{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02864417568427753, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008274984086569064, 'mean_word_length': 5.213438735177865, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Home intravenous therapy in cystic fibrosis: a prospective randomized trial examining clinical, quality of life and cost aspects.

In this study, we set out to determine if home intravenous (i.v.) antibiotic therapy in adult patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) is a feasible, effective and less costly alternative to hospitalization, and to assess the impact of home therapy on quality of life. The study was a prospective, randomized, two-factor mixed design involving adults presenting with respiratory exacerbations of CF. Patients were randomized such that they were discharged home after 2-4 days, or remained in hospital. Seventeen patients had 31 admissions (13 home and 18 hospital). Following 10 days of therapy, there were no significant differences between home or hospital arms with respect to body weight, 12 minute walking distance, sputum weight, pulse oximetry, or improvement in lung function (forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), or forced vital capacity (FVC)). Patients who remained in hospital were less fatigued and noted a greater degree of mastery. Patients discharged early noted less disruption to their family life, personal life and sleeping pattern. The total cost for the home therapy arm was approximately half that of the hospital therapy arm. Home intravenous antibiotic therapy in patients with cystic fibrosis was a feasible, cost-effective alternative to receiving therapy in hospital. Although there was no clinical compromise associated with home therapy, there were advantages and disadvantages in terms of quality of life.