SEARCH · Search PubMed
Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Diabetes is not simply a disorder of the metabolism but a chronic disease that affects every aspect of a person's body and life and is becoming increasingly common This paper outlines the National Service Framework for Diabetes standards and how they aim to reduce the incidence and the risks of complications of this condition.
Heart failure (HF) remains a major public health problem, affecting 5 million patients in the United States. The personal burden of HF includes debilitating symptoms, activity limitations, frequent hospitalizations, arrhythmias, and increased mortality. Despite the compelling scientific evidence that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, beta-blockers, and aldosterone antagonists reduce hospitalizations and mortality in patients with HF, these life-prolonging therapies continue to be underutilized. Device therapy for HF, including implantable cardioverter defibrillators and cardiac resynchronization therapy, has recently been demonstrated to also result in substantial mortality reduction. Accurate evaluation of patients with HF is critical for the appropriate selection and monitoring of therapy to reduce symptoms as well as for the prevention of recurrent hospitalizations. A number of studies in a variety of clinical settings have documented that a significant proportion of patients with HF are not receiving treatment with guideline-recommended, evidence-based therapies. Treatment gaps have also been documented in providing other components of care for patients with HF, including assessment for congestion and patient education. Recent studies demonstrate that hospital-based systems can improve medical care and education of hospitalized HF patients and accelerate use of evidence-based, guideline-recommended therapies by administering them before hospital discharge. HF disease management programs have also been shown to improve HF treatment, resulting in substantial reduction in hospitalizations and mortality. Application of validated and reproducible noninvasive techniques to monitor patients with chronic HF is an important step in maximizing interventions to improve outcomes in this patient population. Further efforts are clearly needed to improve the monitoring of HF patients in the hospital and outpatient settings, as well as to ensure the implementation of effective strategies and systems that increase the use of evidence-based therapies, in order to reduce the substantial HF morbidity and mortality risk.
Cancer and its treatment predispose childhood cancer survivors to chronic or late occurring health problems that may not become clinically significant until many years after therapy. Frequently, long-term survivors of childhood cancer report late cancer-related effects that diminish quality of life and increase the risk of early mortality. Risk-based health care that involves a personalized plan for surveillance, screening, and prevention is recommended to reduce cancer-related morbidity in childhood cancer survivors. To implement optimal risk-based care, the survivor and health care provider must have accurate information about cancer diagnosis, treatment modalities, and potential cancer-related health risks to guide screening and risk-reducing interventions. However, previous studies evaluating health knowledge of childhood cancer survivors demonstrate noteworthy deficits and misperceptions about their cancer diagnosis, treatment, and cancer-related health risks. In addition, because of the relative rarity of childhood cancer, many health care providers lack familiarity with cancer-related health risks and risk-reduction methods relevant for this population. To correct these deficits, the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) and the Children's Oncology Group (COG) developed clinical practice guidelines to foster appropriate risk-based survivor care. Herein, we discuss the development, benefits, and limitations of the SIGN and COG guidelines and the foundation they provide for standardizing long-term follow-up care of the ever-growing vulnerable population of childhood cancer survivors.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OBJECTIVE: The National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) practice guideline provides explicit recommendations for postmenopausal osteoporosis risk assessment and management. This study evaluated primary care adherence to the recommendations and factors associated with such adherence. METHOD: Postmenopausal women 40 years old and older were sampled in the primary care clinic of a US tertiary hospital. We received 469 completed questionnaires that measured the respondent's demographics and osteoporosis risk factors; current and historical osteoporosis counseling, testing, and treatment; and whether or not she had a primary care clinician. Based on information provided, we determined whether each woman was receiving care that followed the NOF guideline. Univariate and multivariate analyses identified factors associated with guideline adherence. RESULTS: Mean age was 69 years; 53% were white and 38% black; 15% had prior fractures. Using NOF criteria, 19.8 % were at moderate risk and 80.2 % were at high risk for osteoporosis. Overall, 57.6% (95% confidence interval 53.1, 62.1) of patients received risk management in accordance with the NOF guideline. The adherence rate was higher in the high-risk group (60.9% v 44.1%, p=.003), in those who had primary care clinicians (62.0% v 43.5%, p=.006), and in nonblack patients (white v black 67.1% v 43.0%, p<.001; other v black 65.0% v 43.0%, p=.012). These associations remained statistically significant after multivariate adjustments. Adherence was not associated with the sex of the primary care clinician. CONCLUSIONS: More than half of postmenopausal women in our study were receiving osteoporosis risk management that followed the NOF practice guideline. Those who were at higher risk, who were not black, or who had primary care clinicians were more likely to receive care in accordance with the NOF guideline, regardless of the sex of the clinician.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to provide a detailed description of comprehensive long-term follow-up (LTFU) programs for pediatric cancer survivors. METHODS: Program directors from 24 comprehensive LTFU programs in the U.S. and Canada completed a 6-page survey that provided details in 5 categories: description of the program, perceived benefits and strengths of the program, barriers to the development and use of the program, methods to improve the program, and an ideal model of care for pediatric cancer survivors. RESULTS: Participants identified the following primary benefits to health care delivered to survivors through LTFU programs: health care delivered by clinicians familiar with long-term risks of survivors, provision of risk-based screening and surveillance for late effects, and targeted education for risk reduction and healthy lifestyles. Key barriers to the functioning of LTFU programs included system-driven and patient/survivor-driven factors. System-driven factors included inadequate resources and finances to sustain programs, low institutional commitment toward the provision of survivorship care, lack of capacity to care for the growing population of survivors, and difficulties with ongoing communication with community physicians. Survivor-driven barriers included lack of interest and lack of awareness of cancer-related risks. CONCLUSIONS: This report describes the frequency, content, and setting of follow-up care delivered by pediatric comprehensive LTFU programs. Critical challenges as survivorship care evolves will include integrating a structured process of program evaluation and building capacity for care.
Earlier guidelines for type 2 diabetes (Afssaps 1999 and Anaes 2000) were based on the UK Prospective Diabetes Study, published in 1998. These guidelines recommended treatment according to HbA1c value (< 6.5%, between 6.5 and 8% and > 8%): an oral antidiabetic agent for levels > 6.5% despite diet and exercise; combined metformin + sulfonylurea) if HbA1c >8%; and insulin if the latter failed. Blood pressure goals were < 130/80 mmHg, with the antihypertensives necessary to achieve it. The LDL-cholesterol target value was < 1 g/L (for primary prevention in the case of high cardiovascular risk or for secondary prevention) or between 1.3 and 1.6 g/l (primary prevention in the absence of elevated risk). Another reading of the UK study, associated with the arrival of glitazones led to a revision of these objectives with a more aggressive treatment approach ("earlier and stronger"): screen patients for type 2 diabetes earlier, set stricter goals (HbA1c < 6%), and promptly prescribe dual therapy (metformin + sulfonylurea). Should this fail, either glitazone should be added or insulin treatment begun. For most people with type 2 diabetes, the target blood pressure remains 130/80 mmHg, regardless of the type and number of antihypertensive agents necessary. The target drops to 125/75 mmHg for patients with > 300 mg/day microalbuminuria; in these cases, treatment with agents that block the renin-angiotensin system (ACE inhibitors or sartans) is recommended. The LDL cholesterol target value is 1.0 or 1.6 g/L, depending on the cardiovascular risk level. But these guidelines are applied insufficiently, especially in terms of clinical and laboratory follow-up of patients and choice of treatment. All health professionals must participate in the more effective diffusion and application of these guidelines. Patient education is fundamental. The establishment of care networks for these patients seems to us to be the best tool for meeting the objectives of these guidelines.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the implementation of guidelines in Finnish primary health care units. DESIGN: A semi-quantitative analysis of a cross-sectional interview survey. SETTING: All municipal health centres in a selected region in Finland. SUBJECTS: Head physicians and head nurses of the 31 participating units. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number of guidelines adopted; methods used in the implementation; and the unit's estimated purposefulness in the implementation of guidelines. RESULTS: All health centres had adopted at least one guideline in the defined task areas, but only one-third of the units had implemented several guidelines. The implementation methods utilised were usually directive and passive rather than co-operative and problem-solving. Half of the units used training and methods involving active participation of the personnel, and in one-third a multiprofessional approach was applied. Clients' representatives were hardly ever involved in the adaptation of guidelines. A quarter of the health centres were assessed as purposeful in their policy to implement guidelines, the large units being more goal-oriented than the smaller ones. CONCLUSIONS: A minority of health centres are goal-oriented in the adoption of guidelines and use versatile methods to support the implementation; this presents an important managerial challenge for national health care development in Finland.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
BACKGROUND: Use of treatment guidelines for treatment of major psychiatric illnesses has increased in recent years. The Texas Medication Algorithm Project (TMAP) was developed to study the feasibility and process of developing and implementing guidelines for bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, and schizophrenia in the public mental health system of Texas. This article describes the consensus process used to develop the first set of TMAP algorithms for the Bipolar Disorder Module (Phase 1) and the trial testing the feasibility of their implementation in inpatient and outpatient psychiatric settings across Texas (Phase 2). METHOD: The feasibility trial answered core questions regarding implementation of treatment guidelines for bipolar disorder. A total of 69 patients were treated with the original algorithms for bipolar disorder developed in Phase 1 of TMAP. RESULTS: Results support that physicians accepted the guidelines, followed recommendations to see patients at certain intervals, and utilized sequenced treatment steps differentially over the course of treatment. While improvements in clinical symptoms (24-item Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale) were observed over the course of enrollment in the trial, these conclusions are limited by the fact that physician volunteers were utilized for both treatment and ratings. and there was no control group. CONCLUSION: Results from Phases 1 and 2 indicate that it is possible to develop and implement a treatment guideline for patients with a history of mania in public mental health clinics in Texas. TMAP Phase 3, a recently completed larger and controlled trial assessing the clinical and economic impact of treatment guidelines and patient and family education in the public mental health system of Texas, improves upon this methodology.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.