ライフサイエンスコーパス: supportive therapy

1 nted by more appropriate terminology, 'renal supportive therapy'.

2 improve outcomes of children requiring this supportive therapy.

3 th had specific effects and were superior to supportive therapy.

4 standard cognitive therapy were superior to supportive therapy.

5 l manualized CBT or short-term psychodynamic supportive therapy.

6 s of severity of ADHD symptoms compared with supportive therapy.

7 4) compared with those who received enriched supportive therapy.

8 placebo for 7 days, in addition to standard supportive therapy.

9 nary hemorrhage and may be a life-sustaining supportive therapy.

10 0 mg/m(2)/d for 10 days is tolerable without supportive therapy.

11 behavioral family therapy, and nondirective supportive therapy.

12 nfants and may be reversible with aggressive supportive therapy.

13 than that of patients receiving personal or supportive therapy.

14 decompensations than did those who received supportive therapy.

15 anxious than patients who received family or supportive therapy.

16 py improves long-term outcomes compared with supportive therapy.

17 Mortality-2 (PIM2) mortality risk, and organ supportive therapies.

18 groups stratified by age and number of organ-supportive therapies.

19 y as an adjuvant for other pharmacologic and supportive therapies.

20 nterpersonal psychotherapy, mindfulness, and supportive therapy (-0.82, -1.41 to -0.24).

21 te goal setting to improve rates of DFEs, or supportive therapy, a control condition.

22 FNC (Optiflow, Fisher & Paykel, New Zealand) supportive therapy according to the attending physician'

23 one and chlorambucil, 37 ciclosporin, and 38 supportive therapy alone.

24 Enriched supportive therapy also demonstrated statistically signi

25 eekly sessions of problem-solving therapy or supportive therapy and assessed at weeks 3, 6, 9, and 12

26 The patient was treated with supportive therapy and discontinuation of disease-modify

27 n = 61) or a control treatment consisting of supportive therapy and education (n = 65).

28 nsive behavioral intervention, compared with supportive therapy and education, resulted in greater im

29 She was treated with supportive therapy and experimental antiviral drug GS-57

30 The TAU consisted of biweekly individual supportive therapy and medication management.

31 Advances in supportive therapy and technology have improved the safe

32 measures; no difference was observed between supportive therapy and waiting list on quality of life.

33 y discontinuing dopamine blockers, providing supportive therapy, and possibly administering medicatio

34 iprofloxacin, rifampin, and clindamycin, and supportive therapy appears to have slowed the progressio

35 All received supportive therapy appropriate for patients with acute l

36 Individualization of management and adequate supportive therapy are important to obtain the best resp

37 Therapeutic naps, medications, and supportive therapy are recommended for narcolepsy and hy

38 uency of P. gingivalis following initial and supportive therapy compared to conventional treatment.

39 om patient and caregiver) as well as data on supportive therapy, concurrent pharmacotherapy, stimulat

40 The supportive therapy condition controlled for nonspecific

41 d MERS-CoV infection is limited to providing supportive therapy consistent with any serious lung dise

42 ontinuing all serotonergic agents, providing supportive therapy, controlling agitation with benzodiaz

43 and pigs, highlighting their potential as a supportive therapy during and after Helicobacter eradica

44 ts are also generally receiving some form of supportive therapy (e.g., fluids, vasopressors, ventilat

45 amidronate and other bisphosponates, used as supportive therapy, effectively reduce the incidence of

46 f CRRT less traumatic, and expand its use as supportive therapy even when complete renal replacement

47 placebo and either coping skills therapy or supportive therapy for 12 weeks were assessed at a 6-mon

48 The role of these agents in supportive therapy for children with cancer is still und

49 Supportive therapy for cognitively impaired patients foc

50 ed one additional response or remission over supportive therapy for every 4.4-5.6 patients by the end

51 Enriched supportive therapy fosters illness management through ap

52 smal cold hemoglobinuria requires aggressive supportive therapy, generally supplemented by corticoste

53 %) obtained a DFE compared with those in the supportive therapy group (34.1%) by the 6-month follow-u

54 rate, and a greater remission rate than the supportive therapy group (response rates at week 9: 47.1

55 y to obtain a DFE compared with those in the supportive therapy group (risk ratio = 2.58; 95% CI, 1.9

56 standard cognitive therapy group, 43% of the supportive therapy group, and 7% of the waiting list gro

57 ted improvement compared with members of the supportive therapy group.

58 Patients receiving supportive therapy had a median survival of 6 weeks.

59 ith birth asphyxia, the emphasis has been on supportive therapy; however, there is increasing evidenc

60 l therapy was more effective than family and supportive therapies in preventing psychotic and affecti

61 ns developed management guidelines for other supportive therapies in sepsis that would be of practica

62 ns developed management guidelines for other supportive therapies in sepsis that would be of practica

63 y, personal therapy was more successful than supportive therapy in improving work performance and rel

64 e called into question the safety of ESAs as supportive therapy in patients being treated for oncolog

65 ere were also no differences in the need for supportive therapies, including vasopressors, intravenou

66 Concomitant behavioral or supportive therapy increases quit rates and should be en

67 Supportive therapy is a nondirective, psychological trea

68 Enriched supportive therapy is an illness management approach tha

69 Supportive therapy, mainly bisphosphonates to delay prog

70 ntidotes, addition of PCC or aPCC to maximum supportive therapy may be reasonable for patients with s

71 y therapy (SBFT), or individual nondirective supportive therapy (NST).

72 therapy, 3 months of weekly emotion-focused supportive therapy, or a 14-week waiting list condition.

73 symptoms were similar to those of family and supportive therapies, particularly in the first 2 years,

74 investigated over the past several decades, supportive therapies remain the mainstay of treatment.

75 Supportive therapy should be applied vigorously to all p

76 Despite advances in supportive therapy to prevent complications of sickle ce

77 d a prophylactic therapy, rather than just a supportive therapy, to minimize the progression of lung

78 c behavioral family therapy, or nondirective supportive therapy were evaluated for 2 years after the

79 ho received ciclosporin and one who received supportive therapy) were ineligible, so were not include

80 Shock with ETx or LeTx may require differing supportive therapies, whereas toxin antagonists should l

81 Although infection control and supportive therapies will remain the cornerstone of trea

82 All participants received supportive therapy with albumin.

83 Current supportive therapy with corticosteroids results in a mod

84 Supportive therapy, with or without family intervention,