[Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus infection in patients and professional staff at a medium or long-stay hospital in Spain]. / Prevalencia de infección por coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes y profesionales de un hospital de media y larga estancia en España.

BACKGROUND AND GOALS: The aim of the study is to know the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients and professional staff of a medium or long-stay hospital during the peak period of the pandemic in Spain, spring 2020. MATERIAL AND METHODS: At the end of February 2020, we developed at the hospital a strategy to diagnose the SARS-CoV-2 infection consisting of complementing the realization of PCR tests at real time with a quick technique of lateral flow immunochromatography to detect IgG and IgM antibodies against the virus. We also developed a protocol to realize those diagnostic tests and considered an infection (current or past) a positive result in any of the above tests. We included 524 participants in the study (230 patients and 294 hospital staff), and divided them into hospital patients and Hemodialysis outpatients. Furthermore, we divided the hospital staff into healthcare and non-healthcare staff. The documented period was from March, 20th to April, 21st, 2020. RESULTS: 26 out of 230 patients tested positive in any of the diagnostic techniques (PCR, antibodies IgG, IgM) with a 11.30% prevalence. According to patients groups, we got a 14.38% prevalence in hospital patients vs. 5.95% in outpatients, with a significantly higher risk in admitted patients after adjustment for age and gender (OR=3,309, 95%CI: 1,154-9,495). 24 out of 294 hospital staff tested positive in any of the diagnostic techniques, with a 8.16% prevalence. According to the groups, we got a 8.91% prevalence in healthcare staff vs. 4.26% in non-healthcare staff. Thus, we do not see any statistically significant differences between hospital staff and patients as far as prevalence is concerned (P=0,391), (OR=2,200, 95%CI: 0,500-9,689). CONCLUSIONS: The result of the study was a quite low prevalence rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection, in both patients and hospital staff, being the hospital patients' prevalence rate higher than the outpatients', and the healthcare staff higher than the non-healthcare's. Combining PCR tests (gold standard) with antibodies tests proved useful as a diagnostic strategy.

Prevalencia de infección por coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes y profesionales de un hospital de media y larga estancia en España / Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus infection in patients and professional staff at a medium or long-stay hospital in Spain

ANTECEDENTES Y OBJETIVO: El objetivo de este estudio fue conocer la prevalencia de la infección por SARS-CoV-2 en pacientes y profesionales de un hospital de media y larga estancia en el periodo del pico de la pandemia en España en la primavera de 2020. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: A finales de febrero del 2020, se diseñó en el hospital una estrategia para el diagnóstico de la infección por SARS-CoV-2 consistente en complementar la realización de PCR a tiempo real con una técnica rápida de inmunocromatografía de flujo lateral para la detección de anticuerpos IgG e IgM frente al virus. Se protocolizó la realización de dichas pruebas diagnósticas y se consideró como infección (actual o pasada) un resultado positivo de alguna de ellas. Se incluyeron en el estudio a 524 participantes (230 pacientes y 294 profesionales). Los pacientes se agruparon en ingresados y en ambulatorios para terapia de hemodiálisis. Los trabajadores se agruparon en asistenciales y no asistenciales. El periodo que se documenta es el comprendido entre el 20 de marzo y el 21 de abril del 2020. RESULTADOS: En 26 de los 230 pacientes el resultado fue positivo en alguna de las técnicas, con una prevalencia del 11,30%. Por grupos, en ingresados fue del 14,38% frente al 5,95% de los ambulatorios (p = 0,055), siendo significativamente superior el riesgo en pacientes ingresados tras ajustar por sexo y edad (OR = 3,309; IC del 95%: 1,154-9,495). En 24 de los 294 profesionales el resultado fue positivo en alguna de las técnicas, con una prevalencia del 8,16%. Por grupos, en asistenciales fue del 8,91% frente al 4,26% de los no asistenciales (p = 0,391), OR ajustada = 2,502 (IC del 95%: 0,559-11,202). CONCLUSIONES: Se ha encontrado una tasa de prevalencia baja frente a SARS-CoV-2 tanto en pacientes como en profesionales. La prevalencia en pacientes hospitalizados es mayor que en ambulatorios, también es superior la prevalencia de sanitarios asistenciales respecto a los no asistenciales

BACKGROUND AND GOALS: The aim of the study is to know the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients and professional staff of a medium or long-stay hospital during the peak period of the pandemic in Spain, spring 2020. MATERIAL AND METHODS: At the end of February 2020, we developed at the hospital a strategy to diagnose the SARS-CoV-2 infection consisting of complementing the realization of PCR tests at real time with a quick technique of lateral flow immunochromatography to detect IgG and IgM antibodies against the virus. We also developed a protocol to realize those diagnostic tests and considered an infection (current or past) a positive result in any of the above tests. We included 524 participants in the study (230 patients and 294 hospital staff), and divided them into hospital patients and Hemodialysis outpatients. Furthermore, we divided the hospital staff into healthcare and non-healthcare staff. The documented period was from March, 20th to April, 21st, 2020. RESULTS: 26 out of 230 patients tested positive in any of the diagnostic techniques (PCR, antibodies IgG, IgM) with a 11.30% prevalence. According to patients groups, we got a 14.38% prevalence in hospital patients vs. 5.95% in outpatients, with a significantly higher risk in admitted patients after adjustment for age and gender (OR=3,309, 95%CI: 1,154-9,495). 24 out of 294 hospital staff tested positive in any of the diagnostic techniques, with a 8.16% prevalence. According to the groups, we got a 8.91% prevalence in healthcare staff vs. 4.26% in non-healthcare staff. Thus, we do not see any statistically significant differences between hospital staff and patients as far as prevalence is concerned (P=0,391), (OR=2,200, 95%CI: 0,500-9,689). CONCLUSIONS: The result of the study was a quite low prevalence rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection, in both patients and hospital staff, being the hospital patients' prevalence rate higher than the outpatients', and the healthcare staff higher than the non-healthcare's. Combining PCR tests (gold standard) with antibodies tests proved useful as a diagnostic strategy

Asociación entre los niveles séricos de vitamina D y marcadores inflamatorios en pacientes en hemodiálisis / Association between vitamin D serum levels and inflammatory markers in patients on hemodialysis

Resumen Introducción: La relación entre 25-OH-vitamina D y el sistema inmune en pacientes con enfermedad renal crónica es objeto de atención. Objetivos: Evaluar la prevalencia de la deficiencia de vitamina D en pacientes en hemodiálisis e investigar la asociación entre la vitamina D y proteína C reactiva ultrasensible (PCRus), índice neutrófilo/linfocito (INL) e índice plaqueta/linfocito (IPL). Método: Estudio transversal de 80 pacientes en hemodiálisis, divididos en dos grupos: un nivel sérico de 25-OH-vitamina D < 20 ng/mL se consideró como deficiencia de vitamina D y ≥ 20 ng/mL, como normal. Con el análisis de correlación de Spearman se definió la relación entre los parámetros. Resultados: 40 % de los pacientes presentó deficiencia de vitamina D. Hubo diferencias significativas entre los grupos en PCRus (p = 0.047), INL (p = 0.039), IPL (p = 0.042) y tratamiento con análogos de vitamina D (p = 0.022). La vitamina D tuvo una correlación negativa significativa con PCRus (p = 0.026), INL (p = 0.013) e IPL (p = 0.022). Conclusiones: La deficiencia de vitamina D fue de 40 %. Los niveles de PCRus, INL e IPL fueron significativamente más altos ante deficiencia de vitamina D. Se encontró correlación inversa significativa entre vitamina D y PCRus, INL e IPL.

Abstract Introduction: The relationship between 25-OH-vitamin D and the immune system in patients with chronic kidney disease is a subject of attention. Objectives: To assess the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in patients on hemodialysis and to investigate the association between vitamin D, ultra-sensitive C-reactive protein (US-CRP), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR). Method: Cross-sectional study of 80 patients on hemodialysis, divided into two groups: a serum 25-OH-vitamin D level < 20 ng/mL was considered to be vitamin D deficiency and a serum level ≥ 20 ng/mL was regarded as normal. The relationship between the parameters was defined with Spearman’s correlation analysis. Results: 40 % of the patients had vitamin D deficiency. There were significant differences between groups in US-CRP (p = 0.047), NLR (p = 0.039), PLR (p = 0.042) and treatment with vitamin D analogues (p = 0.022). Vitamin D had a significant negative correlation with US-CRP (p = 0.026), NLR (p = 0.013) and PLR (p = 0.022). Conclusions: The prevalence of vitamin D deficiency was 40 %. The values of US-CRP, NLR and PLR were significantly higher in the presence of vitamin D deficiency. A significant inverse correlation was found between vitamin D levels and US-CRP, NLR and PLR.

Association between vitamin D serum levels and inflammatory markers in patients on hemodialysis.

INTRODUCTION: The relationship between 25-OH-vitamin D and the immune system in patients with chronic kidney disease is a subject of attention. OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in patients on hemodialysis and to investigate the association between vitamin D, ultra-sensitive C-reactive protein (US-CRP), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR). METHOD: Cross-sectional study of 80 patients on hemodialysis, divided into two groups: a serum 25-OH-vitamin D level < 20 ng/mL was considered to be vitamin D deficiency and a serum level ≥ 20 ng/mL was regarded as normal. The relationship between the parameters was defined with Spearman's correlation analysis. RESULTS: 40 % of the patients had vitamin D deficiency. There were significant differences between groups in US-CRP (p = 0.047), NLR (p = 0.039), PLR (p = 0.042) and treatment with vitamin D analogues (p = 0.022). Vitamin D had a significant negative correlation with US-CRP (p = 0.026), NLR (p = 0.013) and PLR (p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of vitamin D deficiency was 40 %. The values of US-CRP, NLR and PLR were significantly higher in the presence of vitamin D deficiency. A significant inverse correlation was found between vitamin D levels and US-CRP, NLR and PLR. INTRODUCCIÓN: La relación entre 25-OH-vitamina D y el sistema inmune en pacientes con enfermedad renal crónica es objeto de atención. OBJETIVOS: Evaluar la prevalencia de la deficiencia de vitamina D en pacientes en hemodiálisis e investigar la asociación entre la vitamina D y proteína C reactiva ultrasensible (PCRus), índice neutrófilo-linfocito (INL) e índice plaqueta-linfocito (IPL). MÉTODO: Estudio transversal de 80 pacientes en hemodiálisis, divididos en dos grupos: un nivel sérico de 25-OH-vitamina D < 20 ng/mL se consideró como deficiencia de vitamina D y ≥ 20 ng/mL, como normal. Con el análisis de correlación de Spearman se definió la relación entre los parámetros. RESULTADOS: 40 % de los pacientes presentó deficiencia de vitamina D. Hubo diferencias significativas entre los grupos en PCRus (p = 0.047), INL (p = 0.039), IPL (p = 0.042) y tratamiento con análogos de vitamina D (p = 0.022). La vitamina D tuvo una correlación negativa significativa con PCRus (p = 0.026), INL (p = 0.013) e IPL (p = 0.022). CONCLUSIONES: La deficiencia de vitamina D fue de 40 %. Los niveles de PCRus, INL e IPL fueron significativamente más altos ante deficiencia de vitamina D. Se encontró correlación inversa significativa entre vitamina D y PCRus, INL e IPL.

Utilidad de un programa de calidad asistencial para la gestión clínica de las enfermedades nefrológicas en Aragón / The use of a quality care program for the management of renal disease in the Aragon region

No disponible

Hidden sources of phosphorus: presence of phosphorus-containing additives in processed foods.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: An increased consumption of processed foods that include phosphorus-containing additives has led us to propose the following working hypothesis: using phosphate-rich additives that can be easily absorbed in processed foods involves a significant increase in phosphorus in the diet, which may be considered as hidden phosphorus since it is not registered in the food composition tables. MATERIALS AND METHOD: The quantity of phosphorus contained in 118 processed products was determined by spectrophotometry and the results were contrasted with the food composition tables of the Higher Education Centre of Nutrition and Diet, those of Morandeira and those of the BEDCA (Spanish Food Composition Database) Network. RESULTS: Food processing frequently involves the use of phosphoric additives. The products whose label contains these additives have higher phosphorus content and higher phosphorus-protein ratio. We observed a discrepancy with the food composition tables in terms of the amount of phosphorus determined in a sizeable proportion of the products. The phosphorus content of prepared refrigerated foods hardly appears in the tables. CONCLUSIONS: Product labels provide little information on phosphorus content. We observed a discrepancy in phosphorus content in certain foods with respect to the food composition tables. We should educate our patients on reviewing the additives on the labels and on the limitation of processed foods. There must be health policy actions to deal with the problem: companies should analyse the phosphorus content of their products, display the correct information on their labels and incorporate it into the food composition tables. Incentives could be established to prepare food with a low phosphorus content and alternatives to phosphorus-containing additives.