| 1. |
- Alffenaar, J. W. C., et al.
(författare)
-
Clinical standards for the dosing and management of TB drugs
- 2022
-
Ingår i: The International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease. - Paris, France : International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease. - 1027-3719 .- 1815-7920. ; 26:6, s. 483-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: Optimal drug dosing is important to ensure adequate response to treatment, prevent development of drug resistance and reduce drug toxicity. The aim of these clinical standards is to provide guidance on 'best practice' for dosing and management of TB drugs.Methods: A panel of 57 global experts in the fields of microbiology, pharmacology and TB care were identified; 51 participated in a Delphi process. A 5-point Likert scale was used to score draft standards. The final document represents the broad consensus and was approved by all participants.Results: Six clinical standards were defined: Standard 1, defining the most appropriate initial dose for TB treatment; Standard 2, identifying patients who may be at risk of sub-optimal drug exposure; Standard 3, identifying patients at risk of developing drug-related toxicity and how best to manage this risk; Standard 4, identifying patients who can benefit from therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM); Standard 5, highlighting education and counselling that should be provided to people initiating TB treatment; and Standard 6, providing essential education for healthcare professionals. In addition, consensus research priorities were identified.Conclusion: This is the first consensus-based Clinical Standards for the dosing and management of TB drugs to guide clinicians and programme managers in planning and implementation of locally appropriate measures for optimal person-centred treatment to improve patient care.
|
|
| 2. |
- Charalampous, P., et al.
(författare)
-
Methodological considerations in injury burden of disease studies across Europe: a systematic literature review
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Bmc Public Health. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1471-2458. ; 22:1
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Calculating the disease burden due to injury is complex, as it requires many methodological choices. Until now, an overview of the methodological design choices that have been made in burden of disease (BoD) studies in injury populations is not available. The aim of this systematic literature review was to identify existing injury BoD studies undertaken across Europe and to comprehensively review the methodological design choices and assumption parameters that have been made to calculate years of life lost (YLL) and years lived with disability (YLD) in these studies. Methods We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, Google Scholar, and Web of Science, and the grey literature supplemented by handsearching, for BoD studies. We included injury BoD studies that quantified the BoD expressed in YLL, YLD, and disability-adjusted life years (DALY) in countries within the European Region between early-1990 and mid-2021. Results We retrieved 2,914 results of which 48 performed an injury-specific BoD assessment. Single-country independent and Global Burden of Disease (GBD)-linked injury BoD studies were performed in 11 European countries. Approximately 79% of injury BoD studies reported the BoD by external cause-of-injury. Most independent studies used the incidence-based approach to calculate YLDs. About half of the injury disease burden studies applied disability weights (DWs) developed by the GBD study. Almost all independent injury studies have determined YLL using national life tables. Conclusions Considerable methodological variation across independent injury BoD assessments was observed; differences were mainly apparent in the design choices and assumption parameters towards injury YLD calculations, implementation of DWs, and the choice of life table for YLL calculations. Development and use of guidelines for performing and reporting of injury BoD studies is crucial to enhance transparency and comparability of injury BoD estimates across Europe and beyond.
|
|
