Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Modified-release dosage is a mechanism that (in contrast to immediate-release dosage) delivers a drug with a delay after its administration (delayed-release dosage) or for a prolonged period of time (extended-release [ER, XR, XL] dosage) or to a specific target in the body (targeted-release dosage). [1]
Clinical peer review, also known as medical peer review is the process by which health care professionals, including those in nursing and pharmacy, evaluate each other's clinical performance. [1] [2] A discipline-specific process may be referenced accordingly (e.g., physician peer review, nursing peer review).
The patient-reported perspective can be an important asset in gaining treatment or drug approval. [1] [2] There is no incentive for patients to report their outcome data other than to "pay it forward" to the community and help the health industry prevent unnecessary suffering in other patients. [citation needed]
Extended-release (or slow-release) formulations of morphine are those whose effect last substantially longer than bare morphine, availing for, e.g., one administration per day. Conversion between extended-release and immediate-release (or "regular") morphine is easier than conversion to or from an equianalgesic dose of another opioid with ...
Osmotic release systems have a number of major advantages over other controlled-release mechanisms. They are significantly less affected by factors such as pH, food intake, GI motility, and differing intestinal environments. Using an osmotic pump to deliver drugs has additional inherent advantages regarding control over drug delivery rates.
A review of systems (ROS), also called a systems enquiry or systems review, is a technique used by healthcare providers for eliciting a medical history from a patient. It is often structured as a component of an admission note covering the organ systems, with a focus upon the subjective symptoms perceived by the patient (as opposed to the objective signs perceived by the clinician).
Response review For trials where the response rate is the primary endpoint it is strongly recommended that all responses be reviewed by an expert(s) independent of the study at the study's completion. Simultaneous review of the patients’ files and radiological images is the best approach. Reporting of results
Later reviews in the late 90s and early 2000s noted that this approach of "hit hard, hit early" ran significant risks of increasing side effects and development of multidrug resistance, and this approach was largely abandoned. The only consensus was on treating patients with advanced immunosuppression (CD4 counts less than 350/μL). [29]