Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
Support Care Cancer ; 26(7): 2471-2477, 2018 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29435713

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Premedication with dexamethasone is an essential part of the prevention of hypersensitivity reaction (HSR) associated with taxane administration. However, the possibility of stopping dexamethasone premedication has been investigated in previous studies to reduce the steroid's adverse events; however, either the result or the particular protocol was limited. Thus, our study aimed to evaluate the incidence of HSR after dexamethasone premedication discontinuation after lack of HSR in two previous weekly paclitaxel infusions. METHOD: Early breast cancer patients who received adjuvant weekly paclitaxel in a retrospective cohort from January 2012 through February 2016 at the King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital were reviewed. All patients received a standard premedication protocol prior to the first and second paclitaxel infusion. Dexamethasone was omitted in later cycles in all patients who did not undergo infusion HSR. Patients who developed HSR during the first or second cycles of paclitaxel infusion were excluded. The incidence of HSR during the later cycle of paclitaxel administration and factors associated with this adverse reaction were collected. RESULTS: Eighty-one of 85 patients who did not undergo infusion HSR after 2 cycles of weekly paclitaxel administration were retrospectively reviewed. The median age was 51 years (range 27-74 years). Only 16% of the patients had a BMI greater than 30 kg/m2, 57.8% were premenopausal, 67.9% had no comorbidity, none had a history of allergy or asthma, 65.4% received weekly paclitaxel as a single agent, and 34.6% received weekly paclitaxel in combination with trastuzumab. Five of 81 patients reported grade I-II HSR (6.25%), which occurred mostly during the first 6 cycles (60%). Temporary discontinuation of paclitaxel infusion was observed in all HSR patients. No differences regarding age, BMI, menopausal status, and underlying disease between the HSR and no HSR groups were identified. Concerning the safety profile, peripheral neuropathy (gr I 60%, gr II 13.5%, and gr III 2.4%), myalgia (43.4%), and edema (10.5%) were commonly reported, whereas dyspepsia (5.3%) and insomnia (14.5%) were rarely described in withholding patients. CONCLUSION: Withholding dexamethasone premedication in non-experiencing HSR patients after two previous cycles of weekly paclitaxel administration was safe and did not impact the higher incidence of HSR. A discontinuing dexamethasone protocol should be recommended generally in these patients, especially those with a high risk for steroid-induced side effects.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Dexamethasone/therapeutic use , Drug Hypersensitivity/prevention & control , Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions/drug therapy , Paclitaxel/therapeutic use , Premedication/methods , Adult , Aged , Breast Neoplasms/complications , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Bridged-Ring Compounds , Cohort Studies , Dexamethasone/pharmacology , Female , Humans , Incidence , Middle Aged , Paclitaxel/adverse effects , Paclitaxel/pharmacology , Retrospective Studies , Taxoids
2.
Int J Qual Health Care ; 18(5): 346-51, 2006 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16950804

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To explore problems and obstacles of hospitals in Thailand implementing quality management systems according to the hospital accreditation (HA) standards. DESIGN: Questionnaire survey. SETTING: Thirty-nine hospitals in all 13 regions of Thailand. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 728 health care professionals and 41 surveyors of the national accreditation program. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Health care professionals' and surveyors' opinions on problems and obstacles in 24 items representing Thailand HA standards. RESULTS: The response rates were 94.9 and 73.2% in health care professionals and surveyors, respectively. More than 90% of both groups thought that there had been problems in the items such as 'quality improvement (QI) activities' and 'integration and utilization of information'. The items considered by health care professionals as major obstacles included 'adequacy of staff' (34.6%) and 'integration and utilization of information' (26.6%), for example. For surveyors, 'integration and utilization of information' was ranked highest as presenting a major obstacle (43.9%), followed by 'discharge and referral process' (31.7%) and 'medical recording process' (29.3%). The rank orders for the 24 items as problems and major obstacles were similar in both groups (Spearman's rank correlation 0.436, P = 0.033 and 0.583, P = 0.003, respectively). Surveyors had a higher degree of concern and paid more attention to care-related items than health care professionals. CONCLUSIONS: Health care professionals have been facing many problems with multidisciplinary process-related issues of the accreditation standard, whereas surveyors might have had some difficulties in conveying the core QI concepts to them. The findings might be explained by the effects of health care reform on the underlying accreditation principles. One of the strategies to respond to the situation was presented.


Subject(s)
Diffusion of Innovation , Health Personnel/psychology , Total Quality Management , Health Care Surveys , Hospitals, Community , Humans , Thailand
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...