The American journal of medicine
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Current and future management of serious skin and skin-structure infections.
The purpose of this study was to compare in a randomized, open-label clinical study, the efficacy and safety of cefepime (1 g every 12 hours) with that of ceftazidime (1 g every 8 hours) in patients with serious skin and skin-structure infections. Of 298 patients enrolled in the study, 130 with serious skin and skin-structure infections were evaluable. Demographics and underlying medical conditions were comparable in both groups. ⋯ Adverse events occurred with similar frequency in both groups. Events probably related to study drugs affected 3% (6 of 198) of patients treated with cefepime and 4% (4 of 100) of ceftazidime-treated patients. Cefepime, a new parenteral cephalosporin administered every 12 hours, is an extremely well tolerated and effective alternative to ceftazidime given every 8 hours for the treatment of serious skin and skin-structure infections.
-
Multicenter Study
The changing face of candidemia: emergence of non-Candida albicans species and antifungal resistance.
To assess the changing epidemiology of candidemia in the 1990s, to evaluate the clinical implications for the presence of non-Candida albicans in blood, and to evaluate the presence of antifungal resistance in relation to prior antifungal administration. ⋯ In this large scale study, the non-C. albicans species, especially T. glabrata, emerged as important and frequent pathogens causing fungemia. This finding has major clinical implications given the higher complication and mortality rate associated with the non-C. albicans species. The change in the pattern of candidemia might be partly attributed to the increase in number of immunocompromised hosts and the widespread use of prophylactic or empiric antifungal therapy. This is an ominous sign given the in vitro resistance of the non-C. albicans species to currently available antifungal agents.
-
For patients hospitalized with serious illnesses, we identified factors associated with a stated preference to forgo cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), examined physician-patient communication about these issues, and determined the relationship of patients' preferences to intensity of care and survival. ⋯ The diagnosis, patients' perception of the prognosis, and hospital site were significantly associated with patients' resuscitation preferences after adjusting for patient demographics, severity of illness, and functional status. The rate of discussing CPR was low even for patients who did not want CPR. Patient preferences not to receive CPR were associated with a small decrease in intensity of care but no difference in hospital survival.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Nebulized bronchodilators for outpatient management of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
The bronchodilator efficacy, safety, and persistence of effect of the anticholinergic agent ipratropium bromide and the beta-adrenergic agonist albuterol, both given by nebulization, were compared in 223 patients with stable, severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The study was a randomized, double-blind, parallel group trial conducted over 85 days. Patients took the study drugs (either 500 micrograms of ipratropium bromide or 2.5 mg of albuterol) three times daily on an outpatient basis throughout the study. ⋯ Patients receiving ipratropium bromide scored higher on a quality-of-life questionnaire evaluating dyspnea, fatigue, emotional function, and mastery. Side effects were relatively infrequent and generally mild for both study drugs. These results show that ipratropium bromide, given by nebulization, is safe and effective in the outpatient treatment of COPD.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Clinical Trial
Multicenter, placebo-controlled trial comparing acarbose (BAY g 5421) with placebo, tolbutamide, and tolbutamide-plus-acarbose in non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus.
Acarbose delays release of glucose from complex carbohydrates and disaccharides by inhibiting intestinal alpha-glucosidases, thereby attenuating postprandial increments in blood glucose and insulin. This multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study compared the efficacy and safety of diet alone, acarbose, tolbutamide, and acarbose-plus-tolbutamide in non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) patients. ⋯ Acarbose was effective and well tolerated in the treatment of NIDDM. Control of glycemia was significantly better with acarbose compared with diet alone. Acarbose-plus-tolbutamide was superior to tolbutamide alone.