小川 ゆかり

学生にとって充実した質の高い実習を行うためには、学生が実習を通じて如何に成長できたと感じたか、すなわち実習をどの程度有意義と感じたかが重要と考えられる。今回、有意義度に影響する因子を明らかにするため、2012〜2017年度に実務実習を受けた学生830名に対して実習終了直後に行ったアンケートの回答を分析した。結果、有意義度に大きな影響を与える因子は、実習中の患者とのコミュニケーションの頻度と、指導薬剤師の実習生への対応(準備・熱心さ・質問のしやすさ)であると考えられた。

リハビリテーション病棟における高齢入院患者の薬剤数に影響を与える因子について検討した。回復期リハビリテーション病棟へ入院した124例(男性57名、女性67名、81±8歳)を調査対象とした。入院時および退院時の処方内容を基に、薬効群別に服用人数を調査した。退院時内服薬数の中央値は6剤で、退院時に多剤併用(7剤以上の内服薬処方)患者は51例であった。入院時から退院時迄の内服薬数の変化について薬効群別に検討すると、解熱鎮痛消炎剤が服用者数および合計薬剤数ともに有意に減少した。消化性潰瘍剤および高脂血症用剤、痛風治療剤、抗パーキンソン剤を含むその他の薬剤は、服用者数に有意差はなかったものの合剤薬剤数が退院時迄に有意に減少した。血圧降下剤はアンジオテンシン変換酵素阻害薬あるいはアンジオテンシンII受容体拮抗薬、およびCa拮抗薬の退院時処方率が各約40%程度と高かった。重回帰分析で有意となった説明因子は入院時内服薬数、心臓疾患の有無、高血圧症の有無の3因子であった。

BACKGROUND: There is a concern as to whether long-term administration of immunosuppressants in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) would increase the risk of malignancy. OBJECTIVE: To compare the risks of developing malignancy between patients with 1131) treated with immunosuppressive agents and patients with IBD not receiving these agents. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted, and a meta-analysis was performed on data retrieved from cohort studies that followed patients with IBD who received immunosuppressive agents for more than, a year and documented the incidence of newly developed malignancy. An electronic search was conducted using MEDLINE (1966-September 2006), the Cochrane Library (issue 3, 2006), and Japana Centra Revuo Medicina (1981-September 2006). Medical subject headings used in the searches were azathioprine 6-mercaptopurine, cyclosporine, methotrexate, tacrolimus, inflammatory bowel disease, and, neoplasms. We imposed no language limitation in the searches. Additionally, a manual search of reference listings from all articles retrieved from the electronic databases was performed. Using data obtained from control groups or population-based studies, the incidence of newly developed malignancy in patients with IBD treated with immunosuppressive agents was compared with, that of patients with IBD who were not receiving immunosuppressive agents. Statistical analysis for the change in risk of developing malignancy was performed using the weighted mean difference (WMD) normalized to per person-year and its 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: Nine cohort studies met the inclusion criteria for this meta-analysis. Analysis of these studies showed no discernible difference (WMD -0.3 x 10(-3)/person-year; 95% CI -1.2 x 10(-3) to 0.7 x 10(-3)) in the incidence of any kind, of malignancy in patients with IBD who received immunosuppressants compared with those who did not receive immunosuppressants. No significant difference in WMD was observed when the data from,patients with either Crohn's disease. (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC) were analyzed separately CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the administration of immunosuppressive agents in patients with either CD or UC probably does not confer a significantly increased risk of malignancy compared with patients with IBD who are not receiving these agents.

To clarify the effectiveness and safety of azathioprine (AZA) and 6-mercaptopurine (6MP) in the induction and maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis (UC) by using a systematic review of published studies. Studies were searched for from within the 1966 to March 2003 MEDLINE database, Cochrane Library 2003 issue 1, and the 1981 to March 2003 Japana Centra Revuo Medicina database. References from published studies and reviews were also obtained. Randomized, placebo-controlled trials of oral AZA or 6MP therapy in adult patients with active or quiescent UC were included. Ratios for the induction and maintenance of remission, the steroid-sparing effect, and the incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were compared and evaluated between the two study arms and expressed by the odds ratio (OR) specific for the individual studies and the meta-analytic summary for the OR. We could find no randomized controlled trial for 6MP therapy. However, four clinical trials for AZA therapy were included in this meta-analysis. For the induction of remission, the pooled OR of the response to AZA therapy compared with placebo in active UC was 1.45 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) : 0.68 to 3.08). For the maintenance of remission, the pooled OR for AZA therapy was 2.26 (95% CI: 1.27 to 4.01). The number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one recurrence was 6 patients. The pooled OR for AZA therapy's ADRs compared with placebo was 2.11 (95% CI: 0.92 to 4.84). From the viewpoint of effectiveness and safety, this meta-analysis suggests that AZA might be useful in the maintenance of remission in UC patients.