHF.Results35 articles identified related to the lived experience of 720 patients with CHF. Symptoms with physical and emotional characteristics were identified with breathlessness, weakness, despair and anxiety most prevalent. Identifying symptoms’ interaction with BoT framework identified three themes: (1) Symptoms appear to infrequently drive patients to engage in self-care (9.2% of codes), (2) symptoms appear to impede (70.5% of codes) and (3) symptoms form barriers to self-care engagement (20.3% of codes). Symptoms increase illness workload, making completing tasks more difficult; simultaneously, symptoms alter a patient’s capacity, through a reduction in their individual capabilities and willingness to access external resources (ie, hospitals) often with devasting impact on patients’ lives.ConclusionsSymptoms appear to be integral in the patient experience of CHF and BoT, predominately acting to impede patients’ efforts to engage in self-care. Symptoms alter illness workload, increasing complexity and hardship. Patients’ capacity is reduced by symptoms, in what they can do and their willingness to ask for help. Symptoms can lower their perceived self-value and roles within society. Symptoms appear to erode a patient’s agency, decreasing self-value and generalised physical deconditioning leading to affective paralysis towards self-care regimens. Together describing a state of overwhelming BoT which is thought to be a contributor to poor engagement in self-care and may provide new insights into the perceived poor adherence to self-care in the CHF population.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017077487.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. e049130
Author(s):  
José Gerardo González-González ◽  
Alejandro Díaz González-Colmenero ◽  
Juan Manuel Millán-Alanís ◽  
Lyubov Lytvyn ◽  
Ricardo Cesar Solis ◽  
...  

ObjectivesAssess values, preferences and burden of treatment that patients with type 2 diabetes consider when initiating glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) compared with other glucose-lowering options.MethodsPaired reviewers independently included studies reporting quantitative or qualitative methods to assess values, preferences and burden of treatment reported by patients with type 2 diabetes regarding the initiation of GLP-1 RA or SGLT-2i over other alternatives. A systematic search in MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception until May 2020 was performed by an experienced librarian. Risk of bias was assessed with a specifically designed tool for values and preferences studies.Results17 studies (7296 patients) proved eligible. Studies fulfilling criteria for SGLT-2i were not identified. Five studies (2662 patients) evaluated preferences for GLP-1 RA compared with other glucose-lowering medications. 12 studies (4634 patients) evaluated preferences between, at least, two kinds of GLP-1 RA or their injection devices based on the following attributes: efficacy, dose, application frequency, device characteristics. Among studies comparing GLP-1 RA to other glucose-lowering medications, some preferences were observed for dypeptil peptidase-4 inhibitors compared with once daily liraglutide. Comparing different attributes of GLP-1 RA drugs and devices, cardiovascular risk reduction, glucose lowering potential, once weekly and simple administered regimens were the most preferred.ConclusionsAs no evidence for preferences on SGLT-2i was available, only preferences for GLP-1 RA were assessed; however, evidence is still limited for the latter. Studies comparing preferences for GLP1-RA to other glucose-lowering alternatives only included twice daily or once daily injection regimens of GLP-1 RA drugs. According to our findings, once weekly alternatives are widely preferred than the formers. The extent to which patients with type 2 diabetes value reduced adverse cardiovascular and kidney outcomes, weighed benefits against harms and burden of treatment is limited and with very low certainty.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020159284.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document