Cargando…

Treatment eligibility in Alaska Native and American Indian persons with hepatitis C virus infection

OBJECTIVES: Treatment with pegylated interferon and ribavirin may prevent progression of liver disease among patients with chronic hepatitis C virus infection (HCV). Treatment initiation is based on published clinical eligibility criteria, patients’ willingness to undergo treatment and likelihood of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Livingston, Stephen E., Townshend-Bulson, Lisa J., Bruden, Dana L., McMahon, Brian J., Homan, Chriss E., Gove, James E., Deubner, Heike, Bruce, Michael G., Robinson, Renee F., Gretch, David R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Co-Action Publishing 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3417585/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22564468
http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/ijch.v71i0.18445
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: Treatment with pegylated interferon and ribavirin may prevent progression of liver disease among patients with chronic hepatitis C virus infection (HCV). Treatment initiation is based on published clinical eligibility criteria, patients’ willingness to undergo treatment and likelihood of success. We examined treatment eligibility in a cohort of Alaska Native and American Indian persons with chronic HCV infection. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Medical records of all treatment naïve HCV RNA positive patients given an appointment by hepatology specialty clinic staff in 2003 and 2007 were evaluated by a hepatology provider to investigate documented reasons for treatment deferral. RESULTS: Treatment was initiated in 4 of 94 patients (4%) in 2003 and 14 of 146 patients (10%) in 2007. Major reasons for treatment deferral in 2003 versus 2007 included inconsistent appointment attendance (36% of deferrals vs. 18%), active substance abuse (17% vs. 22%), patient decision (17% vs. 27%), liver biopsy without fibrosis or normal ALT (8% vs. 3%), uncontrolled psychiatric condition (7% vs. 7%) and concurrent medical condition (6% vs. 9%). There was significant improvement in proportion of appointments attended in 2007 versus 2003 (76% vs. 67%, p =0.04) and the percentage of patients attending at least 1 appointment (84% vs. 66%, p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Multiple reasons for treatment deferral were documented. Despite a significant improvement in hepatology clinic attendance and an increase in the number of patients started on treatment in 2007 compared to 2003, the overall percentage of those treated remained low.