67 research outputs found
Somatic diseases in patients with schizophrenia in general practice: their prevalence and health care
BACKGROUND: Schizophrenia patients frequently develop somatic co-morbidity. Core tasks for GPs are the prevention and diagnosis of somatic diseases and the provision of care for patients with chronic diseases. Schizophrenia patients experience difficulties in recognizing and coping with their physical problems; however GPs have neither specific management policies nor guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of somatic co-morbidity in schizophrenia patients. This paper systematically reviews the prevalence and treatment of somatic co-morbidity in schizophrenia patients in general practice. METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO data-bases and the Cochrane Library were searched and original research articles on somatic diseases of schizophrenia patients and their treatment in the primary care setting were selected. RESULTS: The results of this search show that the incidence of a wide range of diseases, such as diabetes mellitus, the metabolic syndrome, coronary heart diseases, and COPD is significantly higher in schizophrenia patients than in the normal population. The health of schizophrenic patients is less than optimal in several areas, partly due to their inadequate help-seeking behaviour. Current GP management of such patients appears not to take this fact into account. However, when schizophrenic patients seek the GP's help, they value the care provided. CONCLUSION: Schizophrenia patients are at risk of undetected somatic co-morbidity. They present physical complaints at a late, more serious stage. GPs should take this into account by adopting proactive behaviour. The development of a set of guidelines with a clear description of the GP's responsibilities would facilitate the desired changes in the management of somatic diseases in these patients
The use of insulin declines as patients live farther from their source of care: results of a survey of adults with type 2 diabetes
BACKGROUND: Although most diabetic patients do not achieve good physiologic control, patients who live closer to their source of primary care tend to have better glycemic control than those who live farther away. We sought to assess the role of travel burden as a barrier to the use of insulin in adults with diabetes METHODS: 781 adults receiving primary care for type 2 diabetes were recruited from the Vermont Diabetes Information System. They completed postal surveys and were interviewed at home. Travel burden was estimated as the shortest possible driving distance from the patient's home to the site of primary care. Medication use, age, sex, race, marital status, education, health insurance, duration of diabetes, and frequency of care were self-reported. Body mass index was measured by a trained field interviewer. Glycemic control was measured by the glycosolated hemoglobin A1C assay. RESULTS: Driving distance was significantly associated with insulin use, controlling for the covariates and potential confounders. The odds ratio for using insulin associated with each kilometer of driving distance was 0.97 (95% confidence interval 0.95, 0.99; P = 0.01). The odds ratio for using insulin for those living within 10 km (compared to those with greater driving distances) was 2.29 (1.35, 3.88; P = 0.02). DISCUSSION: Adults with type 2 diabetes who live farther from their source of primary care are significantly less likely to use insulin. This association is not due to confounding by age, sex, race, education, income, health insurance, body mass index, duration of diabetes, use of oral agents, glycemic control, or frequency of care, and may be responsible for the poorer physiologic control noted among patients with greater travel burdens
Enhanced glycemic control with combination therapy for type 2 diabetes in primary care
Type 2 diabetes mellitus is an increasingly common medical problem for primary care clinicians to address. Treatment of diabetes has evolved from simple replacement of insulin (directly or through insulin secretagogs) through capture of mechanisms such as insulin sensitizers, alpha-glucosidase inhibitors, and incretins. Only very recently has recognition of the critical role of the gastrointestinal system as a major culprit in glucose dysregulation been established. Since glycated hemoglobin A1c reductions provide meaningful risk reduction as well as improved quality of life, it is worthwhile to explore evolving paths for more efficient use of the currently available pharmacotherapies. Because diabetes is a progressive disease, even transiently successful treatment will likely require augmentation as the disorder progresses. Pharmacotherapies with complementary mechanisms of action will be necessary to achieve glycemic goals. Hence, clinicians need to be well informed about the various noninsulin alternatives that have been shown to be successful in glycemic goal attainment. This article reviews the benefits of glucose control, the current status of diabetes control, pertinent pathophysiology, available pharmacological classes for combination, limitations of current therapies, and suggestions for appropriate combination therapies, including specific suggestions for thresholds at which different strategies might be most effectively utilized by primary care clinicians
Pain Reactivity and Plasma β-Endorphin in Children and Adolescents with Autistic Disorder
International audienceBackground: Reports of reduced pain sensitivity in autism have prompted opioid theories of autism and have practical care ramifications. Our objective was to examine behavioral and physiological pain responses, plasma β-endorphin levels and their relationship in a large group of individuals with autism.Methodology/Principal Findings: The study was conducted on 73 children and adolescents with autism and 115 normal individuals matched for age, sex and pubertal stage. Behavioral pain reactivity of individuals with autism was assessed in three observational situations (parents at home, two caregivers at day-care, a nurse and child psychiatrist during blood drawing), and compared to controls during venepuncture. Plasma β-endorphin concentrations were measured by radioimmunoassay. A high proportion of individuals with autism displayed absent or reduced behavioral pain reactivity at home (68.6%), at day-care (34.2%) and during venepuncture (55.6%). Despite their high rate of absent behavioral pain reactivity during venepuncture (41.3 vs. 8.7% of controls, P<0.0001), individuals with autism displayed a significantly increased heart rate in response to venepuncture (P<0.05). Moreover, this response (Δ heart rate) was significantly greater than for controls (mean±SEM; 6.4±2.5 vs. 1.3±0.8 beats/min, P<0.05). Plasma β-endorphin levels were higher in the autistic group (P<0.001) and were positively associated with autism severity (P<0.001) and heart rate before or after venepuncture (P<0.05), but not with behavioral pain reactivity.Conclusions/Significance: The greater heart rate response to venepuncture and the elevated plasma β-endorphin found in individuals with autism reflect enhanced physiological and biological stress responses that are dissociated from observable emotional and behavioral reactions. The results suggest strongly that prior reports of reduced pain sensitivity in autism are related to a different mode of pain expression rather than to an insensitivity or endogenous analgesia, and do not support opioid theories of autism. Clinical care practice and hypotheses regarding underlying mechanisms need to assume that children with autism are sensitive to pain
Effects of intracutaneous injections of sterile water in patients with acute low back pain: a randomized, controlled, clinical trial
Thoracotomy is better than thoracoscopic lobectomy in the lymph node dissection of lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of low back pain
Louis Kuritzky George P SamrajDepartment of Community Health and Family Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USAAbstract: Low back pain (LBP) is amongst the top ten most common conditions presenting to primary care clinicians in the ambulatory setting. Further, it accounts for a significant amount of health care expenditure; indeed, over one third of all disability dollars spent in the United States is attributable to low back pain. In most cases, acute low back pain is a self-limiting disease. There are many evidence-based guidelines for the management of LBP. The most common risk factor for development of LBP is previous LBP, heavy physical work, and psychosocial risk factors. Management of LBP includes identification of red flags, exclusion of specific secondary causes, and comprehensive musculoskeletal/neurological examination of the lower extremities. In uncomplicated LBP, imaging is unnecessary unless symptoms become protracted. Reassurance that LBP will likely resolve and advice to maintain an active lifestyle despite LBP are the cornerstones of management. Medications are provided not because they change the natural history of the disorder, but rather because they enhance the ability of the patient to become more active, and in some cases, to sleep better. The most commonly prescribed medications include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and muscle relaxants. Although NSAIDs are a chemically diverse class, their similarities, efficacy, tolerability, and adverse effect profile have more similarities than differences. The most common side effects of NSAIDs are gastrointestinal. Agents with cyclo-oxygenase 2 selectivity are associated with reduced gastrointestinal bleeding, but problematic increases in adverse cardiovascular outcomes continue to spark concern. Fortunately, short-term use of NSAIDs for LBP is generally both safe and effective. This review will focus on the role of NSAIDs in the management of LBP.Keywords: low back pain, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, cyclo-oxygenase
Preliminary Data on Vibratip®, A New Source of Standardised Vibration for Bedside Assessment of Peripheral Neuropathy
- …