PubMed · 9674534
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
C R Gerson. 1998. Technicians or physicians.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0194-5998(98)70192-5
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
It has been traditional to follow up patients after surgery for primary colorectal cancer for approximately 5 years. The indications and rationale for this type of follow-up are early detection of recurrent disease while still at a presymptomatic stage, recognition of a metachronous tumor that might develop in the remaining large bowel, psychological support for the patient, and facilitation of audit to determine outcome in patients randomized into clinical trials. This article reviews the evidence supporting the benefits or otherwise careful follow-up following surgery for colorectal cancer. A possible surveillance regimen involving liver scanning is suggested.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The prognostically favourable effect of secondary prevention in patients with proven coronary heart disease (CHD: documented myocardial infarction, angiographically proven coronary artery stenosis > 60% and/[or] status after coronary artery surgery) has been demonstrated. But it has not been adequately shown to what extent the guidelines laid down by specialist societies is being followed in routine clinical practice. Nor have there been any large-size standardized investigations of whether in-hospital rehabilitation decreases cardiovascular risk factors. It was the aim of this study to investigate the acute effects on cardiovascular risk factors of in-hospital post-infarction rehabilitation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January to May 1997, at 18 rehabilitation clinics, 2441 consecutive patients (22% women, aged 65 +/- 10 years, 78% men, aged 60 +/- 10 years) with proven CHD were included in this post-infarction after-care (PIN) study. During their hospital stay (26 +/- 5 days) they undertook physical training appropriate for cardiological follow-up treatment, as well as various other modes of treatment to affect risk factors. Diagnosis, treatment and standardized data were prospectively recorded on admission and discharge. RESULTS: At discharge the proportions of patients with conventionally defined risk factors were significantly lower than on admission (P < 0.001). The proportion was 8% in patients with arterial blood pressure > 140/90 mm Hg (vs. 24% on admission), 5% in smokers (vs. 39% on admission), 30% vs. 60% in patients with cholesterol levels > 200 mg/dl, 67% vs. 87% in those with low density lipids > 100 mg/dl, 15% vs. 22%, in those with serum triglyceride levels > 200 mg/dl, 11% vs. 14% in those with glucose levels > 140 mg/dl, and 15% vs. 18% in patient with a body/mass index > 30 kg/m2. There was an increase in the proportion of patients who during their hospital stay were prescribed additional drugs: from 85% to 86% for acetylsalicylic acid (P < 0.05), 61% to 77% for beta-adrenergic receptor blockers, 33% to 67% for cholesterol synthesis enzyme (CSE) inhibitors, and 51% to 57% for angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. CONCLUSION: Modifiable cardiovascular risk factors can be reduced by various methods of rehabilitation and more intensive drug treatment during hospitalization. By taking account of evidence-based medicine favourable conditions can be created for longterm ambulant after-care.