Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
Pharm. care Esp ; 25(1): 7-18, 16-02-2023. tab, graf
Article in Spanish | IBECS | ID: ibc-216143

ABSTRACT

Introducción: La Unidad de Enlace Centralizada de Vacunación contra la COVID19 (UECeV) de la Dirección de Atención Primaria Metropolitana Nord del Institut Català de la Salut se creó para resolver las consultas de usuarios y/o profesionales sa-nitarios relacionadas con la vacunación contra el virus SARS-CoV-2. El objetivo principal del presente análisis fue describir la actividad de la UECeV.Método: Realizamos un estudio observacional retrospectivo a partir del registro de consultas aten-didas desde la UECeV entre 31 de abril y 31 de oc-tubre de 2021. Población de referencia: 1.139.411 habitantes adultos asignados. La UECeV se creó en tres sedes territoriales atendidas cada una por dos farmacéuticos/farmacólogos de Atención Primaria (FAP) y un administrativo. La atención telefónica fue a jornada completa adaptable según actividad. Variable principal del análisis: número y tipos de consultas atendidas. Se calculó valores absolutos y porcentajes, medianas y desviación estándar para las variables cuantitativas y para las variables cuali-tativas se realizó un análisis descriptivo.Resultados: 3.103 consultas gestionadas de 3.030 usuarios; 2.180 (70,25%) contestadas por el FAP. Consulta más frecuente: compatibilidad vacuna según patología/medicación de base 1.008 (32,5%). 2.830 (93,4%) usuarios se vacunaron después de la intervención (2.210 consultaron antes de la primera dosis y 618 antes de la segunda). La vacuna mayo-ritaria fue la Comirnaty®. Conclusiones: Las UECeV coordinadas por el FAP con atención directa a los usuarios y/o profesiona-les sanitarios constituyen un elemento de apoyo a los equipos de vacunación de atención primaria para la gestión experta de las consultas de vacuna-ción contra la COVID19. (AU)


Introduction: The North Metropolitan Primary Care Direction of the Institut Català de la Salut crea-ted the Centralized Liaison Unit for anti-COVID19 vaccination (UECeV) to solve queries from users and/or health professionals related to vaccination against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The main objective of the present analysis was to describe the activity of UECeV.Method: We carried out a retrospective observa-tional study based on the registry of consultations attended from the UECeV between April 31st and October 31, 2021. We have an equal or above 18 years old reference population of 1,139,411 inha-bitants. The UECeV was set up in three territorial offices, each attended by two Primary Care phar-macists/pharmacologists (FAP) and one adminis-trative staff member. The telephone service was full-time and could be adapted according to activity. The main variable of the analysis was the number and types of queries attended. Absolute values and percentages, medians and standard deviation were calculated for the quantitative variables and a descriptive analysis was performed for qualitative variables.Results: 3,103 queries were managed out of 3,030 users; 2,180 (70.25%) were answered by the FAP. Most frequent consultation was: vaccine compa-tibility according to pathology/basic medication 1,008 (32.5%). 2,830 (93.4%) users were vaccinated after the consultation (2,210 consulted before the first dose and 618 before the second). The majority vaccine was Comirnaty® Conclusions: The UECeV coordinated by the FAP with direct attention to users and/or health profes-sionals constitutes a support element for primary care vaccination teams for the expert management of AntiCOVID19 vaccination consultations. (AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Immunization Programs , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Pandemics , Primary Health Care , Pharmacists , Spain
2.
BMC Geriatr ; 19(1): 7, 2019 01 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30621606

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Dementia patients often show neuropsychiatric symptoms, known as behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD). These are a common motive for medical consultations, hospitalizations, and nursing home stays. Various studies have suggested that the high prevalence of psychotropic drug use to treat BPSD in institutionalized dementia patients may lead to impaired cognitive capacity, rigidity, somnolence, and other complications during the course of the illness. The aim of this study was to design a consensus-based intervention between care levels to optimize and potentially reduce prescription of psychotropic drugs in institutionalized patients with dementia and assess the changes occurring following its implementation. METHODS: Design: Prospective, quasi-experimental, pre/post intervention, multicenter study. SCOPE: 7 nursing homes associated with a single primary care team. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Institutionalized patients diagnosed with dementia and under treatment with 1 or more psychotropic drugs for at least 3 months. SAMPLE: 240 individuals; mean age, 87 years (SD: 6.795); 75% (180) women. INTERVENTION: Creation of evidence-based therapeutic guidelines for psychotropic drug use in the treatment of BPSD by consensus between reference professionals. Joint review (primary care and geriatric care nursing home professionals) of the medication based on the guidelines and focusing on individual patient needs. Primary variable: Number of psychotropic drugs used per patient. ASSESSMENT: Preintervention, immediate postintervention, and at 1 and 6 months. RESULTS: Overall, the number of psychotropic drugs prescribed was reduced by 28% (from 636 before to 458 after the intervention). The mean number of psychotropic drugs prescribed per patient decreased from 2.71 at baseline to 1.95 at 1 month postintervention and 2.01 at 6 months (p < 0.001 for both time points). Antipsychotics were the drug class showing the highest reduction rate (49.66%). Reintroduction of discontinued psychotropic drugs was 2% at 1 month following the intervention and 12% at 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: A consensus guidelines-based therapeutic intervention with a patient-centered medication review by a multidisciplinary team led to a reduction in prescription of psychotropic drugs in institutionalized dementia patients.


Subject(s)
Dementia/drug therapy , Evidence-Based Medicine/trends , Homes for the Aged/trends , Medication Reconciliation/trends , Nursing Homes/trends , Psychotropic Drugs/therapeutic use , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , Consensus , Dementia/psychology , Drug Prescriptions , Evidence-Based Medicine/methods , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Medication Reconciliation/methods , Prospective Studies
3.
Aten. prim. (Barc., Ed. impr.) ; 50(1): 6-15, ene. 2018. graf, tab
Article in Spanish | IBECS | ID: ibc-172626

ABSTRACT

Objetivo: Estudio cuantitativo: conocer la prevalencia de inadecuación del tratamiento para la osteoporosis en prevención primaria (OPP) en mujeres de 60-74 años. Estudio cualitativo: conocer los criterios diagnósticos y de tratamiento de la OPP y su variabilidad en médicos de atención primaria (AP) y especialistas. Material y método: Estudio cuantitativo: estudio observacional, transversal y retrospectivo. Población: mujeres de 60-74 años con tratamiento activo para la OPP (n = 424) en mayo del 2012. Se consideró inadecuación si presentaban ≤ 2 factores de riesgo con DXA realizada o con DXA T-score ≥ −2,4. Estudio cualitativo: técnica Delphi (15 ítems) y dos rondas de consulta. Periodo: marzo-abril del 2014. Población: médicos AP, reumatólogos y traumatólogos (n = 251). Muestreo aleatorio. Resultados: Estudio cuantitativo: grado de inadecuación del 63,4%. En el 43,2% no constaba diagnóstico de osteoporosis. En el 82,3% no constaban factores de riesgo. Tratamiento: 40,3% con bisfosfonatos y 47,9% con calcio + vitamina D. Estudio cualitativo: el 23% respondieron a la primera ronda y, de estos, el 67% a la segunda ronda. Los ítems con mayor acuerdo fueron valoración de factores de riesgo para el diagnóstico y bisfosfonatos como tratamiento. Los ítems con menor consenso fueron utilización del FRAX y densitometría y tratamiento solo con calcio + vitamina D. Conclusiones: El porcentaje de inadecuación es alto. El grado de registro en historia clínica es bajo. La metodología Delphi es útil para detectar discrepancias entre recomendaciones de guías de práctica clínica y resultados (AU)


Objective: Quantitative study: To assess the prevalence of inadequacy of treatment for osteoporosis in primary prevention (OPP) in women aged 60-74 years. Qualitative study: To evaluate the diagnostic and treatment criteria of the OPP and it's variability in primary care physicians (PC) and specialists. Material and methods: Quantitative study: observational, cross-sectional and retrospective study. Population: women aged 60 -74 years with active treatment for OPP (n = 424) in May 2012. Inadequacy if they had ≤ 2 risk factors with a DXA or DXA T-score ≥ −2.4. Qualitative study: Delphi technique (15items) and two rounds of consultation. Period: March-April 2014. Population: PC physicians, rheumatologists and orthopaedic surgeons (n = 251). Random sampling. Results: Quantitative study: degree of inadequacy is 63.4%. In 43.2% isn’t mention a diagnosis of osteoporosis. In 82.3% there isn’t mention of risk factors. Treatment: bisphosphonate 40.3% and calcium + vitamin D 47.9%. Qualitative study: 23% respond to the first round, and of these 67% the second round. Items with higher agreement were the important of the evaluation of risk factors for diagnosis and bisphosphonates for treatment. Items with fewer consensuses were using the FRAX and densitometry and treatment with only calcium + vitamin D. Conclusions: The percentage of inadequacy is high. The degree of registration in medical history is low. The Delphi method is useful for detecting discrepancies between recommendations of clinical practice guidelines and results (AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Aged , Osteoporosis/drug therapy , Osteoporosis/prevention & control , Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Medication Errors , Primary Prevention/trends , Osteoporotic Fractures , Cross-Sectional Studies , Retrospective Studies , Observational Study , Inappropriate Prescribing , Surveys and Questionnaires , Physicians, Primary Care , Risk Factors , Diphosphonates/administration & dosage , Vitamin D
4.
Aten Primaria ; 50(10): 583-589, 2018 12.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29221946

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: 1-To know the preventive prescription (statin, antiplatelet drugs, bisphosphonates, calcium and vitamin D and Vit B12) of elderly patients previously identified as a CCD (with a complex chronic disease) and ACD (with advanced chronic disease and lifetime expectancy of less than 12 months) who died during 2015. 2-To assess the correct indication of Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPI) to determine potentially avoidable medication. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. LOCATION: Four Primary Health Centres, Castellar del Vallès (Barcelona). PARTICIPANTS: 128 patients, 70 ACD and 58 PCC. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Number of drugs at the time of death from the 6 selected group, deprescription (6 months prior to death due to advanced chronic disease), primary or secondary prevention and inappropriate prescription of PPI. RESULTS: Average age of 85'3 years (10,3). 40% took an antiplatelet drug, avoidable in 60% of the ACD, since they did not present any previous cardiovascular episode. 20% of the patients took statins, in which 48% of the cases were primary prevention. The PPI prescription was 67% with inadequate indication for use in 49% of these cases. 20% took calcium / Vitamin D and 1,6% of the ACD a bisphosphonate. There was a 16% deprescription. CONCLUSIONS: A high percentage of our patients with advanced chronic disease and short life expectancy still continue to take preventive and avoidable treatments, potentially dangerous due to their side effects. There is a need to reflect on what we do with these vulnerable patients.


Subject(s)
Chronic Disease , Deprescriptions , Prescription Drugs/therapeutic use , Primary Prevention , Secondary Prevention , Aged, 80 and over , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Severity of Illness Index
5.
Aten Primaria ; 50(1): 6-15, 2018 Jan.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28416363

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Quantitative study: To assess the prevalence of inadequacy of treatment for osteoporosis in primary prevention (OPP) in women aged 60-74years. Qualitative study: To evaluate the diagnostic and treatment criteria of the OPP and it's variability in primary care physicians (PC) and specialists. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Quantitative study: observational, cross-sectional and retrospective study. POPULATION: women aged 60-74years with active treatment for OPP (n=424) in May 2012. Inadequacy if they had ≤2 risk factors with a DXA or DXA T-score ≥-2.4. Qualitative study: Delphi technique (15items) and two rounds of consultation. PERIOD: March-April 2014. POPULATION: PC physicians, rheumatologists and orthopaedic surgeons (n=251). Random sampling. RESULTS: Quantitative study: degree of inadequacy is 63.4%. In 43.2% isn't mention a diagnosis of osteoporosis. In 82.3% there isn't mention of risk factors. TREATMENT: bisphosphonate 40.3% and calcium +vitaminD 47.9%. Qualitative study: 23% respond to the first round, and of these 67% the second round. Items with higher agreement were the important of the evaluation of risk factors for diagnosis and bisphosphonates for treatment. Items with fewer consensuses were using the FRAX and densitometry and treatment with only calcium +vitaminD. CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of inadequacy is high. The degree of registration in medical history is low. The Delphi method is useful for detecting discrepancies between recommendations of clinical practice guidelines and results.


Subject(s)
Osteoporosis/drug therapy , Osteoporosis/prevention & control , Primary Prevention/standards , Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , Evaluation Studies as Topic , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Qualitative Research , Quality Improvement , Retrospective Studies
6.
BMJ Open ; 2(2): e000507, 2012.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22514242

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a quality improvement (QI) plan aimed at primary healthcare teams (PHCTs) to optimise hypertension control and to compare it with standard clinical care. METHODS: Design Multicentric, non-randomised, quasi-experimental controlled intervention study. Setting 5 PHCTs in the intervention and 13 in the standard care group in the province of Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain. Participants This is a population-based study in which all patients over 18 years of age with a diagnosis of hypertension before 1 January 2006 were included (n=9877 in the intervention group and n=21 704 in the control group). Intervention A QI plan that targeted primary care professionals. The plan included training sessions, implementation of recommended clinical practice guidelines for the management of hypertensive patients and audit and feedback to health professionals. Main outcome measure Prevalence of hypertensive patients with an adequate blood pressure (BP) control. RESULTS: The adjusted difference between intervention and standard care groups in the odds of BP control was 1.3 (95% CI 1.1 to 1.6, p=0.003). Results of the mixed model on repeated measures showed that, on average, an individual in the intervention group had an increase of 92% in the odds of BP control (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.7 to 2.1). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a QI plan can improve BP control. This strategy is potentially feasible for up-scaling within the existing PHCTs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov MS: 1998275938244441.

7.
BMC Public Health ; 9: 89, 2009 Mar 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19321009

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Different studies have shown insufficient blood pressure (BP) control in hypertensive patients. Multiple factors influence hypertension management, and the quality of primary care is one of them. We decided therefore to evaluate the effectiveness of a quality improvement plan directed at professionals of Primary Health Care Teams (PHCT) with the aim to achieve a better control of hypertension. The hypothesis of the study is that the implementation of a quality improvement plan will improve the control of hypertension. The primary aim of this study will be to evaluate the effectiveness of this plan. DESIGN: multicentric study quasi-experimental before - after with control group. The non-randomised allocation of the intervention will be done at PHCT level. SETTING: 18 PHCT in the Barcelona province (Spain). SAMPLE: all patients with a diagnosis of hypertension (population based study). EXCLUSION CRITERIA: patients with a diagnosis of hypertension made later than 01/01/2006 and patients younger than 18 years. INTERVENTION: a quality improvement plan, which targets primary health care professionals and includes educational sessions, feedback to health professionals, audit and implementation of recommended clinical practice guidelines for the management of hypertensive patients. MEASUREMENTS: age, sex, associated co-morbidity (diabetes mellitus type I and II, heart failure and renal failure). The following variables will be recorded: BP measurement, cardiovascular risk and antihypertensive drugs used. Results will be measured before the start of the intervention and twelve months after the start of the study. Dependent variable: prevalence of hypertensive patients with poor BP control. ANALYSIS: Chi-square test and Student's t-test will be used to measure the association between independent qualitative and quantitative variables, respectively. Non-parametric tests will be used for the analysis of non-normally distributed variables. Significance level (alpha) will be set at < 0.05. Outcomes will be analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. DISCUSSION: The implementation of a quality improvement plan might benefit the coordination of different professionals of PHCTs and may also improve blood pressure control. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This protocol has been registered at clinicaltrials.gov with the ID number MS: 1998275938244441.


Subject(s)
Hypertension/prevention & control , Primary Health Care/methods , Quality Assurance, Health Care/methods , Clinical Trials as Topic/methods , Decision Support Systems, Clinical , Health Personnel/education , Humans , Hypertension/diagnosis , Hypertension/therapy , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Primary Health Care/standards , Program Development/methods , Risk Assessment , Spain
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL