Maranatha, Daniel
Department Of Pulmonology And Respiratory Medicine, Faculty Of Medicine, University Of Airlangga, General Hospital Dr. Soetomo, Jl. Mayjen Prof. Dr. Moetopo No. 6-8 Surabaya

Published : 22 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 22 Documents
Search

Terapi Montelukast pada Asma Alfian Nur Rosyid; Arief Bakhtiar; Daniel Maranatha; Muhammad Amin
MEDICINUS Vol. 37 No. 1 (2024): MEDICINUS
Publisher : PT Dexa Medica

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56951/51tkjy13

Abstract

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory respiratory condition caused by various inflammatory mediators, including those from the arachidonic acid pathway, which serves as a precursor for leukotrienes and prostaglandins. Leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) have been approved since 1998 as a treatment for asthma. Montelukast is one of the LTRAs that is useful for asthma control, including cases that accompanied by allergic rhinitis. A daily dose of 5-10 mg is recommended for persistent asthma as the preferred controller. LTRAs are not recommended for acute asthma exacerbation due to their relatively slow onset, but they are beneficial in preventing exacerbations. They are also indicated for exercise-induced asthma (EIA), and can be taken 2 hours prior to exercise. Montelukast can be administered as monotherapy or added to LABA-ICS therapy. It is suitable for adults, children, and infants over 1 year of age, preferably taken at night to prevent symptoms in the early morning. Possible side effects include respiratory tract infections, abdominal pain, diarrhea, and neuropsychiatric disorders. Montelukast is considered safe for use during pregnancy and breastfeeding. Physicians should provide comprehensive education for patients regarding medication compliance and the potential risks of side effects. Regular daily use of montelukast is beneficial in preventing acute exacerbations in asthma patients.
Cost-Effectiveness of Length of Stay of Intravenous Aminophylline and Nebulized Salbutamol in Asthma Exacerbations Lorensia, Amelia; Ikawati, Zullies; Andayani, Tri Murti; Maranatha, Daniel
Journal of Tropical Pharmacy and Chemistry Vol. 8 No. 1 (2024): J. Trop. Pharm. Chem.
Publisher : Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Mulawarman, Samarinda, Indonesia, 75117, Gedung Administrasi Fakultas Farmasi Jl. Penajam, Kampus UNMUL Gunung Kelua, Samarinda, Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25026/jtpc.v8i1.435

Abstract

Asthma is a heterogeneous disease which is also one of the major health problems in the world. Uncontrolled asthma symptoms will exacerbate asthma, which is the biggest cause of the patient into the ER. Salbutamol is a bronchodilator that belonged to the short-acting beta-2 agonist (SABA), which is an obligatory choice in the management of asthma exacerbations. Unlike the aminophylline group in Indonesia which is still often used widely and rarely appear in the side effects of its use. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of nebulized salbutamol versus intravenous aminophylline for reduction in asthma symptoms, improvement in lung function, and a long hospital stay. The study involved 57 adults asthma exacerbation patients without complication who received treatment in the ER, were studied by using quasi-experimental methods in this study cost-effectiveness analysis to compare intravenous aminophylline (n:27) versus nebulized salbutamol (n:30) therapy to determine the most cost-effective. Intravenous aminophylline therapy was more cost-effective than nebulized salbutamol in reducing the symptoms of asthma and PEF value improvement. Clinical outcome of the length of hospital stay outcome both had the same effective, and cost analysis results showed intravenous aminophylline (US$5.38) cheaper than nebulized salbutamol (US$5.71). intravenous aminophylline was more effective in reducing asthma symptoms than nebulized salbutamol (Pvalue=0.001). Meanwhile, the average decrease in lung function intravenous aminophylline than nebulized salbutamol, although not significantly different (Pvalue=0.507). Aminophylline therapy was more cost-effective in reducing asthma symptoms and improvement in lung function compared nebulized salbutamol in exacerbations asthma patients. But cost-effectiveness researchers need to measure substance abuse outcomes in terms of Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY), as this will make their findings more relevant to the development of treatment policy.