Suppr超能文献

长期护理机构中的流感预防:一项关于金刚烷胺药物不良反应危险因素的病例对照研究。

Influenza prophylaxis in the long-term care facility: a case-control study of the risk factors for adverse drug reactions to amantadine.

作者信息

Dolamore Michael J

机构信息

Ten Broeck Commons, Lake Katrine, New York, USA.

出版信息

Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2003 Nov;64(9):753-63. doi: 10.1016/j.curtheres.2003.11.001.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Amantadine hydrochloride remains an inexpensive means of influenza A prophylaxis, but it is reported to have a high incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) compared with newer, more expensive drugs.

OBJECTIVE

This study attempted to determine the effects of poor renal function on the rate of ADRs and any other variables on the tolerability of prophylaxis in this population. This would allow a high-risk subset of LTCF residents to be identified before prophylaxis, thus decreasing the risk for ADRs from amantadine.

METHODS

In this retrospective case-control study, a course of standardized low-dose (100-mg/d tablets) amantadine prophylaxis was ordered for all 242 residents of Ten Broeck Commons LTCF in Lake Katrine, New York, without influenza A for 14 days. Chart data of residents who developed ADRs (ADR group) were compared with those of a selected group who did not (control group). Residents' age, sex, renal function (blood urea nitrogen, serum creatinine, and creatinine clearance), dementia diagnosis, and number and classes of medications were compared.

RESULTS

The ADR group comprised 25 residents (21 women, 4 men; mean [SD] age, 84.8 [8.4] years); the control group, 29 residents (23 women, 6 men; mean [SD] age, 85.7 [7.5] years). The development of ADRs was not associated with differences in age, sex, renal function, or any medical condition, including measured, preexisting mental status changes between the groups. The overall risk for ADRs in the 242 residents was highest between days 8 and 14 of prophylaxis (17 residents [7.0%]) compared with the first 7 days (8 residents [3.3%]). Acute confusion was the most common ADR. All ADRs resolved on cessation of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

No preexisting medical condition was statistically associated with an increased risk for ADRs, but an association with the number of days of prophylaxis was observed. By shortening prophylaxis to 7 days, the ADR risk may be lowered to be commensurate with more expensive medications.

摘要

背景

盐酸金刚烷胺仍是预防甲型流感的一种廉价手段,但据报道,与更新的、更昂贵的药物相比,长期护理机构(LTCFs)的居民中其药物不良反应(ADRs)发生率较高。

目的

本研究试图确定肾功能不佳对ADRs发生率的影响以及该人群中预防耐受性的任何其他变量。这将有助于在预防前识别出LTCF居民中的高风险亚组,从而降低金刚烷胺引起ADRs的风险。

方法

在这项回顾性病例对照研究中,为纽约卡特里娜湖Ten Broeck Commons LTCF的所有242名未感染甲型流感的居民订购了一个疗程的标准化低剂量(100mg/d片剂)金刚烷胺预防用药,为期14天。将出现ADRs的居民(ADR组)的病历数据与未出现ADRs的选定组(对照组)的病历数据进行比较。比较居民的年龄、性别、肾功能(血尿素氮、血清肌酐和肌酐清除率)、痴呆诊断以及药物的数量和种类。

结果

ADR组包括25名居民(21名女性,4名男性;平均[标准差]年龄,84.8[8.4]岁);对照组包括29名居民(23名女性,6名男性;平均[标准差]年龄,85.7[7.5]岁)。ADRs的发生与年龄、性别、肾功能或任何医疗状况的差异无关,包括两组之间测量的、既往存在的精神状态变化。242名居民中ADRs的总体风险在预防的第8至14天最高(17名居民[7.0%]),而在前7天为8名居民[3.3%]。急性意识模糊是最常见的ADR。所有ADRs在停止治疗后均得到缓解。

结论

没有任何既往医疗状况与ADRs风险增加在统计学上相关,但观察到与预防天数有关联。通过将预防时间缩短至7天,ADR风险可能会降低至与更昂贵药物相当的水平。

相似文献

2
Adverse reactions to amantadine prophylaxis of influenza in a retirement home.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 1991 Jul;39(7):700-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1991.tb03625.x.
3
Use of oseltamivir during influenza outbreaks in Ontario nursing homes, 1999-2000.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2002 Apr;50(4):608-16. doi: 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50153.x.
4
Polypharmacy as a risk factor for adverse drug reactions in geriatric nursing home residents.
Am J Geriatr Pharmacother. 2006 Mar;4(1):36-41. doi: 10.1016/j.amjopharm.2006.03.002.
8
Economic evaluation of oseltamivir phosphate for postexposure prophylaxis of influenza in long-term care facilities.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005 Mar;53(3):444-51. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53162.x.
10
Use of antiviral prophylaxis in influenza outbreaks in long term care facilities.
Can J Infect Dis. 2000 Jul;11(4):187-92. doi: 10.1155/2000/246037.

引用本文的文献

1
Infection control in long term care institutions for the elderly: A reflection document on the situation in Spain.
Rev Esp Quimioter. 2023 Aug;36(4):346-379. doi: 10.37201/req/002.2023. Epub 2023 Mar 29.
2
Amantadine and rimantadine for influenza A in children and the elderly.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Nov 21;2014(11):CD002745. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002745.pub4.

本文引用的文献

1
Influenza in the nursing home.
Am Fam Physician. 2002 Jan 1;65(1):75-8, 72.
4
Assessment of adherence to renal dosing guidelines in long-term care facilities.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2000 Nov;48(11):1470-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2000.tb02639.x.
6
Influenza outbreak in a long-term-care facility: considerations for pharmacy.
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1999 Nov 15;56(22):2303-7. doi: 10.1093/ajhp/56.22.2303.
8
Duration of antiviral prophylaxis during nursing home outbreaks of influenza A: a comparison of 2 protocols.
Arch Intern Med. 1998 Oct 26;158(19):2155-9. doi: 10.1001/archinte.158.19.2155.
10
Amantadine-induced coma.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993 Oct;74(10):1119-20. doi: 10.1016/0003-9993(93)90072-i.

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