4.4 Article

Managing treatment complexity in cystic fibrosis: Challenges and Opportunities

期刊

PEDIATRIC PULMONOLOGY
卷 47, 期 6, 页码 523-533

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ppul.22546

关键词

unmet needs; treatment complexity; adherence

资金

  1. Novartis Pharma AG
  2. Novartis
  3. Roche
  4. Gilead

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is a complex, chronic, multisystem disease for which there is currently no cure. Nonetheless, advances in management have led to dramatic improvements in patient survival. With this development, new issues have arisen for CF patients and their care providers, including an increased symptom burden and increased frequency of co-morbidities as patients reach older ages, leading to the need for a highly complicated and time-consuming regimen of treatments. Such high symptom and treatment burden often leads to non-adherence and low levels of competence with administration of therapy, both of which may have detrimental impacts on CF outcomes. Optimal management is also hindered by other patient-related factors, including inadequacies in disease education which may lead to issues with self-management. This is particularly important during the transition from parent-directed therapy to independent self-management that occurs during adolescence and early adulthood. Clinicians are also faced with a considerable challenge when selecting interventions for individual patients; although the paradigm of aggressive care necessitates a wide range of therapies, there is a limited evidence base with which to compare available therapeutic regimens. Novel pharmacological agents are being developed to target the underlying cause of CF, while non-pharmacological interventions aim to improve competence and maximize adherence and health outcomes. Comparative effectiveness research is needed to simplify management and facilitate the implementation of appropriate treatment strategies. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2012; 47:523533. (c) 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据