So How Does Vatalanib (PTK787) 2HCl Give Good Results?

Матеріал з HistoryPedia
Версія від 14:34, 4 червня 2017, створена Leek58pond (обговореннявнесок) (Створена сторінка: Methods?The medical records of 106 patients complaining of cough lasting 8 weeks or more, who visited our clinics from 1 April to 31 December 2012, were collect...)

(різн.) ← Попередня версія • Поточна версія (різн.) • Новіша версія → (різн.)
Перейти до: навігація, пошук

Methods?The medical records of 106 patients complaining of cough lasting 8 weeks or more, who visited our clinics from 1 April to 31 December 2012, were collected and Vatalanib (PTK787) 2HCl reviewed retrospectively. Results?Among the 106 patients who were adequately assessed, a diagnosis was made in 93 patients (87.7%): atopic cough (AC) in 29 (27.4%); cough variant asthma (CVA) in 22 (20.8%); sinobronchial syndrome (SBS) in 21 (19.8%); fungus-associated chronic cough (FACC) in 13 (12.3%); gastroesophageal reflux-associated cough (GER) in 4 (3.8%); psychogenic cough in 4 (3.8%), and unexplained cough (UCC) in 13 (12.3%). BM fungi were detected in 1 AC patient, 3 CVA patients, 3 SBS patients. SMIT was observed in 8 (27.6%) AC patients, 6 (27.3%) CVA patients, 10 (47.6%) SBS patients, 10 (76.9%) FACC patients, 1 (25%) GERD patients, and 0 (0%) psychogenic cough patients. Regardless of diagnosis, the existence of SMIT was significantly correlated with positive results of BM colonization in the sputum of chronic cough patients (P?Cytoskeletal Signaling inhibitor patients was shown to be relatively high, and that FACC was demonstrated to be the fourth major cause of chronic cough in this study. VITULL K. GUPTA1, ARUN KUMAR MARIA1, ASHWANI MAHESHWARI1, JAGJEET S. BAHIA1, SONIA ARORA2, VARUN GUPTA1, MEGHNA GUPTA1, GOBIND P. SINGH1 1Dept of Medicine, Adesh Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Bathinda, Punjab, India, 2Kishori EX 527 Ram Hospital and Diabetes Care Centre, Bathinda Punjab, India Introduction?Primary care physicians provide care to the majority of patients of COPD. Although clinical practice guidelines have been developed for COPD, their influence on primary care practice is unclear. Aims and Objectives?The study sought to examine the prescription pattern regarding inhaler devices and medication in management of COPD in primary care practice in relation to guideline-based recommendations. Materials and Methods?We studied the prescriptions details of already diagnosed and on treatment COPD patients and inhaler devices, inhaled medications, oral medications were physically verified. Results?4287 COPD patients completed the study. Results show that 29.5% patients were on inhalers and 70.5% on oral medications. 57.1% used Dry Powder Inhalers, 28.3% Meter Dose Inhalers, 11.5% Meter Dose Inhalers with spacer devices and 3.1% nebulizers. 35.8% patients were prescribed SABA/ICS, 25.9% LABA/ICS, 13.5% SABA, 11.3% ICS, 7.8% SABA/SAAC and 1.