4.6 Article

Adherence to prophylaxis and bleeding outcome in haemophilia: a multicentre study

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF HAEMATOLOGY
卷 174, 期 3, 页码 454-460

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bjh.14072

关键词

adherence; prophylaxis; chronic; hemophilia; von Willebrand

资金

  1. Baxter Pharmaceutics
  2. Pfizer
  3. Baxter
  4. Bayer Schering Pharma
  5. CSL Behring
  6. Novo Nordisk
  7. Novartis
  8. Wyeth/Pfizer
  9. Biotest

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Prevention of bleeding and joint damage in severe haemophilia is dependent on adherence to prophylactic replacement therapy. The aim of this study was to assess adherence to prophylaxis, including associations with age, bleeding and clotting factor consumption (CFC). In three Dutch haemophilia centres, semi-structured interviews about adherence to prophylaxis in the previous 2weeks were conducted with patients or parents of a child with haemophilia. Patients were classified, according to pre-specified definitions, as adherent, sub-optimally adherent or non-adherent based on missing, timing, and dose of infusions. Association of annual bleeding rates, mean CFC, person performing the infusion (parents verus patients) with adherence categories were analysed. Overall, 241 patients with haemophilia using prophylaxis were studied. Parents were more adherent (66%; n=48/73) than patients (43%; n=72/168). Sub-optimal adherence occurred in 29% of parents and 37% of patients and was characterized by changes in timing of infusion (mostly from morning to evening), while missing <6% of infusions. Non-adherence occurred less often: in 5% of parents and 20% of patients. Reduced adherence was associated with lower CFC, but not with joint bleeding. In conclusion, non-adherence in haemophilia was relatively rare, yet 1/3 of patients struggled to administer prophylaxis at the appropriate time of day.

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

4.6
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