Biomedical subjects

Susan J Rogers

Publications and source records attributed to Susan J Rogers.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2004

How do drug users define their progress in harm reduction programs? Qualitative research to develop user-generated outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Harm reduction is a relatively new and controversial model for treating drug users, with little formal research on its operation and effectiveness. In order to advance the study of harm reduction programs and our understanding of how drug users define their progress, qualitative research was conducted to develop outcomes of harm reduction programming that are culturally relevant, incremental, (i.e., capable of measuring change), and hierarchical (i.e., capable of showing how clients improve over time). METHODS: The study used nominal group technique (NGT) to develop the outcomes (phase 1) and focus group interviews to help validate the findings (phase 2). Study participants were recruited from a large harm-reduction program in New York City and involved approximately 120 clients in 10 groups in phase 1 and 120 clients in 10 focus groups in phase 2. RESULTS: Outcomes of 10 life areas important to drug users were developed that included between 10 to 15 incremental measures per outcome. The outcomes included ways of 1) making money; 2) getting something good to eat; 3) being housed/homeless; 4) relating to families; 5) getting needed programs/benefits/services; 6) handling health problems; 7) handling negative emotions; 8) handling legal problems; 9) improving oneself; and 10) handling drug-use problems. Findings also provided insights into drug users' lives and values, as well as a window into understanding how this population envisions a better quality of life. Results challenged traditional ways of measuring drug users based solely on quantity used and frequency of use. They suggest that more appropriate measures are based on the extent to which drug users organize their lives around drug use and how much drug use is integrated into their lives and negatively impacts other aspects of their lives. CONCLUSIONS: Harm reduction and other programs serving active drug users and other marginalized people should not rely on institutionalized, provider-defined solutions to problems in living faced by their clients.

Journal Article↗

PubMed2004

Does harm reduction programming make a difference in the lives of highly marginalized, at-risk drug users?

Harm reduction is a controversial model for treating drug users, with little formal research available on its operation and effectiveness. In order to advance the field, we first conducted participatory research of harm reduction with 120 clients using nominal-group technique to develop culturally relevant outcomes to measure progress. Second, we conducted focus group interviews with a different group of clients to help validate the outcomes. Third, we used the outcomes in an evaluation of the largest harm reduction program in New York City, which involved a representative sample of 261 and entailed baseline, post, and six follow-up assessments. The participatory research resulted in outcomes of 10 life areas important to drug users. Evaluation results showed that program participants made positive improvements across most outcomes, with the most substantial progress made in how clients dealt with drug-use problems. Along with their participation in the program, progress in some outcomes was also associated with clients' type of drug use (i.e., stable vs. chaotic), where more stable drug use was associated with better ways of making an income and types of housing. Surprisingly, progress was not associated with the kinds or numbers of services received or the length of time in the program. This was attributed to the service delivery model of harm reduction, in which clients are less inclined to associate their success with a single staff person or with a single service or intervention received than with the program as a whole.

Journal Article↗

PubMed2004

Donepezil: a clinical review of current and emerging indications.

This article reviews the piperidine derivative, donepezil hydrochloride (E2020, Aricept), a reversible central acetylcholinesterase inhibitor currently approved for treatment of mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease. Donepezil is well absorbed orally, unaffected by food or by time of administration; it reaches therapeutic levels in doses of 5-10 mg/day and peak plasma concentrations are obtained 3-4 h after oral administration. A single bedtime dose is recommended due to the long elimination half-life of the drug (70 h). Donepezil does not cause liver toxicity or significant drug interactions and is relatively well-tolerated. Initial side effects include nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, insomnia, muscle cramps, fatigue, anorexia and syncope. Caution is advised in patients with bradycardia. Long-term use of donepezil in AD has been found to delay nursing-home placement and to result in caregiver respite. Donepezil also slows deterioration of cognition and global function in patients with moderate-to-severe AD, with improvement of abnormal behaviours. In addition to AD, donepezil demonstrates significant improvement in cognition, global function and activities of daily living in comparison with placebo-treated patients with vascular dementia and has potential therapeutic benefit for other neurological conditions.

Alzheimer Disease↗

PubMed2004

Myelopathy in Sjögren's syndrome: role of nonsteroidal immunosuppressants.

The incidence, aetiology and optimal treatment of CNS Sjögren's syndrome, including myelopathy associated with Sjögren's syndrome, are unknown at the present time. CNS Sjögren's syndrome is thought to be the result of an autoimmune vasculitis, but other mechanisms may be important. Spinal cord involvement in CNS Sjögren's syndrome may present as acute transverse myelitis, progressive myelitis, Brown-Séquard syndrome, neurogenic bladder or lower motor neurone disease. Optic nerve pathology frequently accompanies spinal cord involvement. Acute transverse myelitis has a high mortality and appears to be the most frequent form of spinal cord involvement in CNS Sjögren's syndrome, occurring in about 1% of all patients with Sjögren's syndrome. The patient's symptomatology and clinical course dictate current treatment of myelopathy. First-line treatment appears to be corticosteroid therapy. However, when the patient's condition fails to improve or deteriorates a nonsteroidal immunosuppressant agent should be considered. Agents used to treat myelopathy include cyclophosphamide, chlorambucil, azathioprine, ciclosporin (cyclosporin) and methotrexate in conjunction with corticosteroids. Most data exist as anecdotal reports. The agent of first choice, based on adverse effect profile and efficacy, appears to be cyclophosphamide given intravenously in pulse doses. Other nonsteroidal immunosuppressant agents should be considered, especially when lack of efficacy of, or intolerance to, cyclophosphamide exists in the patient's history. Glandular and other extraglandular symptoms may benefit concomitantly from the immunosuppressant treatment. In addition, when acute relief of symptomatology is needed, the patient may benefit from a trial of plasmapheresis or intravenous immunoglobulin. Infliximab (anti-tumour necrosis factor-alpha antibodies) has not been used as a treatment modality for myelopathy, but has shown some usefulness in the treatment of extraglandular symptoms, as well as peripheral nervous system manifestations of Sjögren's syndrome. This agent might be considered when all other treatment modalities have failed given the presumed importance of tumour necrosis factor in the pathogenesis of Sjögren's syndrome.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗

PubMed2002

Reaching and identifying the STD/HIV risk of sex workers in Beijing.

China's HIV cases are growing by more than 30% annually. Few researchers have been able to reach sex workers and examine their risk behavior patterns. Key informants in illegal prostitution connected with owners of establishments in Beijing to recruit the involvement of sex workers. A total of 69 were surveyed about their background and risk behaviors in spring, 2000 in four venues; hair salons, bathing centers, karaoke bars, and the street. The women were mostly young (in their 20s), of low socioeconomic status, and from small towns and villages. They worked about 3 to 4 days a week, averaged one to two clients per day, made the equivalent of about U.S. $135 a week, and averaged about 3 months at any one establishment. They lacked accurate knowledge of STDs/HIV, and although 61% reported consistent condom usage 93% associated usage with prevention of pregnancy and 72% perceived a low risk of HIV infection. Nearly all (98%) felt condoms were affordable, yet 37% reported they were not accessible; 74% had obtained a medical exam in the last year, but 29% were examined when sick; only 10% received prevention information during medical visits, and 55% did not know where to go for HIV testing. Based on venue, stratification among sex workers existed, impacting their risk. Sex workers are at high risk of HIV infection/transmission, especially as the virus becomes more established in Beijing. Although risk factors were consistent with those of sex workers in other countries, the variation by venue, the low perceived vulnerability to HIV, the highly illegal nature of prostitution, and high mobility of sex workers in Beijing calls for a tailored intervention approach. Prevention messages/strategies should be responsive to the differing background, knowledge,

AIDS Serodiagnosis↗