TY  - JOUR
T1  - UniZeit - Studieren an der Uni Würzburg 2010/11
N2  - UniZeit - Schülerzeitung der Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg 2010/11 Inhaltsübersicht: - Sprache, Kultur, Medien - Ingenieurwissenschaften - Mathe und Informatik - Naturwissenschaften - Lebenswissenschaften - Erziehung und Gesellschaft - Recht und Wirtschaft - Nach der Vorlesung - Studienangebot - Weitere Informationen
KW  - Würzburg
KW  - Universität
KW  - Studium
KW  - Schüler
KW  - Studienangebot
KW  - Studieren
KW  - university
KW  - study
Y1  - 2010
U6  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-51766
ER  - 
TY  - THES
A1  - Brasche, Juliane
T1  - Patienten- und Anwenderfreundlichkeit des Safeguard-Druckverbandes im Vergleich zum ET-Druckverband (Nürnberger Ufo) zur Blutstillung nach transfemoralem Zugang : Studie
T1  - Patient comfort and user convenience of pressure bandaging after femoral catheterization: A comparison between Safeguard and ET (Nürnberger UFO) pressure dressing
N2  - Ziel der Arbeit war der Vergleich von zwei Druckverbandsystemen in Hinblick auf effektive Blutstillung, Patienten- sowie Anwenderfreundlichkeit. Dazu wurden 117 Patienten, die sich zwischen März 2011 und Dezember 2012 im Klinikum Fulda einer diagnostischen Angiographie unterzogen, in einer randomisierten offenen klinisch kontrollierten Studie untersucht. 
Die in der Studie untersuchten Druckverbände stellten sich als gleich sicher und effektiv bei der Blutstillung heraus. Es traten in der gesamten Studienpopulation keine schwergradigen Komplikationen auf. Der Safeguard-Druckverband lässt sich leichter und schneller anbringen und entfernen, als der mit elastischen Binden fixierte ET-Druckverband. Er wurde zudem durch die Patienten besser toleriert und als bequemer empfunden. 
Zusammenfassend ist der Safeguard-Druckverband nach unkomplizierten diagnostischen Angiographien ebenso sicher, wie der UFO-Druckverband und zeigte darüber hinaus eine höhere Anwender- und Patientenfreundlichkeit.
N2  - The aim of this study was the comparison of two types of pressure bandaging with regard to effective hemostasis, patient comfort and user convenience. One hundred and seventeen patients undergoing diagnostic angiography utilizing femoral artery access were examined in a  randomized, single center, open, controlled, clinical trial. 
Both pressure bandages were equally safe and effective in achieving hemostasis. No major complications were observed. The Safeguard pressure dressing was significantly easier and faster to place and to remove than the ET pressure dressing with elastic bandages. Patients also evaluated the Safeguard pressure dressing as significantly more comfortable and tolerable. The study demonstrates that the Safeguard pressure dressing is equally safe as the ET pressure dressing after uncomplicated diagnostic angiography and results in improved patient comfort and user convenience.
KW  - Druckverband
KW  - Blutstillung
KW  - Studie
KW  - Studie
KW  - study
KW  - Vergleich
KW  - Druckverbände
KW  - Patientenfreundlichkeit
KW  - Anwenderfreundlichkeit
KW  - comparison
KW  - pressure bandages
KW  - patient comfort
KW  - user convenience
Y1  - 2019
U6  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-180921
ER  - 
TY  - JOUR
A1  - Aster, H-C
A1  - Evdokimov, D.
A1  - Braun, A.
A1  - Üçeyler, N.
A1  - Sommer, C.
T1  - Analgesic Medication in Fibromyalgia Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study
JF  - Pain Research and Management
N2  - There is no approved drug for fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) in Europe. In the German S3 guideline, amitriptyline, duloxetine, and pregabalin are recommended for temporary use. The aim of this study was to cross-sectionally investigate the current practice of medication in FMS patients in Germany. We systematically interviewed 156 patients with FMS, while they were participating in a larger study. The patients had been stratified into subgroups with and without a decrease in intraepidermal nerve fiber density. The drugs most commonly used to treat FMS pain were nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (41.0% of all patients), metamizole (22.4%), and amitriptyline (12.8%). The most frequent analgesic treatment regimen was “on demand” (53.9%), during pain attacks, while 35.1% of the drugs were administered daily and the remaining in other regimens. Median pain relief as self-rated by the patients on a numerical rating scale (0–10) was 2 points for NSAIDS, 2 for metamizole, and 1 for amitriptyline. Drugs that were discontinued due to lack of efficacy rather than side effects were acetaminophen, flupirtine, and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Reduction in pain severity was best achieved by NSAIDs and metamizole. Our hypothesis that a decrease in intraepidermal nerve fiber density might represent a neuropathic subtype of FMS, which would be associated with better effectiveness of drugs targeting neuropathic pain, could not be confirmed in this cohort. Many FMS patients take “on-demand” medication that is not in line with current guidelines. More randomized clinical trials are needed to assess drug effects in FMS subgroups.
KW  - Fibromyalgia
KW  - analgesic medication
KW  - study
Y1  - 2022
U6  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-300578
VL  - 2022
ER  -