Spanish and Portuguese Societies of Internal Medicine consensus guideline about best practice in end-of-life care.

AIM: To develop consensus recommendations about good clinical practice rules for caring end-of-life patients. METHODS: A steering committee of 12 Spanish and Portuguese experts proposed 37 recommendations. A two rounds Delphi method was performed, with participation of 105 panelists including internists, other clinicians, nurses, patients, lawyers, bioethicians, health managers, politicians and journalists. We sent a questionnaire with 5 Likert-type answers for each recommendation. Strong consensus was defined when >95% answers were completely agree or >90% were agree or completely agree; and weak consensus when >90% answers were completely agree or >80% were agree or completely agree. RESULTS: The panel addressed 7 specific areas for 37 recommendations spanning: identification of patients; knowledge of the disease, values and preferences of the patient; information; patient's needs; support and care; palliative sedation, and after death care. CONCLUSIONS: The panel formulated and provided the rationale for recommendations on good clinical practice rules for caring end-of-life patients.

Guía de práctica clínica de consenso sobre buenas prácticas en los cuidados al final de la vida de las Sociedades Española y Portuguesa de Medicina Interna / Spanish and Portuguese Societies of Internal Medicine consensus guideline about best practice in end-of-life care

Objetivo Establecer recomendaciones de consenso sobre normas de buena práctica clínica en la atención a los pacientes al final de la vida. Métodos Un comité de 12 expertos españoles y portugueses propuso 37 recomendaciones. Se realizó un Proceso Delphi a dos rondas, con participación de 105 panelistas incluyendo internistas, otros médicos clínicos, enfermeras, enfermos, juristas, expertos en bioética, gestores sanitarios, políticos y periodistas. Para cada recomendación se envió un cuestionario con cinco respuestas tipo Likert. Se definió consenso fuerte cuando > 95% de las respuestas estaban totalmente de acuerdo o > 90% estaban de acuerdo y totalmente de acuerdo; consenso débil cuando > 90% estaban totalmente de acuerdo o > 80% estaban de acuerdo y totalmente de acuerdo. Resultados El panel abordó siete áreas específicas con 37 recomendaciones que abarcaban: Identificación de los pacientes; Conocimiento, valores y preferencias del paciente; Información; Necesidades del paciente; Atención y cuidados; Sedación paliativa y Atención tras la muerte. Conclusiones Un Proceso Delphi con participación multidisciplinar ha permitido establecer normas de buena práctica clínica en la atención al final de la vida con consenso de enfermos, agentes sociales y profesionales sanitarios (AU)

Aim To develop consensus recommendations about good clinical practice rules for caring end-of-life patients. Methods A steering committee of 12 Spanish and Portuguese experts proposed 37 recommendations. A two rounds Delphi method was performed, with participation of 105 panelists including internists, other clinicians, nurses, patients, lawyers, bioethicians, health managers, politicians and journalists. We sent a questionnaire with 5 Likert-type answers for each recommendation. Strong consensus was defined when > 95% answers were completely agree or > 90% were agree or completely agree; and weak consensus when > 90% answers were completely agree or > 80% were agree or completely agree. Results The panel addressed 7 specific areas for 37 recommendations spanning: identification of patients; knowledge of the disease, values and preferences of the patient; information; patient's needs; support and care; palliative sedation, and after death care Conclusions The panel formulated and provided the rationale for recommendations on good clinical practice rules for caring end-of-life patients (AU)

Spanish and Portuguese Societies of Internal Medicine consensus guideline about best practice in end-of-life care. / Guía de práctica clínica de consenso sobre buenas prácticas en los cuidados al final de la vida de las Sociedades Española y Portuguesa de Medicina Interna.

AIM: To develop consensus recommendations about good clinical practice rules for caring end-of-life patients. METHODS: A steering committee of 12 Spanish and Portuguese experts proposed 37 recommendations. A two rounds Delphi method was performed, with participation of 105 panelists including internists, other clinicians, nurses, patients, lawyers, bioethicians, health managers, politicians and journalists. We sent a questionnaire with 5 Likert-type answers for each recommendation. Strong consensus was defined when > 95% answers were completely agree or > 90% were agree or completely agree; and weak consensus when > 90% answers were completely agree or > 80% were agree or completely agree. RESULTS: The panel addressed 7 specific areas for 37 recommendations spanning: identification of patients; knowledge of the disease, values and preferences of the patient; information; patient's needs; support and care; palliative sedation, and after death care. CONCLUSIONS: The panel formulated and provided the rationale for recommendations on good clinical practice rules for caring end-of-life patients.

Bloodstream infections as a marker of community-acquired sepsis severity. Results from the Portuguese community-acquired sepsis study (SACiUCI study).

The impact of bloodstream infection (BSI) on admission to hospital on the outcome of patients with community-acquired sepsis (CAS) admitted to intensive-care units (ICU) is largely unknown. We selected 803 adult patients consecutively admitted with CAS to one of 17 Portuguese ICU, in whom blood cultures were collected before initiation of antibiotic therapy during a 12-month period. A BSI was identified on hospital admission in 160 (19.9%) patients. Those with and without BSI had similar mean Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II and age. The presence of BSI was independently associated with mortality in ICU (adjusted odds ratio 1.86; 95% confidence interval 1.20-2.89; p 0.005). On the 4th day in ICU, patients with BSI were found to be significantly more dependent on vasopressor support (p 0.002) but not on ventilatory support. Cumulative ICU mortality was significantly higher in BSI patients from the 9th day onwards. A seasonal variation of BSI isolates was noted: gram-negative BSI were more common in the summer, whereas in the winter, gram-positive infections were more frequent (p 0.024), without mortality differences.