Healthcare experience among patients with type 2 diabetes: A cross-sectional survey using the IEXPAC tool.

Aim: To assess the experience with health care among patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and to evaluate patients' demographic variables and healthcare-related characteristics which may affect their experience. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was delivered to T2DM adults. Patient experiences were assessed with the 'Instrument for Evaluation of the Experience of Chronic Patients' (IEXPAC) questionnaire, a validated 12-item survey, which describes patient experience within the last 6 months (items 1-11) and hospitalization in the last 3 years (item 12), with possible scores ranging from 0 (worst) to 10 (best experience). Results: A total of 451 T2DM patients responded to the survey (response rate 72.3%; mean age 69.5 ± 10.1 years, 67.8% men). The mean overall IEXPAC score was 5.92 ± 1.80. Mean scores were higher for productive interactions (7.92 ± 2.15) and self-management (7.08 ± 2.27) than for new relational model (1.72 ± 2.01). Only 32.8% of patients who had been hospitalized in the past 3 years reported having received a follow-up call or visit after discharge. Multivariate analyses identified that regular follow-up by the same physician and follow-up by a nurse were associated with a better patient experience. Continuity of healthcare score was higher only in those patients requiring help from others. Conclusions: The areas of T2DM care which may need to be addressed to ensure better patient experience are use of the Internet, new technologies and social resources for patient information and interaction with healthcare professionals, closer follow-up after hospitalization, and a comprehensive multidisciplinary approach with regular follow-up by the same physician and a nurse.

Abdominal aortic aneurysm screening program using hand-held ultrasound in primary healthcare.

We determined the feasibility of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) screening program led by family physicians in public primary healthcare setting using hand-held ultrasound device. The potential study population was 11,214 men aged ≥ 60 years attended by three urban, public primary healthcare centers. Participants were recruited by randomly-selected telephone calls. Ultrasound examinations were performed by four trained family physicians with a hand-held ultrasound device (Vscan®). AAA observed were verified by confirmatory imaging using standard ultrasound or computed tomography. Cardiovascular risk factors were determined. The prevalence of AAA was computed as the sum of previously-known aneurysms, aneurysms detected by the screening program and model-based estimated undiagnosed aneurysms. We screened 1,010 men, with mean age of 71.3 (SD 6.9) years; 995 (98.5%) men had normal aortas and 15 (1.5%) had AAA on Vscan®. Eleven out of 14 AAA-cases (78.6%) had AAA on confirmatory imaging (one patient died). The total prevalence of AAA was 2.49% (95%CI 2.20 to 2.78). The median aortic diameter at diagnosis was 3.5 cm in screened patients and 4.7 cm (p<0.001) in patients in whom AAA was diagnosed incidentally. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified coronary heart disease (OR = 4.6, 95%CI 1.3 to 15.9) as the independent factor with the highest odds ratio. A screening program led by trained family physicians using hand-held ultrasound was a feasible, safe and reliable tool for the early detection of AAA.

Validez y aplicabilidad de un nuevo método de registro para la hipertensión arterial / Validity and Applicability of a New Recording Method for Hypertension

Introducción y objetivos: El diagnóstico de la hipertensión arterial se asocia al método de medición y las condiciones en que esta se realiza. La reciente guía británica recomienda el uso sistemático de monitorización ambulatoria de la presión arterial durante 24h. Sin embargo, no todos los centros de salud disponen de dispositivos, y su uso queda restringido a 1 paciente/día. Analizamos si un nuevo método de registro de la presión arterial permite diagnosticar del mismo modo que con la monitorización de la presión arterial de 24 h. Métodos: Evaluación de un nuevo método de registro de hipertensión arterial consistente en monitorizar la presión arterial durante 1h en condiciones de práctica clínica habitual. Se comparó con los registros diurnos de la prueba estándar utilizando el coeficiente de correlación y Bland-Altman plots. Se calculó el índice kappa de concordancia y la sensibilidad y la especificidad del método. Resultados: De los 102 participantes, 89 (87,3%) obtuvieron el mismo diagnóstico con uno y otro método, con alta concordancia (κ=0,81; intervalo de confianza del 95%, 0,71-0,91). Se observaron correlaciones robustas entre las lecturas de presión arterial diastólica (r=0,85) y sistólica (r=0,76). La sensibilidad y la especificidad del nuevo método para el diagnóstico de hipertensión de bata blanca fueron del 85,2% (intervalo de confianza del 95%, 67,5-94,1) y el 92% (intervalo de confianza del 95%, 83,6-96,3). Conclusiones: La monitorización de la presión arterial de 1h es un método válido y fiable para diagnosticar la hipertensión arterial y clasificar subpoblaciones de hipertensos, especialmente en hipertensión de bata blanca e hipertensión refractaria, que permite un mayor rendimiento de los instrumentos de monitorización

Introduction and objectives: Blood pressure measurement methods and conditions are determinants of hypertension diagnosis. A recent British guideline recommends systematic 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. However, these devices are not available at all health centers and they can only be used by 1 patient per day. The aim of this study was to test a new blood pressure recording method to see if it gave the same diagnostic results as 24-h blood pressure monitoring. Methods: One-hour blood pressure monitoring under routine clinical practice conditions was compared with standard method of day time recording by analyzing the coefficient of correlation and Bland-Altman plots. The Kappa index was used to calculate degree of agreement. Method sensitivity and specificity were also analyzed. Results: Of the 102 participants, 89 (87.3%) obtained the same diagnosis regardless of method, with high between-method agreement (κ= 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.91). We observed robust correlations between diastolic (r=0.85) and systolic blood pressure (r=0.76) readings. Sensitivity and specificity for the new method for diagnosing white coat hypertension were 85.2% (95% confidence interval 67.5%-94.1%) and 92% (95% confidence interval, 83.6%-96.3%), respectively. Conclusions: One-hour blood pressure monitoring is a valid and reliable method for diagnosing hypertension and for classifying hypertension subpopulations, especially in white coat hypertension and refractory hypertension. This also leads to a more productive use of monitoring instruments

Validity and applicability of a new recording method for hypertension.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Blood pressure measurement methods and conditions are determinants of hypertension diagnosis. A recent British guideline recommends systematic 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. However, these devices are not available at all health centers and they can only be used by 1 patient per day. The aim of this study was to test a new blood pressure recording method to see if it gave the same diagnostic results as 24-h blood pressure monitoring. METHODS: One-hour blood pressure monitoring under routine clinical practice conditions was compared with standard method of day time recording by analyzing the coefficient of correlation and Bland-Altman plots. The Kappa index was used to calculate degree of agreement. Method sensitivity and specificity were also analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 102 participants, 89 (87.3%) obtained the same diagnosis regardless of method, with high between-method agreement (κ= 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.91). We observed robust correlations between diastolic (r=0.85) and systolic blood pressure (r=0.76) readings. Sensitivity and specificity for the new method for diagnosing white coat hypertension were 85.2% (95% confidence interval 67.5%-94.1%) and 92% (95% confidence interval, 83.6%-96.3%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: One-hour blood pressure monitoring is a valid and reliable method for diagnosing hypertension and for classifying hypertension subpopulations, especially in white coat hypertension and refractory hypertension. This also leads to a more productive use of monitoring instruments.