Ophthalmology · 1999
The impact of the optic neuritis treatment trial on the practices of ophthalmologists and neurologists.
СтатьяПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Trobe J D, Sieving P C, Guire K E, Fendrick A M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the Optic Neuritis Treatment Trial (ONTT) results have altered the practice patterns of ophthalmologists and neurologists.
DESIGN: Mail survey.
PARTICIPANTS: A random sample of 987 ophthalmologists and 900 neurologists practicing in the United States were mailed a questionnaire that inquired into decision-making with regard to management of optic neuritis before and after the publication of the ONTT results.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Responses received from 202 ophthalmologists and 244 neurologists, a response rate of 47%.
RESULTS: Following the ONTT reports, nearly all ophthalmologists and neurologists have reduced their use of oral prednisone alone, substituting a regimen that includes intravenous methylprednisolone. A large proportion of practitioners in both specialties mistakenly believe that intravenous methylprednisolone treatment improves final visual outcome. Only 7% of neurologists and 36% of ophthalmologists (P = 0.0001) are adhering to the ONTT suggestion to use magnetic resonance imaging as a basis for initiating treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: The ONTT has led to a dramatic reduction in the use of oral prednisone without a preceding course of intravenous methylprednisolone in the treatment of acute optic neuritis. Ophthalmologists and neurologists have changed some of their practices without fully understanding the results of the ONTT.
DESIGN: Mail survey.
PARTICIPANTS: A random sample of 987 ophthalmologists and 900 neurologists practicing in the United States were mailed a questionnaire that inquired into decision-making with regard to management of optic neuritis before and after the publication of the ONTT results.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Responses received from 202 ophthalmologists and 244 neurologists, a response rate of 47%.
RESULTS: Following the ONTT reports, nearly all ophthalmologists and neurologists have reduced their use of oral prednisone alone, substituting a regimen that includes intravenous methylprednisolone. A large proportion of practitioners in both specialties mistakenly believe that intravenous methylprednisolone treatment improves final visual outcome. Only 7% of neurologists and 36% of ophthalmologists (P = 0.0001) are adhering to the ONTT suggestion to use magnetic resonance imaging as a basis for initiating treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: The ONTT has led to a dramatic reduction in the use of oral prednisone without a preceding course of intravenous methylprednisolone in the treatment of acute optic neuritis. Ophthalmologists and neurologists have changed some of their practices without fully understanding the results of the ONTT.