Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Ambul Care Manage ; 43(1): 81-88, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31644507

ABSTRACT

A major focus of US health care systems is ensuring timely patient access to subspecialty care. This article describes the experiences of a large children's hospital after implementation of clinic session standardization and template optimization. Outpatient specialty clinic sessions were standardized to 4-hour periods, and all unfilled complex appointment slots were made available for any appointment type within 72 hours of the clinic date. Three high-demand outpatient clinical services achieved increased aggregate potential and completed outpatient appointments over a 2-year period. These improvements were mostly due to an increase in providers and were not always coupled to shorter patient lag times.


Subject(s)
Appointments and Schedules , Health Services Accessibility/standards , Outpatient Clinics, Hospital/organization & administration , Specialization , Efficiency, Organizational , Health Services Needs and Demand , Hospitals, Pediatric , Humans , United States
2.
Dermatol Surg ; 43(3): 396-404, 2017 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28157728

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: VYC-15L (Juvéderm Volbella XC) is a nonanimal crosslinked hyaluronic acid (HA) gel with lidocaine. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of VYC-15L for lip and perioral enhancement versus a nonanimal stabilized HA with lidocaine (Restylane-L; NASHA). METHODS: This prospective multicenter study randomized 225 adults with minimal, mild, or moderate lip fullness on the validated 5-point Allergan Lip Fullness Scale (LFS) to treatment with VYC-15L or NASHA; optional touch-up was administered 30 days later. Subjects were followed for 1 year. The primary effectiveness end point was noninferiority of VYC-15L versus NASHA by mean change in LFS score from baseline to Month 3. RESULTS: The primary end point was met. At Month 3, LFS responder rates were 80.3% for VYC-15L versus 70.8% for NASHA. LFS responder rates exceeded 60% through 1 year with VYC-15L. Perioral lines severity improved for 65.4% and 66.2% of VYC-15L subjects at Month 3 and Year 1, respectively. At Month 3, 96.1% and 88.2% of subjects reported improvement in FACE-Q Satisfaction With Lips and Satisfaction With Lip Lines, respectively. Severe injection site responses were reported less frequently with VYC-15L than NASHA. CONCLUSION: VYC-15L was safe and effective for lip and perioral enhancement, with treatment effects lasting through 1 year.


Subject(s)
Face , Hyaluronic Acid/administration & dosage , Rejuvenation , Skin Aging/drug effects , Viscosupplements/administration & dosage , Adult , Aged , Double-Blind Method , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Injections, Intradermal , Lip/drug effects , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , United States
3.
J Drugs Dermatol ; 8(12): 1122-6, 2009 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20027940

ABSTRACT

The ideal dermal filler for treatment of the aging had needs to have inherent bulk and longevity of effect. The filler calcium hydroxylapatite (CaHA) provides a texture that lends itself to injection and then to subsequent massage, without losing control of where the product is placed. In the recent past, delivery of CaHA to the hands has been accomplished by mixing lidocaine with the dermal filler prior to injection into the dorsum of the hand. The author suggests that an alternative way to deliver CaHA is to administer a large bolus of lidocaine immediately prior to injection of the dermal filler itself, followed by firm massage to disseminate the CaHA microspheres and carrier gel into the areas around and above the tendons and veins of the hand.


Subject(s)
Cosmetic Techniques , Durapatite/administration & dosage , Hand , Lidocaine/administration & dosage , Skin Aging , Humans
4.
J Cosmet Dermatol ; 8(3): 205-10, 2009 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19735519

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Pain is a common patient complaint during dermal filler injections. The primary objective of this study was to compare a new formulation of Juvéderm((R)) injectable gel with lidocaine (denoted as JUV + L) to commercially-available Juvéderm((R)) injectable gel without lidocaine (denoted as JUV) with respect to procedural pain scores in subjects desiring nasolabial fold (NLF) correction. METHODS: Subjects received randomized treatment with the lidocaine filler in one NLF and the filler without lidocaine in the other NLF. Investigators determined the appropriate formulation (Ultra or Ultra Plus) and volume of material to inject but were blinded as to which syringe contained lidocaine. Subjects rated procedural pain (pain during injection) using an 11-point scale within 30 min after receiving treatment in both NLFs and compared procedural pain between right and left NLFs using a 5-point scale. NLF severity was rated by both subjects and investigators before and 2 weeks after treatment. RESULTS: The mean difference on the procedural pain scale was 3.4 (P < 0.0001), and 93% of subjects found JUV + L to be less or slightly less painful than JUV. Improvement in NLF severity was comparable for both products. Common treatment site reactions (CTRs) of pain and tenderness were considerably less frequent for JUV + L than JUV while all other CTRs showed no statistically significant differences. CONCLUSION: The dermal filler formulated with lidocaine is effective in reducing procedural pain during correction of facial wrinkles and folds while maintaining a similar safety and effectiveness profile to the filler without lidocaine.


Subject(s)
Gels/pharmacology , Lidocaine/pharmacology , Skin Aging/drug effects , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anesthetics, Local/administration & dosage , Double-Blind Method , Female , Functional Laterality , Gels/administration & dosage , Humans , Hyaluronic Acid/administration & dosage , Hyaluronic Acid/adverse effects , Hyaluronic Acid/pharmacology , Lidocaine/administration & dosage , Lidocaine/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Pain/chemically induced , Pain/prevention & control , Pain Measurement , Safety
5.
J Drugs Dermatol ; 5(2): 140-54, 2006 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16485882

ABSTRACT

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) has significant promise in improving outcomes of patients with a variety of cutaneous conditions. A group of experts met to review the principles, indications, and clinical benefits of PDT with 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA). They also reviewed PDT with methyl aminolevulinate. The experts established consensus statements for pretreatment, posttreatment, ALA contact time, light sources, and numbers of sessions associated with ALA PDT for actinic keratosis and superficial basal cell carcinoma, photorejuvenation and cosmetic enhancement, acne, sebaceous skin, rosacea, and rhinophyma. They based consensus recommendations on their clinical experience and the medical literature. They also suggested future applications of ALA PDT. Experts concluded that ALA PDT is a safe and effective modality for the treatment of conditions commonly encountered in dermatology. Since downtime is minimal, the technique is suitable for patients of all ages and lifestyles. Appropriate light sources are available in many dermatology offices. The expanding clinical and financial benefits of PDT justify the purchase of an appropriate light source.


Subject(s)
Aminolevulinic Acid/therapeutic use , Carcinoma, Basal Cell/drug therapy , Keratosis/drug therapy , Photochemotherapy/methods , Photosensitizing Agents/therapeutic use , Skin Neoplasms/drug therapy , Clinical Trials as Topic , Humans
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...