Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
Add more filters










Language
Publication year range
1.
Rev. esp. pediatr. (Ed. impr.) ; 66(3): 162-166, mayo-jun. 2010. ilus, tab
Article in Spanish | IBECS | ID: ibc-91711

ABSTRACT

Introducción. Los accidentes infantiles son la primera causa de muerte en niños de 1 a 14 años. Su importancia reside sobretodo en sus graves consecuencias y en que se pueden prevenir. Para ello es necesario conocer la epidemiología. Existen, en nuestro medio, muy pocos estudios realizados a nivel de asistencia primaria. El objetivo de este estudio es el de conocer la epidemiología de los accidentes infantiles en niños atendidos en un Centro de Salud de Huesca. Material y método. Se trata de un estudio prospectivo iniciado el 1 de abril de 2008 y terminado el 30 de marzo de 2009. Se registraron todos los accidentes infantiles padecidos por los niños que acudieron a la consulta durante este período. Resultados. Se registraron 172 accidentes siendo las caídas lo más frecuentes. 11 niños (9,6%) sufrieron quemaduras. No se encontraron diferencias en relación al día. El pico horario de 19 a 20 horas fue el de máxima incidencia. Un 14,5% habían padecido un accidente con anterioridad. El 69,2% estaban acompañados por un adulto en el momento del accidente, 33 niños (19,1%) fueron tratados en el hospital y 4 (2,3%) requirieron ingreso hospitalario. Comentario. Aunque el número de niños estudiados por nosotros no es muy elevado la incidencia no es nada despreciable. Creemos necesario un mayor conocimiento epidemiológico a nivel de asistencia primaria para poder mejorar la prevención (AU)


Introduction. The childish injuries are the first cause of death in boys of 1 to 14 years. His importance overcoat owes in h is grave consequences and in that they can to prevent. For this is necessary to know the epidemiology. Exist, in our half, very few studies realized to level of primary assistance. The aim of this study is the one to know the epidemiology of the childish injuries in boys attended in a Centre of Health of Huesca. Material and method. Treat of a prospective study initated the 1 of April of 2008 and finished the 30 of march of 2009. The registered all the childish injuries suffered by the boys that they came to the Center during this period . Results. They registered 172 accidents being the falls the most frequent. 11 boys 89,6%) suffered burns. They did not find differences in relation to the day. The time beak of 19 to 20 hours was the one of maximum incidence. A 14,5% had previously suffered and accident. 69,2% were accompanied by an adult in the moment. 33 boys (19,1%) were treated in the hospital and 4(2,3%) required hospitable entry. Coment. Althouh the number of boys studied by us is not very elevated the incidence is important. We believe necessary a main epidemiological knowledge to primary care level (AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Infant , Child, Preschool , Child , Accidents, Home/statistics & numerical data , Emergency Medical Services/statistics & numerical data , Accidental Falls/statistics & numerical data , Prospective Studies , Burns/epidemiology
2.
An Pediatr (Barc) ; 69(4): 329-34, 2008 Oct.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18928700

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To identify and validate indicators to improve the assessment of prescribing by primary care paediatricians, incorporating the values and views of the professionals involved. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Nominal group technique, validated through a Delphi survey. PARTICIPANTS: Paediatricians and primary care pharmacists. A nominal group was formed with thirteen specialists. The question raised at the meeting was: "What indicators focusing on the drug and what indicators linked to diagnosis and treatment do you find most helpful in assessing the quality of prescription in paediatrics?", each panellist proposed indicators that were discussed and weighted on a scale from 1 to 9. The highest scored indicators were included in a two round Delphi survey, intended for all paediatricians and primary care pharmacists. MEASUREMENTS: Validity of the indicator; Indicators with a median score equal to or greater than 7 were considered valid. Degree of consensus; it was considered that there was consensus if the interquartile range was not more than 3 points. RESULTS: We generated 29 indicators focusing on the drug and 27 incorporating the diagnosis. Nineteen focusing on the drug and 13 incorporating the diagnosis were included in the survey. There was a high degree of agreement between the group and survey results. CONCLUSIONS: A set of quality indicators for paediatric prescribing has been generated using this tecnique, with consensus of a representative group of stakeholders and validated by all of them.


Subject(s)
Drug Prescriptions/standards , Pediatrics , Primary Health Care , Quality Indicators, Health Care
3.
An. pediatr. (2003, Ed. impr.) ; 69(4): 329-334, oct. 2008. ilus
Article in Es | IBECS | ID: ibc-67684

ABSTRACT

Objetivo: Seleccionar y validar indicadores que permitan mejorar la evaluación de la prescripción de los pediatras de atención primaria, incorporando los valores y la opinión de los profesionales implicados. Material y métodos: Técnica de grupo nominal, validación mediante encuesta tipo Delphi. Participaron pediatras y farmacéuticos de atención primaria. Se formó un grupo nominal con 13 expertos. En la sesión se planteó la pregunta: "¿Qué indicadores centrados en el fármaco y qué indicadores que relacionen diagnóstico y tratamiento consideras más útiles para evaluar la calidad de la prescripción en pediatría?", cada panelista propuso indicadores que se discutieron y ponderaron en una escala del 1 al 9. Los indicadores más valorados se incluyeron en una encuesta tipo Delphi a dos rondas dirigida a todos los pediatras y farmacéuticos de atención primaria. Las mediciones realizadas fueron: la validez del indicador, se consideraron válidos los indicadores con una mediana de la puntuación igual o superior a 7; el grado de consenso, se consideró que había consenso si el rango intercuartílico no incluía más de 3 puntos. Resultados: Se generaron 29 indicadores centrados en el fármaco y 27 que incorporaban el diagnóstico. Se incluyeron en la encuesta 19 centrados en el fármaco y 13 que incorporaban el diagnóstico. Hubo un alto grado de acuerdo entre el grupo y los resultados de la encuesta. Conclusiones: Mediante esta técnica se ha generando una serie de indicadores de calidad de prescripción para pediatría consensuados por un grupo representativo de los agentes implicados y validado para el conjunto de éstos (AU)


Objective: To identify and validate indicators to improve the assessment of prescribing by primary care paediatricians, incorporating the values and views of the professionals involved. Material and methods: Nominal group technique, validated through a Delphi survey. Participants: Paediatricians and primary care pharmacists. A nominal group was formed with thirteen specialists. The question raised at the meeting was: "What indicators focusing on the drug and what indicators linked to diagnosis and treatment do you find most helpful in assessing the quality of prescription in paediatrics?", each panellist proposed indicators that were discussed and weighted on a scale from 1 to 9. The highest scored indicators were included in a two round Delphi survey, intended for all paediatricians and primary care pharmacists. Measurements: Validity of the indicator; Indicators with a median score equal to or greater than 7 were considered valid. Degree of consensus; it was considered that there was consensus if the interquartile range was not more than 3 points. Results: We generated 29 indicators focusing on the drug and 27 incorporating the diagnosis. Nineteen focusing on the drug and 13 incorporating the diagnosis were included in the survey. There was a high degree of agreement between the group and survey results. Conclusions: A set of quality indicators for paediatric prescribing has been generated using this tecnique, with consensus of a representative group of stakeholders and validated by all of them (AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Drug Prescriptions/statistics & numerical data , Drug Prescriptions/standards , Indicators of Quality of Life , Primary Health Care/methods , Pediatrics/education , Pediatrics , Pharmacists/organization & administration , Pharmacists , Morbidity Surveys , Health Status Indicators , Quality Indicators, Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Socioeconomic Survey , Pediatrics/statistics & numerical data
7.
Aten Primaria ; 27(5): 339-42, 2001 Mar 31.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-11333555

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To find whether in certain primary care teams an association exists between the level of coverage in determined services and expenditure on drugs for pathologies included in these services. DESIGN: Retrospective descriptive study. SETTING: Primary care, INSALUD, Area 1, Huesca. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Using the data on coverage of the service portfolio in 1999 and pharmacy expenditure by therapeutic sub-groups during January-October of the same year, the following was analysed:- The service caring for chronic patients: Hypercholesterolaemia and comparison with expenditure in sub-group B04A (lipid-lowerers/ anti-atheroma drugs).- The service caring for chronic patients: Diabetes and comparison with expenditure in sub-groups A10A (insulin) and A10B (oral antidiabetic drugs). Expenditure was expressed as cost adjusted per 100 insured persons, using the INSALUD coefficients for the adjustment (active person coefficient: 0.732; pensioner coefficient: 0.268). The relationship between the two variables was represented graphically by a cloud of dots. Association between them was measured by Pearson's correlation coefficient. No statistically significant correlation was found between coverage and pharmacy expenditure in these sub-groups. Hypercholesterolaemia/lipid-lowerers: Pearson's coefficient = 0.334, 95% CI (-0.115 to 0.669). Diabetes/oral diabetic drugs and insulin: Pearson's coefficient < 0.1. CONCLUSIONS: The differences in coverage of the services analysed bear no direct relationship to pharmacy expenditure. The portfolio of services is not a good method of allocation of pharmaceutical resources.


Subject(s)
Health Care Rationing/organization & administration , Pharmaceutical Services/supply & distribution , Primary Health Care/organization & administration , Humans , Hypercholesterolemia/drug therapy , Retrospective Studies , Spain
8.
Aten. prim. (Barc., Ed. impr.) ; 27(5): 339-342, mar. 2001.
Article in Es | IBECS | ID: ibc-2209

ABSTRACT

Objetivo. Conocer si en ciertos equipos de atención primaria ha existido asociación entre el grado de cobertura en determinados servicios y el gasto en fármacos para las patologías incluidas en ellos. Diseño. Estudio descriptivo, retrospectivo. Emplazamiento. Atención primaria. INSALUD. Área 1, Huesca. Mediciones y resultados principales. Usando los datos de coberturas de cartera de servicios de 1999 y de gasto en farmacia por subgrupos terapéuticos durante el período enero-octubre del mismo año se analizó: - El servicio de atención a pacientes crónicos: hipercolesterolemia, y se comparó con el gasto en el subgrupo B04A (hipolipemiantes/antiateromatosos). El servicio de atención a pacientes crónicos: diabetes, y se comparó con el gasto en los subgrupos A10A (insulinas) y A10B (antidiabéticos orales). El gasto se expresó como gasto ajustado por 100 asegurados, usando para el ajuste los coeficientes del INSALUD (coeficiente activos, 0,732; coeficiente pensionistas, 0,268). La relación entre ambas variables se representó gráficamente por una nube de puntos. La existencia de asociación entre ellas se midió utilizando el coeficiente de correlación de Pearson. No se ha encontrado asociación estadísticamente significativa entre el resultado en coberturas y el gasto en farmacia en estos subgrupos. Hipercolesterolemia/hipolipemiantes: coeficiente de Pearson, 0,334; IC del 95 por ciento, -0,115 a 0,669.Diabetes/antidiabéticos orales e insulina: coeficiente de Pearson < 0,1.Conclusiones: Extraemos dos conclusiones: Las diferencias en coberturas de los servicios analizados no tienen relación directa con el gasto en fármacos. La cartera de servicios no resulta un buen método en la asignación de recursos para el consumo de fármacos (AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Spain , Health Care Rationing , Pharmaceutical Services , Primary Health Care , Retrospective Studies , Hypercholesterolemia
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...