248 research outputs found

    Inhaled corticosteroids for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-the shifting treatment paradigm

    Get PDF
    Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) guidelines suggest using inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in patients with severe airflow limitation or those at high risk of exacerbations. This recommendation is based on evidence demonstrating that ICS, especially when prescribed in fixed-dose combinations (FDC) with long-acting β2 agonists (LABA), improve quality of life (QoL), decrease exacerbations and hospitalisations, and have been associated with a trend towards a reduction in all-cause mortality. Audit shows that routine prescribing practice frequently uses inhaler therapies outside current guidelines recommendations; severe to very severe disease constitutes about 20% of all COPD patients, but up to 75% of COPD patients are prescribed an ICS, with significant numbers given ICS/LABA as first-line maintenance therapy. The role of ICS in the treatment paradigm for COPD is changing, driven by the growing evidence of increased risk of pneumonia, and the introduction of a new class of FDC; LABA and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA), which simplify dual bronchodilation and present a plausible alternative therapy. As the evidence base for dual therapy bronchodilation expands, it is likely that maximal bronchodilation will move up the treatment algorithm and ICS reserved for those with more severe disease who are not controlled on dual therapy. This change has already manifested in local COPD algorithms, such as those at Tayside, and represents a significant change in recommended prescribing practice. This review reassesses the role of ICS in the shifting treatment paradigm, in the context of alternative treatment options that provide maximal bronchodilation

    Issues potentially affecting quality of life arising from long-term medicines use: a qualitative study

    Get PDF
    Background Polypharmacy is increasing and managing large number of medicines may create a burden for patients. Many patients have negative views of medicines and their use can adversely affect quality of life. No studies have specifically explored the impact of general long-term medicines use on quality of life. Objective To determine the issues which patients taking long-term medicines consider affect their day-to-day lives, including quality of life. Setting Four primary care general practices in North West England Methods Face-to-face interviews with adults living at home, prescribed four or more regular medicines for at least 1 year. Interviewees were identified from primary care medical records and purposively selected to ensure different types of medicines use. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. Results Twenty-one interviews were conducted and analysed. Patients used an average of 7.8 medicines, 51 % were preventive, 40 % for symptom relief and 9 % treatment. Eight themes emerged: relationships with health professionals, practicalities, information, efficacy, side effects, attitudes, impact and control. Ability to discuss medicines with health professionals varied and many views were coloured by negative experiences, mainly with doctors. All interviewees had developed routines for using multiple medicines, some requiring considerable effort. Few felt able to exert control over medicines routines specified by health professionals. Over half sought additional information about medicines whereas others avoided this, trusting in doctors to guide their medicines use. Patients recognised their inability to assess efficacy for many medicines, notably those used for prophylaxis. All were concerned about possible side effects and some had poor experiences of discussing concerns with doctors. Medicines led to restrictions on social activities and personal life to the extent that, for some, life can revolve around medicines. Conclusion There is a multiplicity and complexity of issues surrounding medicines use, which impact on day-to-day lives for patients with long-term conditions. While most patients adapt to long-term medicines use, others did so at some cost to their quality of life

    Risk sharing arrangements for pharmaceuticals: potential considerations and recommendations for European payers

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There has been an increase in 'risk sharing' schemes for pharmaceuticals between healthcare institutions and pharmaceutical companies in Europe in recent years as an additional approach to provide continued comprehensive and equitable healthcare. There is though confusion surrounding the terminology as well as concerns with existing schemes.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Aliterature review was undertaken to identify existing schemes supplemented with additional internal documents or web-based references known to the authors. This was combined with the extensive knowledge of health authority personnel from 14 different countries and locations involved with these schemes.</p> <p>Results and discussion</p> <p>A large number of 'risk sharing' schemes with pharmaceuticals are in existence incorporating both financial-based models and performance-based/outcomes-based models. In view of this, a new logical definition is proposed. This is "<it>risk sharing' schemes should be considered as agreements concluded by payers and pharmaceutical companies to diminish the impact on payers' budgets for new and existing schemes brought about by uncertainty and/or the need to work within finite budgets</it>". There are a number of concerns with existing schemes. These include potentially high administration costs, lack of transparency, conflicts of interest, and whether health authorities will end up funding an appreciable proportion of a new drug's development costs. In addition, there is a paucity of published evaluations of existing schemes with pharmaceuticals.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We believe there are only a limited number of situations where 'risk sharing' schemes should be considered as well as factors that should be considered by payers in advance of implementation. This includes their objective, appropriateness, the availability of competent staff to fully evaluate proposed schemes as well as access to IT support. This also includes whether systematic evaluations have been built into proposed schemes.</p

    Positive Affect Predicts Cerebral Glucose Metabolism in Late Middle-aged Adults.

    Get PDF
    Positive affect is associated with a number of health benefits; however, few studies have examined the relationship between positive affect and cerebral glucose metabolism, a key energy source for neuronal function and a possible index of brain health. We sought to determine if positive affect was associated with cerebral glucose metabolism in late middle-aged adults (n = 133). Participants completed the positive affect subscale of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale at two time points over a two-year period and underwent 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography scanning. After controlling for age, sex, perceived health status, depressive symptoms, anti-depressant use, family history of Alzheimer’s disease, APOE ε4 status and interval between visits, positive affect was associated with greater cerebral glucose metabolism across para-/limbic, frontal, temporal and parietal regions. Our findings provide evidence that positive affect in late midlife is associated with greater brain health in regions involved in affective processing and also known to be susceptible to early neuropathological processes. The current findings may have implications for interventions aimed at increasing positive affect to attenuate early neuropathological changes in at-risk individuals

    Cost-analysis of XELOX and FOLFOX4 for treatment of colorectal cancer to assist decision-making on reimbursement

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>XELOX (capecitabine + oxaliplatin) and FOLFOX 4 (5-FU + folinic acid + oxaliplatin) have shown similar improvements in survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC). A US cost-minimization study found that the two regimens had similar costs from a healthcare provider perspective but XELOX had lower costs than FOLFOX4 from a societal perspective, while a Japanese cost-effectiveness study found XELOX had superior cost-effectiveness. This study compared the costs of XELOX and FOLFOX4 in patients with MCRC recently treated in two oncology departments in Hong Kong.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Cost data were collected from the medical records of 60 consecutive patients (30 received XELOX and 30 FOLFOX4) from two hospitals. Drug costs, outpatient visits, hospital days and investigations were recorded and expressed as cost per patient from the healthcare provider perspective. Estimated travel and time costs were included in a societal perspective analysis. All costs were classed as either scheduled (associated with planned chemotherapy and follow-up) or unscheduled (unplanned visits or admissions and associated tests and medicines). Costs were based on government and hospital sources and expressed in US dollars (US).</p><p>Results</p><p>XELOXpatientsreceivedanaverageof7.3chemotherapycycles(ofthe8plannedcycles)andFOLFOX4patientsreceived9.2cycles(ofthe12plannedcycles).Thescheduledcostperpatientpercyclewas).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>XELOX patients received an average of 7.3 chemotherapy cycles (of the 8 planned cycles) and FOLFOX4 patients received 9.2 cycles (of the 12 planned cycles). The scheduled cost per patient per cycle was 2,046 for XELOX and 2,152forFOLFOX4,whiletheunscheduledcostwas2,152 for FOLFOX4, while the unscheduled cost was 240 and 421,respectively.Totaltreatmentcostperpatientwas421, respectively. Total treatment cost per patient was 16,609 for XELOX and 23,672forFOLFOX4;thetotalcostforFOLFOX4was3723,672 for FOLFOX4; the total cost for FOLFOX4 was 37% greater than that of XELOX. The addition of the societal costs increased the total treatment cost per patient to 17,836 for XELOX and $27,455 for FOLFOX4. Sensitivity analyses showed XELOX was still less costly than FOLFOX4 when using full drug regimen costs, incorporating data from a US model with costs and adverse event data from their clinical trial and with the removal of oxaliplatin from both treatment arms. Capecitabine would have to cost around four times its present price in Hong Kong for the total resource cost of treatment with XELOX to equal that of FOLFOX4.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>XELOX costs less than FOLFOX4 for this patient group with MCRC from both the healthcare provider and societal perspectives.</p

    Neuropsychological patterns following lesions of the anterior insula in a series of forty neurosurgical patients

    Get PDF
    In the present study we investigated the effects of lesions affecting mainly the anterior insula in a series of 22 patients with lesions in the left hemisphere (LH), and 18 patients with lesions involving the right hemisphere (RH). The site of the lesion was established by performing an overlap of the probabilistic cytoarchitectonic maps of the posterior insula. Here we report the patients\u2019 neuropsychological profile and an analysis of their pre-surgical symptoms. We found that pre-operatory symptoms significantly differed in patients depending on whether the lesion affected the right or left insula and a strict parallelism between the patterns emerged in the pre-surgery symptoms analysis, and the patients\u2019 cognitive profile. In particular, we found that LH patients showed cognitive deficits. By contrast, the RH patients, with the exception of one case showing an impaired performance at the visuo-spatial planning test were within the normal range in performing all the tests. In addition, a sub-group of patients underwent to the post-surgery follow-up examination
    corecore