INTRODUÇÃO: A síndrome coronariana aguda (SCA) é uma das manifestações clínicas da doença arterial coronariana. A Estratégia de Registro em Insuficiência Coronariana (ERICO) é uma coorte de indivíduos atendidos no Hospital Universitário da Universidade de São Paulo por SCA. O presente trabalho teve por objetivo descrever a frequência de uso o tempo para administração dos medicamentos habitualmente usados no tratamento das SCA nos participantes do estudo ERICO. MÉTODOS: Foram incluídos 746 participantes ERICO, entre fevereiro de 2009 e dezembro de 2012 que procuraram diretamente o hospital (N=656) ou que se dirigiram inicialmente a unidades de atenção primária à saúde (APS; N=90). Avaliamos o tempo do contato médico ao tratamento com aspirina, clopidogrel, heparina e trombolíticos, de acordo com a unidade de primeiro contato, utilizando modelos de regressão logística. Posteriormente, foram revisados os prontuários de 563 (85,8%) participantes que vieram diretamente ao hospital, e descritas as frequências de administração de aspirina, clopidogrel, heparinas, betabloqueadores, inibidores da enzima conversora de angiotensina (IECA) / bloqueadores dos receptores da angiotensina II (BRA), estatinas, nitratos e morfina. Os motivos de não-administração ou suspensão da aspirina, clopidogrel, heparinas, betabloqueadores e IECA/BRA foram obtidos dos registros em prontuário. RESULTADOS: Observamos que 93,6%, 86,1% e 86,5% dos participantes do estudo receberam aspirina, clopidogrel e heparina, respectivamente, durante as primeiras 24 horas de internação. Em modelos ajustados, indivíduos encaminhados de unidades de APS tinham mais chance de receber aspirina nas primeiras 3 horas (Razão de chances [RC]: 3,65; intervalo de confiança de 95% [IC95%]: 2,04-6,52), mas menor chance de receber heparina (RC: 0,32; IC95%: 0,16-0,62) ou clopidogrel (RC: 0,49; IC95%: 0,29-0,83) no mesmo intervalo de tempo. Entretanto, 24,4% dos participantes encaminhados das unidades de APS não receberam aspirina antes da transferência ao hospital. A não administração de aspirina, clopidogrel e heparina ao longo da internação foi um evento raro, e geralmente ligada a um maior risco de sangramento. Os betabloqueadores não foram prescritos para 15,8% dos participantes, e a principal causa encontrada foi a insuficiência cardíaca descompensada. IECA/BRA não foram prescritos para 16,7%, e a principal causa foi choque ou hipotensão. Entretanto, as causas de não-administração (64,0%) e de suspensão (26,4%) frequentemente não estavam descritas. CONCLUSÕES: Em nosso estudo, participantes que primeiramente foram a unidades de atenção primária tiveram uma maior probabilidade de receber tratamento precoce com aspirina, em comparação aos participantes que foram diretamente ao hospital. Entretanto, proporção significativa não recebeu o medicamento antes da transferência, apontando espaço para potenciais melhorias no atendimento. A frequência do uso de medicamentos no estudo ERICO foi, em geral, igual ou superior à maior parte dos estudos encontrados. A falha de registro adequado dos motivos de não-administração e suspensão em prontuário foi um achado frequente, e que também aponta para oportunidade de aperfeiçoamento da assistência / BACKGROUND: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is one of the clinical manifestations of coronary artery disease. The Strategy of Registry of Acute Coronary Syndrome (ERICO) is a cohort of individuals treated at the Hospital Universitário da Universidade de São Paulo due to an ACS event. The aim of this study was to describe the frequency of use and time-to-treatment for drugs commonly used in ACS treatment, in the ERICO study. METHODS: We included 746 ERICO participants enrolled from February 2009 to December 2012 who either sought the hospital directly (N = 656) or were initially referred to primary care units (N = 90). We evaluated the time-to-treatment with aspirin, clopidogrel, heparins and thrombolytics, according to the unit of first contact, using logistic regression models. Subsequently, the medical records of 563 (85.8%) participants who came directly to the hospital were reviewed and the frequency of aspirin, clopidogrel, heparins, beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) / angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB), statins, nitrates and morphine use. The reasons for non-administration and/or withdrawal of aspirin, clopidogrel, heparins, beta-blockers and ACEI / BRA were obtained from medical records. RESULTS: We observed that 93.6%, 86.1% and 86.5% of study participants received aspirin, clopidogrel and heparin, respectively, during the first 24 hours of hospitalization. In adjusted models, individuals referred from primary care units were more likely to receive aspirin within the first 3 hours (odds ratio [OR]: 3.65, 95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 2.04-6.52), But less likely to receive heparin (OR: 0.32; 95%CI: 0.16-0.62) or clopidogrel (OR: 0.49; 95%CI: 0.29-0.83) in the same time interval. However, 24.4% of the participants referred from primary care units did not receive aspirin before transfer to hospital. Non-administration of aspirin, clopidogrel, and heparin during hospitalization was a rare event, and generally linked to an increased risk of bleeding. Beta-blockers were not prescribed for 15.8% of the participants, and the main cause was decompensated heart failure. ACEI / ARB were not prescribed for 16.7%, and the main cause was shock or hypotension. However, the causes of non-administration (64.0%) and withdrawal (26.4%) were often not described. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, participants who first went to primary care units were more likely to receive early treatment with aspirin compared to those who went directly to the hospital. However, a significant proportion did not receive the drug prior to the transfer, indicating room for potential improvements in care. The frequency of medication use in the ERICO study was generally equal to or greater than those described in other studies. Failure to properly register the reasons for drug non-administration and treatment withdrawal was a frequent finding, pointing to an opportunity for improved care

INTRODUÇÃO: A síndrome coronariana aguda (SCA) é uma das manifestações clínicas da doença arterial coronariana. A Estratégia de Registro em Insuficiência Coronariana (ERICO) é uma coorte de indivíduos atendidos no Hospital Universitário da Universidade de São Paulo por SCA. O presente trabalho teve por objetivo descrever a frequência de uso o tempo para administração dos medicamentos habitualmente usados no tratamento das SCA nos participantes do estudo ERICO. MÉTODOS: Foram incluídos 746 participantes ERICO, entre fevereiro de 2009 e dezembro de 2012 que procuraram diretamente o hospital (N=656) ou que se dirigiram inicialmente a unidades de atenção primária à saúde (APS; N=90). Avaliamos o tempo do contato médico ao tratamento com aspirina, clopidogrel, heparina e trombolíticos, de acordo com a unidade de primeiro contato, utilizando modelos de regressão logística. Posteriormente, foram revisados os prontuários de 563 (85,8%) participantes que vieram diretamente ao hospital, e descritas as frequências de administração de aspirina, clopidogrel, heparinas, betabloqueadores, inibidores da enzima conversora de angiotensina (IECA) / bloqueadores dos receptores da angiotensina II (BRA), estatinas, nitratos e morfina. Os motivos de não-administração ou suspensão da aspirina, clopidogrel, heparinas, betabloqueadores e IECA/BRA foram obtidos dos registros em prontuário. RESULTADOS: Observamos que 93,6%, 86,1% e 86,5% dos participantes do estudo receberam aspirina, clopidogrel e heparina, respectivamente, durante as primeiras 24 horas de internação. Em modelos ajustados, indivíduos encaminhados de unidades de APS tinham mais chance de receber aspirina nas primeiras 3 horas (Razão de chances [RC]: 3,65; intervalo de confiança de 95% [IC95%]: 2,04-6,52), mas menor chance de receber heparina (RC: 0,32; IC95%: 0,16-0,62) ou clopidogrel (RC: 0,49; IC95%: 0,29-0,83) no mesmo intervalo de tempo. Entretanto, 24,4% dos participantes encaminhados das unidades de APS não receberam aspirina antes da transferência ao hospital. A não administração de aspirina, clopidogrel e heparina ao longo da internação foi um evento raro, e geralmente ligada a um maior risco de sangramento. Os betabloqueadores não foram prescritos para 15,8% dos participantes, e a principal causa encontrada foi a insuficiência cardíaca descompensada. IECA/BRA não foram prescritos para 16,7%, e a principal causa foi choque ou hipotensão. Entretanto, as causas de não-administração (64,0%) e de suspensão (26,4%) frequentemente não estavam descritas. CONCLUSÕES: Em nosso estudo, participantes que primeiramente foram a unidades de atenção primária tiveram uma maior probabilidade de receber tratamento precoce com aspirina, em comparação aos participantes que foram diretamente ao hospital. Entretanto, proporção significativa não recebeu o medicamento antes da transferência, apontando espaço para potenciais melhorias no atendimento. A frequência do uso de medicamentos no estudo ERICO foi, em geral, igual ou superior à maior parte dos estudos encontrados. A falha de registro adequado dos motivos de não-administração e suspensão em prontuário foi um achado frequente, e que também aponta para oportunidade de aperfeiçoamento da assistência / BACKGROUND: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is one of the clinical manifestations of coronary artery disease. The Strategy of Registry of Acute Coronary Syndrome (ERICO) is a cohort of individuals treated at the Hospital Universitário da Universidade de São Paulo due to an ACS event. The aim of this study was to describe the frequency of use and time-to-treatment for drugs commonly used in ACS treatment, in the ERICO study. METHODS: We included 746 ERICO participants enrolled from February 2009 to December 2012 who either sought the hospital directly (N = 656) or were initially referred to primary care units (N = 90). We evaluated the time-to-treatment with aspirin, clopidogrel, heparins and thrombolytics, according to the unit of first contact, using logistic regression models. Subsequently, the medical records of 563 (85.8%) participants who came directly to the hospital were reviewed and the frequency of aspirin, clopidogrel, heparins, beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) / angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB), statins, nitrates and morphine use. The reasons for non-administration and/or withdrawal of aspirin, clopidogrel, heparins, beta-blockers and ACEI / BRA were obtained from medical records. RESULTS: We observed that 93.6%, 86.1% and 86.5% of study participants received aspirin, clopidogrel and heparin, respectively, during the first 24 hours of hospitalization. In adjusted models, individuals referred from primary care units were more likely to receive aspirin within the first 3 hours (odds ratio [OR]: 3.65, 95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 2.04-6.52), But less likely to receive heparin (OR: 0.32; 95%CI: 0.16-0.62) or clopidogrel (OR: 0.49; 95%CI: 0.29-0.83) in the same time interval. However, 24.4% of the participants referred from primary care units did not receive aspirin before transfer to hospital. Non-administration of aspirin, clopidogrel, and heparin during hospitalization was a rare event, and generally linked to an increased risk of bleeding. Beta-blockers were not prescribed for 15.8% of the participants, and the main cause was decompensated heart failure. ACEI / ARB were not prescribed for 16.7%, and the main cause was shock or hypotension. However, the causes of non-administration (64.0%) and withdrawal (26.4%) were often not described. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, participants who first went to primary care units were more likely to receive early treatment with aspirin compared to those who went directly to the hospital. However, a significant proportion did not receive the drug prior to the transfer, indicating room for potential improvements in care. The frequency of medication use in the ERICO study was generally equal to or greater than those described in other studies. Failure to properly register the reasons for drug non-administration and treatment withdrawal was a frequent finding, pointing to an opportunity for improved care

Submitted by Luciana Ferreira (lucgeral@gmail.com) on 2016-05-19T14:31:23Z No. of bitstreams: 2 Dissertação Marilia Oliveira Morais - 2013.pdf: 1820357 bytes, checksum: f5d19dc55daf286af2de46f79df8659f (MD5) license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Luciana Ferreira (lucgeral@gmail.com) on 2016-05-19T14:32:53Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 2 Dissertação Marilia Oliveira Morais - 2013.pdf: 1820357 bytes, checksum: f5d19dc55daf286af2de46f79df8659f (MD5) license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-05-19T14:32:53Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 Dissertação Marilia Oliveira Morais - 2013.pdf: 1820357 bytes, checksum: f5d19dc55daf286af2de46f79df8659f (MD5) license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2013-08-23 / Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Goiás - FAPEG / Therapeutic modalities for the treatment of oral cancer result in local adverse effects that can cause interruptions of the radiotherapy and consequently to influence in the patient survival. For the reduction and control of the adverse effects, Dental Care Protocol is applied to patients with oral cancer by dental surgeon team before, during and after radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the adhesion of patients with oral cancer to a Dental Care Protocol and its Impact in the interruption and survival. Patients and methods: In this study 133 cases of oral cancer undergoing radiotherapy were selected. The patients were classified according to the period of dental adhesion: no adhesion (group I), adhesion less than or equal to 6 months (group II) and adhesion higher than 6 months (group III). Clinic and pathological aspects, occurrence of interruption of radiotherapy, disease-free survival and overall survival were investigated. Results: The incidence of radiotherapy interruption due to symptoms was statistically significant in group III compared to group I (p = 0.01). The frequency and duration of interruption due to symptoms were not statistically significant between groups. The conclusion of radiotherapy rate was statistically significant in the group that exceeded 6 months of dental adhesion (p = 0.02). Patient’s survival was higher in group III (p = 0.01) when compared to the other groups. Conclusion: The adhesion to a dental care protocol did not have any impact on the radiotherapy interruption due to the occurrence of symptoms, however, patients who had higher adhesion to the Dental Care Protocol showed a higher rate of disease-free survival and overall survival. / Modalidades de tratamentos para o câncer de cavidade oral resultam em efeitos adversos locais que podem gerar interrupções da radioterapia e consequentemente influenciar na sobrevida do paciente. Para a redução e controle dos efeitos adversos, protocolos de preparo do paciente oncológico são estabelecidos por equipes odontológicas antes, durante e pós-tratamento radioterápico e quimioterápico. Objetivo: Verificar a adesão dos pacientes portadores de câncer de cavidade oral ao protocolo preventivo odontológico e seu impacto na interrupção da radioterapia e sobrevida do paciente. Pacientes e método: Neste estudo foram selecionados 133 casos de câncer de cavidade oral submetidos à radioterapia. Os pacientes foram classificados de acordo com o tempo de adesão odontológica: sem adesão (grupo I), adesão inferior ou igual a 6 meses (grupo II) e adesão superior a 6 meses (grupo III). Foram investigadas as características clínico-patológicas, ocorrência de interrupção da radioterapia, sobrevida livre de doença e sobrevida global. Resultados: A ocorrência de interrupção por sintomas foi estatisticamente significante no grupo III quando comparado ao grupo I (p=0,01). A frequência e a duração de interrupção por sintomas não foram estatisticamente significante entre os grupos. A conclusão da radioterapia foi estatisticamente significante no grupo com adesão superior a 6 meses (p=0,02). A sobrevida dos pacientes foi maior no grupo III (p=0,01) quando comparado aos demais grupos. Conclusão: A adesão ao protocolo não teve impacto sobre interrupção da radioterapia devido ocorrência da interrupção por sintomas, no entanto, pacientes que tiveram adesão ao protocolo preventivo odontológico apresentaram um melhor índice de sobrevida livre de doença e de sobrevida global.

La transplantation d'organe améliore durablement la qualité de vie de patients en défaillance organique terminale. Malheureusement le nombre de greffons disponibles est insuffisant pour traiter tous les patients inscrits en liste d'attente. En France, les organes greffés proviennent essentiellement de donneurs en mort encéphalique. En cas de maladie grave, incurable et rapidement mortelle, il est également possible dans certains pays (dont la France) d'arrêter les thérapeutiques qui maintiennent artificiellement un patient en vie et de prélever ses organes une fois le décès par arrêt circulatoire constaté. La loi n°2005-370 du 22 Avril 2005 (dite loi Léonetti) autorise l'arrêt des traitements lorsqu'ils apparaissent « inutiles, disproportionnés ou n'ayant d'autre effet que le seul maintien artificiel de la vie ». Pour certains, cette fin de vie médicalement planifiée devrait prendre en compte les souhaits du patient en matière de don d'organes et l'intérêt de la greffe pour la société. La position française était néanmoins jusqu'en 2014 de ne pas considérer le patient en fin de vie comme un donneur potentiel afin d'éviter toute confusion entre la décision d'arrêter les traitements curatifs et l'intention de prélever ses organes. Alors que ce type de prélèvement a débuté fin 2014 dans quelques sites pilotes français, nous avons examiné les aspects pratiques, juridiques et éthiques du prélèvement d'organe en situation de fin de vie médicalisée, en focalisant notre réflexion sur les droits du patient, la définition de la mort, la temporalité du processus de prélèvement, et les éléments qui déterminent les modalités d'arrêt des suppléances vitales. / Organ transplantation saves lives of many persons who otherwise would die from end-stage organ disease. In the past decades the need for transplants has grown faster than the number of available organs. This increasing requirement for donated organs has led to a renewed interest in donation after circulatory determination of death (DCDD). In some countries including France, terminally ill patients who die of cardiac arrest after a planned withdrawal of life support may be considered as organ donors (controlled DCDD). Before 2005 French rules were not designed for such practices. With regard to patients in final stage of incurable diseases, the law number 2005-370 of April 22, 2005 authorizes the withholding or withdrawal of treatments when they appear "useless, disproportionate or having no other effect than solely the artificial preservation of life". Advocates of the controlled DCDD argue that the end-of-life care plan should incorporate the patient's wishes concerning organ donation and the public interest of transplantation. Until 2014, most French medical academics regarded the perceived conflict of interest that would arise for clinicians treating potential donors as a major ethical question. As the French program started at the end of 2014 in a few pilot sites, we thus examine the practical, legal and ethical issues that arise in considering controlled DCDD, including determination of the donor's overall benefit, debates relating to the diagnosis and time of death, and factors determining how life-sustaining treatment is to be withdrawn.

Infants with hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy (birth asphyxia) have a high risk of death or disability. Those with poor prognosis are sometimes allowed to die after withdrawal of intensive care. In recent years, doctors have used new types of brain scan, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), to predict the type and severity of impairment if the infant survives and to help with such decisions. In this thesis, I analyse the issues arising from the use of MRI for prognostication and decision-making in newborn infants. I argue that previous prognostic research has been hampered by a failure to identify and focus on the most important practical question and that this contributes to uncertainty in practice. I outline recommendations for improving research. I then look at existing guidelines about withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment. I identify several problems with these guidelines; they are vague and fail to provide practical guidance, they provide little or no genuine scope for parental involvement in decisions, and they give no weight to the interests of others. I argue that parental interests should be given some weight in decisions for newborn infants. I develop a new model of decision-making that, using the concept of a Restricted Life, attempts to set out clearly the boundaries of parental discretion in decision-making. I argue that where infants are predicted to have severe cognitive or very severe physical impairment parents should be permitted to request either withdrawal or continuation of treatment. I justify this model on the basis of overlapping interests, (prognostic, experiential and moral) uncertainty, asymmetrical harms, and the burden of care. In the conclusion, I set out a guideline for the use of MRI in newborn infants with hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy. I suggest that this guideline would provide a more robust, coherent and practical basis for decision-making in newborn intensive care.