| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Borisov, S, et al.
(författare)
-
Surveillance of adverse events in the treatment of drug-resistant tuberculosis: first global report
- 2019
-
Ingår i: The European respiratory journal. - : European Respiratory Society (ERS). - 1399-3003 .- 0903-1936. ; 54:6
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that countries implement pharmacovigilance and collect information on active drug safety monitoring (aDSM) and management of adverse events.The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the frequency and severity of adverse events to anti-tuberculosis (TB) drugs in a cohort of consecutive TB patients treated with new (i.e. bedaquiline, delamanid) and repurposed (i.e. clofazimine, linezolid) drugs, based on the WHO aDSM project. Adverse events were collected prospectively after attribution to a specific drug together with demographic, bacteriological, radiological and clinical information at diagnosis and during therapy. This interim analysis included patients who completed or were still on treatment at time of data collection.Globally, 45 centres from 26 countries/regions reported 658 patients (68.7% male, 4.4% HIV co-infected) treated as follows: 87.7% with bedaquiline, 18.4% with delamanid (6.1% with both), 81.5% with linezolid and 32.4% with clofazimine. Overall, 504 adverse event episodes were reported: 447 (88.7%) were classified as minor (grade 1–2) and 57 (11.3%) as serious (grade 3–5). The majority of the 57 serious adverse events reported by 55 patients (51 out of 57, 89.5%) ultimately resolved. Among patients reporting serious adverse events, some drugs held responsible were discontinued: bedaquiline in 0.35% (two out of 577), delamanid in 0.8% (one out of 121), linezolid in 1.9% (10 out of 536) and clofazimine in 1.4% (three out of 213) of patients. Serious adverse events were reported in 6.9% (nine out of 131) of patients treated with amikacin, 0.4% (one out of 221) with ethionamide/prothionamide, 2.8% (15 out of 536) with linezolid and 1.8% (eight out of 498) with cycloserine/terizidone.The aDSM study provided valuable information, but implementation needs scaling-up to support patient-centred care.
|
|
| 3. |
- Fietze, I., et al.
(författare)
-
Management of obstructive sleep apnea in Europe-A 10-year follow-up
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Sleep Medicine. - : Elsevier BV. - 1389-9457. ; 97, s. 64-72
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: In 2010, a questionnaire-based study on obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) management in Europe identified differences regarding reimbursement, sleep specialist qualification, and titration procedures. Now, 10 years later, a follow-up study was conducted as part of the ESADA (European Sleep Apnea Database) network to explore the development of OSA management over time.Methods: The 2010 questionnaire including questions on sleep diagnostic, reimbursement, treatment, and certification was updated with questions on telemedicine and distributed to European Sleep Centers to reflect European OSA management practice.Results: 26 countries (36 sleep centers) participated, representing 20 ESADA and 6 non-ESADA countries. All 21 countries from the 2010 survey participated. In 2010, OSA diagnostic procedures were performed mainly by specialized physicians (86%), whereas now mainly by certified sleep specialists and specialized physicians (69%). Treatment and titration procedures are currently quite homogenous, with a strong trend towards more Autotitrating Positive Airway Pressure treatment (in hospital 73%, at home 62%). From 2010 to 2020, home sleep apnea testing use increased (76%-89%) and polysomnography as sole diagnostic procedure decreased (24%-12%). Availability of a sleep specialist qualification increased (52%-65%) as well as the number of certified polysomnography scorers (certified physicians: 36%-79%; certified technicians: 20%-62%). Telemedicine, not surveyed in 2010, is now in 2020 used in diagnostics (8%), treatment (50%), and follow-up (73%). Conclusion: In the past decade, formal qualification of sleep center personnel increased, OSA diagnostic and treatment procedures shifted towards a more automatic approach, and telemedicine became more prominent.(c) 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
|
|
