Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

D D Brown

Publications and source records attributed to D D Brown.

198 records · Page 11Linked to original sources
PubMedDate not supplied

A steady-state evaluation of the effects of propantheline bromide and cholestyramine on the bioavailability of digoxin when administered as tablets or capsules.

Drug interactions can profoundly alter the absorption of digoxin in tablet form. This study evaluated whether digoxin solution in capsules, a new dosage form with 90% to 100% bioavailability, would reduce such alterations, specifically those caused by cholestyramine and propantheline bromide. The investigation used a six-treatment, steady-state, balanced, incomplete block design with 18 healthy adults studied for four continuous two-week treatment periods. Treatments were either two 0.25 mg digoxin tablets or two 0.20 mg digoxin capsules administered alone, with propantheline, 15 mg qid, or with cholestyramine, 8 g qd. Bioavailability was determined from steady-state, 24-hour area under the serum concentration-time curve (AUC, ng X h/mL) and from 0- and 24-hour trough serum digoxin concentrations (ng/mL). The AUCs for tablets alone, with cholestyramine, and with propantheline were 32.8 +/- 13.3 (+/- SD), 22.4 +/- 12.1, and 40.6 +/- 13.9, respectively, while corresponding values for capsules were 31.7 +/- 9.3, 24.7 +/- 7.9, and 35.9 +/- 12.8. The trough concentrations for tablets alone, with cholestyramine, and with propantheline were 0.88 +/- 0.47, 0.61 +/- 0.38, and 1.09 +/- 0.35, respectively; trough concentrations for capsules were 0.77 +/- 0.28, 0.74 +/- 0.28, and 0.96 +/- 0.48, respectively. The only significant differences in AUC were seen when comparing tablets alone versus tablets with cholestyramine (P less than .0005) and tablets with propantheline (P less than .01). A significant finding was also observed when comparing trough concentrations for tablets alone versus tablets with cholestyramine (P less than .005).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

In-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a 30-year review.

BACKGROUND: We performed a meta-analysis to: (1) assess the disputed issue of in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) success rates among elderly patients, (2) investigate the possibility of a declining CPR success rate between 1960 and 1990, (3) provide an overview estimate of CPR effectiveness in specific patient groups, and (4) assess CPR risks. METHODS: Ninety-eight reports providing in-hospital CPR survival-to-discharge rates were included in this overview. These reports were identified from MEDLINE searches, previous reviews, and reference citations. RESULTS: A pooled analysis revealed that 2994 (15 percent) of 19,955 patients were successfully resuscitated (survival to discharge). The rate of successful CPR has not changed in 30 years (r = -0.14, P > 0.05), but there has been a steady decline in the optimism regarding its value (r = -0.29, P < 0.01). Patients younger than 70 years of age had a success rate of 16.2 percent (odds ratio = 1.36; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.20 to 1.53) versus 12.4 percent for patients older than 70 years (P < 0.001). Community hospitals had a higher CPR success rate than teaching hospitals (18.5 percent versus 13.6 percent, P < 0.001). Although 72.9 percent of the post-CPR deaths were within 72 hours, prolonged in hospital survival in a vegetative state did occur; 1.6 percent of successfully resuscitated patients had a permanent neurological impairment. CONCLUSION: The increasing pessimism about the value of CPR, specifically, its futility in the elderly patient, is not supported by this review. The results of this meta-analysis should assist both the physician and the patient in determining the probable outcome of CPR.

Age Factors↗