Suppr超能文献

偏头痛的分层护理与阶梯式护理策略:护理策略中的残疾情况(DISC)研究:一项随机试验。

Stratified care vs step care strategies for migraine: the Disability in Strategies of Care (DISC) Study: A randomized trial.

作者信息

Lipton R B, Stewart W F, Stone A M, Láinez M J, Sawyer J P

机构信息

Innovative Medical Research Inc, 1200 High Ridge Rd, Stamford, CT 06905, USA.

出版信息

JAMA. 2000;284(20):2599-605. doi: 10.1001/jama.284.20.2599.

Abstract

CONTEXT

Various guidelines recommend different strategies for selecting and sequencing acute treatments for migraine. In step care, treatment is escalated after first-line medications fail. In stratified care, initial treatment is based on measurement of the severity of illness or other factors. These strategies for migraine have not been rigorously evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical benefits of 3 strategies: stratified care, step care within attacks, and step care across attacks, among patients with migraine.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Randomized, controlled, parallel-group clinical trial conducted by the Disability in Strategies Study group from December 1997 to March 1999 in 88 clinical centers in 13 countries.

PATIENTS

A total of 835 adult migraine patients with a Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) grade of II, III, or IV were analyzed as the efficacy population; the safety analysis included 930 patients.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly assigned to receive (1) stratified care (n = 279), in which patients with MIDAS grade II treated up to 6 attacks with aspirin, 800 to 1000 mg, plus metoclopramide, 10 mg, and patients with MIDAS grade III and IV treated up to 6 attacks with zolmitriptan, 2.5 mg; (2) step care across attacks (n = 271), in which initial treatment was with aspirin, 800 to 1000 mg, plus metoclopramide, 10 mg. Patients not responding in at least 2 of the first 3 attacks switched to zolmitriptan, 2.5 mg, to treat the remaining 3 attacks; and (3) step care within attacks (n = 285), in which initial treatment for all attacks was with aspirin, 800 to 1000 mg, plus metoclopramide, 20 mg. Patients not responding to treatment after 2 hours in each attack escalated treatment to zolmitriptan, 2.5 mg.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Headache response, achieved if pain intensity was reduced from severe or moderate at baseline to mild or no pain at 2 hours; and disability time per treated attack at 4 hours for all 6 attacks, compared among the 3 groups.

RESULTS

Headache response at 2 hours was significantly greater across 6 attacks in the stratified care treatment group (52.7%) than in either the step care across attacks group (40.6%; P<.001) or the step care within attacks group (36.4%; P<.001). Disability time (6 attacks) was significantly lower in the stratified care group (mean area under the curve [AUC], 185.0 mm. h) than in the step care across attacks group (mean AUC, 209.4 mm. h; P<.001) or the step care within attacks group (mean AUC, 199.7 mm. h; P<.001). The incidence of adverse events was higher in the stratified care group (321 events) vs both step care groups (159 events in across-attack group; 217 in within-attack group), although most events were of mild-to-moderate intensity.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that as a treatment strategy, stratified care provides significantly better clinical outcomes than step care strategies within or across attacks as measured by headache response and disability time. JAMA. 2000;284:2599-2605.

摘要

背景

各种指南推荐了不同的偏头痛急性治疗选择和用药顺序策略。在阶梯式治疗中,一线药物治疗失败后治疗方案逐步升级。在分层治疗中,初始治疗基于疾病严重程度或其他因素的评估。这些偏头痛治疗策略尚未得到严格评估。

目的

比较分层治疗、发作期内阶梯式治疗和发作期间阶梯式治疗这三种策略对偏头痛患者的临床疗效。

设计与地点

1997年12月至1999年3月,由残疾策略研究小组在13个国家的88个临床中心进行的随机、对照、平行组临床试验。

患者

共835例偏头痛成年患者纳入疗效分析人群,偏头痛残疾评估量表(MIDAS)评分为II、III或IV级;安全性分析纳入930例患者。

干预措施

患者被随机分配接受:(1)分层治疗(n = 279),MIDAS评分为II级的患者使用阿司匹林800至1000 mg加甲氧氯普胺10 mg治疗最多6次发作,MIDAS评分为III级和IV级的患者使用佐米曲普坦2.5 mg治疗最多6次发作;(2)发作期间阶梯式治疗(n = 271),初始治疗使用阿司匹林800至1000 mg加甲氧氯普胺10 mg。在前3次发作中至少对2次治疗无反应的患者改用佐米曲普坦2.5 mg治疗剩余3次发作;(3)发作期内阶梯式治疗(n = 285),所有发作的初始治疗均使用阿司匹林800至1000 mg加甲氧氯普胺20 mg。每次发作2小时后治疗无反应的患者将治疗升级为佐米曲普坦2.5 mg。

主要观察指标

头痛缓解情况,即疼痛强度从基线时的重度或中度降至2小时时的轻度或无痛;以及比较三组中所有6次发作在4小时时每次治疗发作的残疾时间。

结果

分层治疗组6次发作后2小时的头痛缓解率(52.7%)显著高于发作期间阶梯式治疗组(40.6%;P <.001)和发作期内阶梯式治疗组(36.4%;P <.001)。分层治疗组的残疾时间(6次发作)显著低于发作期间阶梯式治疗组(平均曲线下面积[AUC],209.4 mm·h;P <.001)和发作期内阶梯式治疗组(平均AUC,199.7 mm·h;P <.001)。分层治疗组的不良事件发生率高于两个阶梯式治疗组(发作期间阶梯式治疗组159例事件;发作期内阶梯式治疗组217例事件),分层治疗组有321例事件,尽管大多数事件为轻至中度。

结论

我们的结果表明,作为一种治疗策略,分层治疗在头痛缓解和残疾时间方面提供的临床结果显著优于发作期内或发作期间的阶梯式治疗策略。《美国医学会杂志》。2000年;284:2599 - 2605。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验