ABSTRACT
Objetivo: Describir el tipo de pacientes que superan la dosis diaria definida (DDD) de fentanilo de liberación inmediata en un área sanitaria.Material y métodos: Estudio observacional, descriptivo, realizado en un área sanitaria de 256.807 habitantes en el que se incluyeron todos los pacientes que superaban la DDD de fentanilo de liberación inmediata en diciembre de 2019.Resultados: Se detectaron 29 pacientes, 58,6% mujeres, con una mediana de edad de 59 (31-87) años, que superaban una media de 3 (1,1-10) veces la DDD de fentanilo de liberación inmediata, en sus distintas presentaciones, siendo la indicación en el 69% de los casos dolor crónico no oncológico (DCNO). La mayoría de los pacientes tomaba benzodiacepinas (79,3%) y el mayor porcentaje de primeras prescripciones de fentanilo de liberación rápida procedía de atención primaria (38%).Conclusiones: En nuestro estudio el uso inadecuado o posible abuso de fentanilo de liberación inmediata se da en mayor proporción en pacientes con DCNO, y en la mayoría de los casos la primera prescripción se realizó en atención primaria. No observamos relación clara con patología psiquiátrica ni otras adicciones. (AU)
Objective: To describe the type of patients that exceed the defined daily dose (DDD) of immediate-release fentanyl in a health area.Material and methods: Observational, descriptive study, carried out in a health area of 256,807 inhabitants, which included all patients who passed the immediate-release fentanyl DDD in December 2019.Results: 29 patients were detected, 58.6% female, with a median age of 59 (31-87) years, who exceeded an average of 3 (1.1-10) times the immediate-release fentanyl DDD, in its different presentations, being the indication in 69% of cases chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP). The majority of patients took benzodiazepines (79.3%) and the highest percentage of first-prescriptions for inmediate-release fentanyl came from primary care (38%).Conclusions: In our study, the inappropriate use or possible abuse of immediate-release fentanyl occurs in a greater proportion in patients with CNCP, and in most cases the first prescription was made in primary care. We did not observe a clear relationship with psychiatric pathology or other addictions. (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Fentanyl/administration & dosage , Fentanyl/adverse effects , Fentanyl/therapeutic use , Recommended Dietary Allowances , Chronic Pain/therapy , Epidemiology, Descriptive , Drug Liberation , SpainABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the admission of a high number of patients to the ICU, generally due to severe respiratory failure. Since the appearance of the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection, at the end of 2019, in China, a huge number of treatment recommendations for this entity have been published, not always supported by sufficient scientific evidence or with methodological rigor necessary. Thanks to the efforts of different groups of researchers, we currently have the results of clinical trials, and other types of studies, of higher quality. We consider it necessary to create a document that includes recommendations that collect this evidence regarding the diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19, but also aspects that other guidelines have not considered and that we consider essential in the management of critical patients with COVID-19. For this, a drafting committee has been created, made up of members of the SEMICYUC Working Groups more directly related to different specific aspects of the management of these patients (AU)
La pandemia por COVID-19 ha provocado el ingreso de un elevado número de pacientes en UCI, generalmente por insuficiencia respiratoria severa. Desde la aparición de los primeros casos de infección por SARS-CoV-2, a finales de 2019, en China, se ha publicado una cantidad ingente de recomendaciones de tratamiento de esta entidad, no siempre respaldadas por evidencia científica suficiente ni con el rigor metodológico necesario. Gracias al esfuerzo de distintos grupos de investigadores, actualmente disponemos de resultados de ensayos clínicos, y otro tipo de estudios, de mayor calidad. Consideramos necesario realizar un documento que incluya recomendaciones que recojan estas evidencias en cuanto al diagnóstico y el tratamiento de COVID-19, pero también aspectos que otras guías no han contemplado y que consideramos fundamentales en el manejo del paciente crítico con COVID-19. Para ello se ha creado un comité redactor, conformado por miembros de los Grupos de Trabajo de SEMICYUC más directamente relacionados con diferentes aspectos específicos del manejo de estos pacientes (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Pandemics , Intensive Care Units , Clinical Protocols , Critical IllnessABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the admission of a high number of patients to the ICU, generally due to severe respiratory failure. Since the appearance of the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection, at the end of 2019, in China, a huge number of treatment recommendations for this entity have been published, not always supported by sufficient scientific evidence or with methodological rigor necessary. Thanks to the efforts of different groups of researchers, we currently have the results of clinical trials, and other types of studies, of higher quality. We consider it necessary to create a document that includes recommendations that collect this evidence regarding the diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19, but also aspects that other guidelines have not considered and that we consider essential in the management of critical patients with COVID-19. For this, a drafting committee has been created, made up of members of the SEMICYUC Working Groups more directly related to different specific aspects of the management of these patients.
ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the admission of a high number of patients to the ICU, generally due to severe respiratory failure. Since the appearance of the first cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection, at the end of 2019, in China, a huge number of treatment recommendations for this entity have been published, not always supported by sufficient scientific evidence or with methodological rigor necessary. Thanks to the efforts of different groups of researchers, we currently have the results of clinical trials, and other types of studies, of higher quality. We consider it necessary to create a document that includes recommendations that collect this evidence regarding the diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19, but also aspects that other guidelines have not considered and that we consider essential in the management of critical patients with COVID-19. For this, a drafting committee has been created, made up of members of the SEMICYUC Working Groups more directly related to different specific aspects of the management of these patients.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Critical Illness/therapy , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
On March 11, 2020, the Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) as a pandemic. The spread and evolution of the pandemic is overwhelming the healthcare systems of dozens of countries and has led to a myriad of opinion papers, contingency plans, case series and emerging trials. Covering all this literature is complex. Briefly and synthetically, in line with the previous recommendations of the Working Groups, the Spanish Society of Intensive, Critical Medicine and Coronary Units (SEMICYUC) has prepared this series of basic recommendations for patient care in the context of the pandemic.
Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Critical Care/standards , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Societies, Medical , Adult , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Critical Care/methods , Critical Illness/epidemiology , Critical Illness/therapy , Delivery of Health Care/methods , Delivery of Health Care/standards , Disease Management , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain/epidemiologyABSTRACT
La humanización en sanidad surge por la necesidad de acercarnos a una dimensión más holística de la enfermedad. El sufrimiento no solo es exclusivo de los pacientes y las familias, sino que el profesional se encuentra en el centro del proceso de despersonalización. El exceso de tecnificación y la colocación del proceso patológico en ocasiones como único objetivo de actuación, así como la hipertrofia del poder institucional que estamos viviendo en los últimos tiempos, hacen que en ocasiones el propio profesional sanitario sea el primero en demandar un cambio en el abordaje de la dinámica dentro de las instituciones sanitarias. Tras una reflexión inicial, desde el corazón de la medicina más tecnificada, como es la Medicina Intensiva, clásicamente aislada del resto del entorno hospitalario y de las familias, decidimos abordar un proyecto de integración, empatía y acercamiento a los pacientes y familiares de la Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos (UCI) del Hospital Infanta Margarita, en el que se pretendieron implementar herramientas para trabajar en los elementos más importantes de un plan de humanización (las familias, pacientes, profesionales, y nuestra comunidad), potenciando el dar a conocer el trabajo que se realiza en la UCI y que se desarrolló a lo largo de 12 meses, el proyecto: UCI Infanta Margarita, 1 año: 12 meses para 12 compromisos (AU)
Suffering is not only exclusive to patients or their relatives, but also to the health professionals, who feel to be at the center of the depersonalization process. Over-technification and the fact that the disease process is sometimes the only focal point of our activities, together with the ever-increasing influence of institutional power seen in recent times, all cause the health professional to be the first in demanding a change in health institution dynamics. Following initial reflection from one of the most technified medical specialties (Intensive Care Medicine), classically isolated from the rest of the Hospital and from the community, we implemented a project aimed at securing integration and empathy in our approach to patients and their relatives in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of Infanta Margarita Hospital. The project was designed to incorporate tools for working on the most important elements of a humanization plan, i.e., the patients, their relatives, the health professionals and the community, attempting to disclose the work done in the ICU over a period of 12 months. This project is referred to as the Project ICU Infanta Margarita: 1 year: 12 months for 12 commitments (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Intensive Care Units/organization & administration , Intensive Care Units/standards , Humanization of Assistance , Music Therapy/methods , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Delivery of Health Care/standardsABSTRACT
Suffering is not only exclusive to patients or their relatives, but also to the health professionals, who feel to be at the center of the depersonalization process. Over-technification and the fact that the disease process is sometimes the only focal point of our activities, together with the ever-increasing influence of institutional power seen in recent times, all cause the health professional to be the first in demanding a change in health institution dynamics. Following initial reflection from one of the most technified medical specialties (Intensive Care Medicine), classically isolated from the rest of the Hospital and from the community, we implemented a project aimed at securing integration and empathy in our approach to patients and their relatives in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of Infanta Margarita Hospital. The project was designed to incorporate tools for working on the most important elements of a humanization plan, i.e., the patients, their relatives, the health professionals and the community, attempting to disclose the work done in the ICU over a period of 12 months. This project is referred to as the Project ICU Infanta Margarita: 1 year: 12 months for 12 commitments.
Subject(s)
Attitude of Health Personnel , Community-Institutional Relations , Empathy , Holistic Health , Intensive Care Units , Personnel, Hospital/psychology , Professional-Family Relations , Professional-Patient Relations , Social Media , Aftercare , Burnout, Professional/prevention & control , Communication , Confidentiality , Humans , Motivation , Music Therapy , Patients/psychology , Recreation , Relaxation Therapy , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/nursing , Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic/prevention & control , Surveys and Questionnaires , Visitors to PatientsABSTRACT
This prospective study aimed to assess the association between prior functional status and hospital mortality for patients admitted to four intensive care units in Spain between 2006 and 2012. Prior functional status was classified into three groups, using a modification of the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS), including group 1 with no limitations on activities of daily living; group 2 with some limitations but self-sufficient; and group 3 who were dependent on others for their activities of daily living. Of the 1,757 patients considered (mean Simplified Acute Physiology Score [SAPS] predicted mortality 14.8% and hospital mortality 13.7%), group 1 had the lowest observed hospital mortality (8.3%) compared to the SAPS 3 predicted mortality (11.6%). The observed mortality for group 2 (20.6%) and group 3 (27.4%) were both higher than predicted (19.2% and 21.2% respectively; odds ratio [OR] 1.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.38-2.82 for group 2 and OR 2.90, 95% CI 1.78-4.72 for group 3 compared to group 1). Combining prior functional status and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score with SAPS 3 further improved the ability of the SAPS 3 scores in predicting hospital mortality (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.85 [95% CI 0.82-0.88] versus 0.84 [95% CI 0.81-0.87] respectively). In summary, patients with limited functional status prior to ICU admission had a higher risk of observed hospital mortality than predicted. Assessing prior functional status using a relatively simple questionnaire, such as a modified GOS, has the potential to improve the accuracy of existing prognostic models.
Subject(s)
Activities of Daily Living , Critical Illness , Hospital Mortality , Adult , Aged , Cohort Studies , Female , Glasgow Outcome Scale , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate SAPS 3 performance in Spain, assessing discrimination and calibration in a multicenter study. DESIGN: A prospective, multicenter study was carried out. Patients and setting: A prospective cohort study was performed in Spanish hospitals between 2006 and 2011. Measurements and results: A total of 2171 patients were included in the study. The mean age was 61.4 ± 16.09 years, the ICU mortality was 11.6%, and hospital mortality 16.03%. The SAPS 3 score was 46.29 ± 14.34 points, with a probability of death for our geographical area of 18.57%, and 17.97% for the general equation. The differences between observed-to-predicted mortality were analyzed with the Hosmer-Lemeshow test, which yielded H = 31.71 (p < 0.05) for our geographical area and H = 20.05 (p < 0.05) for the general equation. SAPS 3 discrimination with regard to hospital mortality, tested using the area under the ROC curve, was 0.845 (0.821-0.869). CONCLUSION: Our study shows good discrimination of the SAPS 3 system in Spain, but also inadequate calibration, with differences between predicted and observed mortality. There are more similarities with regard to the general equation than with respect to our geographical area equation, and in both cases the SAPS 3 system overestimates mortality. According to our results, Spanish ICU mortality is lower than in other hospitals included in the multicenter study that developed the SAPS 3 system, in patients with similar characteristics and severity of illness
OBJETIVO: Analizar el funcionamiento del sistema SAPS3 en España, evaluando la discriminación y calibración en un estudio multicéntrico. DISEÑO: Estudio prospectivo de cohortes, multicéntrico. Ámbito: Hospitales españoles entre 2006 y 2011. Variables de interés y resultados: Se incluyó en el estudio a un total de 2171 pacientes. La edad media fue 61,4 ± 16,09 años, la mortalidad en UCI fue del 11,6% y la mortalidad hospitalaria 16,03%. El score SAPS 3 fue de 46,29 ± 14,34 puntos, con la probabilidad de morir por la ecuación de nuestra área geográfica 18.57%, y 17.97% para la ecuación general. Las diferencias entre la mortalidad observada y la predicha se analizaron mediante el test de Hosmer-Lemeshow. Este test mostró H = 31,71 (p < 0,05) para nuestra área geográfica y H = 20,05 (p < 0,05) para la ecuación general. La discriminación del SAPS 3 con respecto a la mortalidad hospitalaria, testada mediante el área bajo la curva ROC, fue 0.845 (0,821-0,869). CONCLUSIÓN: Nuestro estudio muestra, en España, una buena discriminación del sistema pronóstico SAPS 3 pero una inadecuada calibración, con diferencias entre la mortalidad predicha y, la observada. Hay más similitudes con respecto a la ecuación general que con la ecuación de nuestra zona geográfica, y en ambos casos, el sistema SAPS 3 sobreestima la mortalidad. De acuerdo con los resultados, la mortalidad en UCI es menor que la de otros hospitales incluidos en el estudio multicéntrico que se utilizaron para desarrollar el sistema SAPS 3, en pacientes con similares características y severidad de la enfermedad
Subject(s)
Humans , Severity of Illness Index , Prognosis , Mortality , Critical Illness/classification , Critical Care/methods , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Risk Adjustment/methodsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate SAPS 3 performance in Spain, assessing discrimination and calibration in a multicenter study. DESIGN: A prospective, multicenter study was carried out. PATIENTS AND SETTING: A prospective cohort study was performed in Spanish hospitals between 2006 and 2011. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: A total of 2171 patients were included in the study. The mean age was 61.4±16.09 years, the ICU mortality was 11.6%, and hospital mortality 16.03%. The SAPS 3 score was 46.29±14.34 points, with a probability of death for our geographical area of 18.57%, and 17.97% for the general equation. The differences between observed-to-predicted mortality were analyzed with the Hosmer-Lemeshow test, which yielded H=31.71 (p<0.05) for our geographical area and H=20.05 (p<0.05) for the general equation. SAPS 3 discrimination with regard to hospital mortality, tested using the area under the ROC curve, was 0.845 (0.821-0.869). CONCLUSION: Our study shows good discrimination of the SAPS 3 system in Spain, but also inadequate calibration, with differences between predicted and observed mortality. There are more similarities with regard to the general equation than with respect to our geographical area equation, and in both cases the SAPS 3 system overestimates mortality. According to our results, Spanish ICU mortality is lower than in other hospitals included in the multicenter study that developed the SAPS 3 system, in patients with similar characteristics and severity of illness.
Subject(s)
Severity of Illness Index , Humans , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , SpainABSTRACT
No disponible
