Catalogue Search | MBRL
Search Results Heading
Explore the vast range of titles available.
MBRLSearchResults
-
DisciplineDiscipline
-
Is Peer ReviewedIs Peer Reviewed
-
Item TypeItem Type
-
SubjectSubject
-
YearFrom:-To:
-
More FiltersMore FiltersSourceLanguage
Done
Filters
Reset
15
result(s) for
"Pérez-Ramos, Jeanette"
Sort by:
Effectiveness of a decision aid for patients with depression: A randomized controlled trial
2017
Background
Shared decision making is an important component of patient‐centred care and decision aids are tools designed to support patients' decision making and help patients with depression to make informed choices.
Objective
The study aim was to assess the effectiveness of a web‐based decision aid for patients with unipolar depression.
Design
Randomized controlled trial.
Setting and participants
Adults diagnosed with a major depressive disorder and recruited in primary care centres were included and randomized to the decision aid (n=68) or usual care (n=79).
Intervention
Patients in the decision aid group reviewed the decision aid accompanied by a researcher.
Outcome measures
Knowledge about treatment options, decisional conflict, treatment intention and preference for participation in decision making. We also developed a pilot measure of concordance between patients' goals and concerns about treatment options and their treatment intention.
Results
Intervention significantly improved knowledge (P<.001) and decisional conflict (P<.001), and no differences were observed in treatment intention, preferences for participation, or concordance. One of the scales developed to measure goals and concerns showed validity issues.
Conclusion
The decision aid “Decision making in depression” is effective improving knowledge of treatment options and reducing decisional conflict of patients with unipolar depression. More research is needed to establish a valid and reliable measure of concordance between patients' goals and concerns regarding pharmacological and psychological treatment, and the choice made.
Journal Article
Efficacy, Effectiveness, Safety, and Cost-effectiveness of Epidural Adhesiolysis for Treating Failed Back Surgery Syndrome. A Systematic Review
by
Brito-García, Noé
,
del Pino-Sedeño, Tasmania
,
Serrano-Aguilar, Pedro
in
Adhesions
,
Back pain
,
Back surgery
2019
Abstract
Background
Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) has a profound impact on patients’ quality of life and represents a major clinical challenge and a significant economic burden for society. Adhesiolysis is used as a treatment to eliminate perineural/epidural adhesions in patients with chronic pain attributed to FBSS.
Objective
To evaluate the efficacy, effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of epidural adhesiolysis compared with other procedures for treating FBSS.
Method
A systematic review was conducted. The electronic databases Medline/PreMedline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library Plus, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination databases, SCOPUS, Science Citation Index, and PEDRO were consulted through April 2017. Predefined criteria were used to determine inclusion of the studies and to assess their methodological quality.
Results
Ten reports were included. No randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on efficacy or cost-effectiveness were found. Three reports (corresponding to two RCTs, N = 212) suggested that adhesiolysis was effective, especially for pain and disability. However, both studies presented serious methodological flaws. In addition to RCTs, seven observational studies with high risk of bias reported data on effectiveness and safety. Fifty-eight adverse events were reported among 130 patients undergoing endoscopic adhesiolysis, and 19 among the 110 undergoing percutaneous adhesiolysis.
Conclusions
The evidence on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of adhesiolysis for treating FBSS is nonexistent, whereas evidence on its effectiveness and safety is insufficient. Incorporating data from observational studies did not improve the quality of the evidence on effectiveness.
Journal Article
Attitudes toward concordance in psychiatry: a comparative, cross-sectional study of psychiatric patients and mental health professionals
by
Serrano-Aguilar, Pedro
,
De las Cuevas, Carlos
,
Perestelo-Pérez, Lilisbeth
in
Adult
,
Attitude
,
Attitudes
2012
Background
Concordance and Shared Decision-Making (SDM) are considered measures of the quality of care that improves communication, promotes patient participation, creates a positive relationship with the healthcare professional, and results in greater adherence with the treatment plan.
Methods
This study compares the attitudes of 225 mental health professionals (125 psychiatrists and 100 psychiatry registrars) and 449 psychiatric outpatients towards SDM and concordance in medicine taking by using the \"Leeds Attitude toward Concordance Scale\" (LATCon).
Results
The internal consistency of the scale was good in all three samples (Cronbach's α: patients = 0.82, psychiatrists = 0.76, and registrars = 0.82). Patients scored significantly lower (1.96 ± 0.48) than professionals (
P
< .001 in both cases), while no statistically significant differences between psychiatrists (2.32 ± 0.32) and registrars (2.23 ± 0.35) were registered; the three groups showed a positive attitude towards concordance in most indicators. Patients are clearly in favor of being informed and that their views and preferences be taken into account during the decision-making process, although they widely consider that the final decision must be the doctor's responsibility. Among mental health professionals, the broader experience provides a greater conviction of the importance of the patient's decision about treatment.
Conclusions
We observed a positive attitude towards concordance in the field of psychotropic drugs prescription both in professionals and among patients, but further studies are needed to address the extent to which this apparently accepted model is reflected in the daily practice of mental health professionals.
Journal Article
Sociodemographic and clinical predictors of compliance with antidepressants for depressive disorders: systematic review of observational studies
by
De las Cuevas
,
Perez-Ramos
,
Perestelo-Perez
in
adherence
,
Antidepressants
,
Care and treatment
2013
The literature shows that compliance with antidepressant treatment is unsatisfactory. Several personal and disease-related variables have been shown to be related to compliance behavior. The objective of this study was to review the literature about sociodemographic and clinical predictors of compliance in patients with depressive disorders.
The Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, PsycInfo, and Cinahl databases were searched until May 2012. Studies that analyzed sociodemographic and clinical predictors or correlates of compliance in patients with depressive disorder were included. A quantitative synthesis was not performed because of the heterogeneity and availability of the data reported. For similar reasons, the results were not classified according to the different phases of treatment. The search was limited to studies published in English and Spanish.
Thirty-two studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The most consistent associations with compliance were found for age (older patients showed more compliance) and race (white patients were more likely to adhere to treatment than minority ethnic groups). Few studies assessed clinical factors, and the most plausible predictors of compliance were certain comorbidities and substance abuse. Severity of depression did not play an important role in predicting compliance.
The impact of the variables studied on compliance behavior appeared to be inconsistent. Identifying potential predictors of compliance with antidepressant treatment is important, both for the routine practice of the mental health professional and for refining interventions to enhance adherence and target them to specific populations at risk of noncompliance.
Journal Article
Response to Letter to Editor
by
García-Perez, Lidia
,
Brito-García, Noé
,
Serrano-Aguilar, Pedro
in
Cost-Benefit Analysis
,
Failed Back Surgery Syndrome
,
Humans
2020
Journal Article