PAUSATE Study: Prevalence and appropriateness of the use of antimicrobials in Spanish hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence and appropriateness of antimicrobial use in Spanish hospitals through a pharmacist-led systematic cross-sectional review. METHOD: A nationwide multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted on  10% of the patients admitted to the participating hospitals on one day in April  2021. Hospital participation was voluntary, and the population was randomly  selected. The study sample was made up of patients who, on the day of the  study, received at least one antimicrobial belonging to groups J01, J02, J04,  J05AB, J05AD or J05AH in the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification  System. The pharmacist in charge made a record and carried out an evaluation  of the appropriateness of antimicrobial use following a method  proposed and validated by the Pharmaceutical Care of Patients with Infectious  Diseases Working Group of the Spanish Society of Hospital Pharmacy. The  evaluation method considered each of the items comprising antimicrobial  prescriptions. An algorithm was used to assess prescriptions as appropriate,  suboptimal, inappropriate and unevaluableResults: One-hundred three hospitals participated in the study and the treatment of 3,568 patients was reviewed. A total of 1,498 (42.0%) patients received antimicrobial therapy, 424 (28.3%) of them in  combination therapy. The most commonly prescribed antimicrobials were  moxicillin-clavulanic acid (7.2%), ceftriaxone (6.4%), piperacillin-tazobactam  (5.8%), and meropenem 4.0%. As regards appropriateness,  prescriptions were considered appropriate in 34% of cases, suboptimal in 45%,  inappropriate in 19% and unevaluable in 2%. The items that most  influenced the assessment of a prescription as suboptimal were completeness  f medical record entries, choice of agent, duration of treatment and monitoring of efficacy and safety. The item that most influences the  assessment of a prescription as inappropriate was the indication of  ntimicrobial agent. Conclusions: The method used provided information on the prevalence and  appropriateness of the use of antimicrobials, a preliminary step in the design  and implementation of actions aimed at measuring the impact of the use of  ntimicrobials within the antimicrobial stewardship programs.

OBJETIVO: Conocer la prevalencia y el grado de adecuación del uso de  antimicrobianos en los hospitales españoles mediante una revisión sistemática  transversal realizada por farmacéuticos.Método: Estudio multicéntrico, nacional, transversal sobre el 10% de los pacientes ingresados en los hospitales participantes un día del mes de abril  de 2021. La participación de los hospitales fue voluntaria y la selección de la  población aleatoria. De la población se disgregó la muestra de estudio,  constituida por los pacientes que recibían el día del corte al menos un  antimicrobiano perteneciente a los grupos J01, J02, J04, J05AB, J05AD y  J05AH del Sistema de Clasificación Anatómica, Terapéutica y Química. Sobre la  muestra de estudio, el farmacéutico realizó un registro y evaluación de la  adecuación del tratamiento antimicrobiano siguiendo una metódica propuesta y  validada por el Grupo de trabajo de Atención Farmacéutica al Paciente con  nfermedad Infecciosa de la Sociedad Española de Farmacia Hospitalaria. La  metódica de evaluación consideró cada una de las dimensiones que conforman  la prescripción del antimicrobiano e incluyó un algoritmo para calificar la  prescripción global como adecuada, mejorable, inadecuada y no valorable. RESULTADOS: Participaron 103 hospitales y se revisó el tratamiento de 3.568  pacientes, de los que 1.498 (42,0%) recibieron terapia antimicrobiana, 424  (28,3%) en combinación. La prevalencia de los antimicrobianos más frecuentes  fue: amoxicilina-clavulánico 7,2%, ceftriaxona 6,4%, piperacilina- tazobactam 5,8% y meropenem 4,0%. Respecto a la adecuación del  tratamiento la prescripción, fue considerada adecuada en el 34% de los casos,  mejorable en el 45%, inadecuada en el 19% y no valorable en el 2%. Las  dimensiones que más influyeron en la calificación de la prescripción como  mejorable fueron el registro en la historia clínica, la elección del agente, la  duración del tratamiento y la monitorización de la eficacia y seguridad, y como  inadecuada la indicación de antimicrobiano. CONCLUSIONES: La metódica utilizada permite conocer la prevalencia y  adecuación del uso de antimicrobianos, paso previo para diseñar y emprender  acciones de mejora y medir el impacto de su implantación en el marco de los  programas de optimización del uso de antimicrobianos.

Estudio PAUSATE: Prevalencia y adecuación del uso hospitalario de antimicrobianos en España / PAUSATE Study: Prevalence and appropriateness of the use of antimicrobials in Spanish hospitals

Objetivo: Conocer la prevalencia y el grado de adecuación del usode antimicrobianos en los hospitales españoles mediante una revisiónsistemática transversal realizada por farmacéuticos.Método: Estudio multicéntrico, nacional, transversal sobre el 10% de lospacientes ingresados en los hospitales participantes un día del mes deabril de 2021. La participación de los hospitales fue voluntaria y la selección de la población aleatoria. De la población se disgregó la muestrade estudio, constituida por los pacientes que recibían el día del corte almenos un antimicrobiano perteneciente a los grupos J01, J02, J04, J05AB,J05AD y J05AH del Sistema de Clasificación Anatómica, Terapéutica yQuímica. Sobre la muestra de estudio, el farmacéutico realizó un registroy evaluación de la adecuación del tratamiento antimicrobiano siguiendouna metódica propuesta y validada por el Grupo de trabajo de AtenciónFarmacéutica al Paciente con Enfermedad Infecciosa de la Sociedad Española de Farmacia Hospitalaria. La metódica de evaluación consideró cadauna de las dimensiones que conforman la prescripción del antimicrobiano eincluyó un algoritmo para calificar la prescripción global como adecuada,mejorable, inadecuada y no valorable. (AU)

Objective: To determine the prevalence and appropriateness of antimicrobial use in Spanish hospitals through a pharmacist-led systematiccross-sectional review.Method: A nationwide multicenter cross-sectional study was conductedon 10% of the patients admitted to the participating hospitals on one dayin April 2021. Hospital participation was voluntary, and the populationwas randomly selected. The study sample was made up of patients who,on the day of the study, received at least one antimicrobial belonging togroups J01, J02, J04, J05AB, J05AD or J05AH in the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification System. The pharmacist in charge madea record and carried out an evaluation of the appropriateness of antimicrobial use following a method proposed and validated by the Pharmaceutical Care of Patients with Infectious Diseases Working Group of theSpanish Society of Hospital Pharmacy. The evaluation method consideredeach of the items comprising antimicrobial prescriptions. An algorithm wasused to assess prescriptions as appropriate, suboptimal, inappropriateand unevaluable. (AU)

Applying reflective multicriteria decision analysis to understand the value of therapeutic alternatives in the management of gestational and peripartum anaemia in Spain.

BACKGROUND: The objective of the FeminFER project was to assess the value of ferric carboxymaltose following a multicriteria decision analysis in obstetrics and gynaecology in Spain. METHODS: Ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) and ferrous sulphate were evaluated using the EVIDEM framework. Ten stakeholders participated to collect different perspectives. The framework was adapted considering evidence retrieved with a PICO-S search strategy and grey literature. Criteria/subcriteria were weighted by level of relevance and an evidence-based decision-making exercise was developed in each criterion; weights and scores were combined to obtain the value of intervention relative to each criterion/subcriterion, that were further combined into the Modulated Relative Benefit-Risk Balance (MRBRB). RESULTS: The most important criterion favouring FCM was Compared Efficacy/Effectiveness (0.183 ± 0.07), followed by Patient Preferences (0.059 ± 0.10). Only Direct medical costs criterion favoured FS (-0.003 ± 0.03). MRBRB favoured FCM; 0.45 ± 0.19; in a scale from -1 to + 1. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, considering the several criteria involved in the decision-making process, participants agreed with the use of FCM according to its MRBRB.

La Sociedad Española de Farmacia Hospitalaria ante la especialidad única / The Stand of the SEFH Toward a Single Speciality

No disponible

Factores predictores de hiperglucemia en pacientes con nutrición parenteral / Predictive factors of hyperglycaemia in patients with parenteral nutrition

Objetivo: Identificar los factores predictivos de hiperglucemia en pacientes que reciben nutrición parenteral (NP). Material y métodos: Estudio observacional retrospectivo (enero 2016-diciembre 2016) realizado en un hospital universitario de 450 camas. Se incluyeron los pacientes adultos hospitalizados que recibieron NP total por vía central durante al menos 48h de duración. Se recogieron las variables necesarias para caracterizar a los pacientes, y aquellas referentes a la NP recibida y se definió hiperglucemia como 3 glucemias consecutivas superiores a 150mg/dl o 2 superiores a 180mg/dl. Se realizó un análisis estadístico descriptivo, comparativo bivariante, y un análisis multivariante mediante regresión logística binaria (SPSS.v.24.). Resultados: Se incluyeron 234 pacientes. La prevalencia de hiperglucemia en la población bajo estudio fue del 44%. Las principales diferencias observadas en el análisis bivariante entre los pacientes hiperglucémicos y normoglucémicos se relacionaron con edad, comorbilidades previas, servicio médico, presencia de sepsis, duración y aporte de glucosa en la NP, así como los valores analíticos de glucemia y el tratamiento con corticoides. Los factores predictivos de hiperglucemia obtenidos tras el análisis multivariante fueron: aclaramiento renal (OR=0,982; IC95% 0,968-0,996; p=0,010), glucemia previa a la NP (OR=1,039; IC95% 1,026-1,051; p<0,001), diabetes mellitus (OR=11,016; IC95% 3,028-31,697; p<0,001), medicina intensiva (OR=3,303; IC95% 1,183-9,219; p=0,023), corticoides (OR=3,115; IC95% 1,179-8,226; p=0,022). Conclusiones: El aclaramiento renal disminuido, la glucemia previa elevada, la diabetes, la utilización de corticoides y el paciente crítico son factores predictores de hiperglucemia, por lo que sería conveniente considerarlos en el diseño de la fórmula de inicio de NP

Objective: To identify the predictive factors of hyperglycaemia in patients receiving parenteral nutrition (PN). Material and methods: Retrospective observational study (January 2016-December 2016) conducted in a 450-bed university hospital. Adult hospitalized patients who received total PN through a central line for at least 48hours were included. The required variables to characterize patients, and those related to the PN received were collected and hyperglycaemia was defined as 3 consecutive glycaemias greater than 150mg/dl or 2 greater than 180mg/dl. A descriptive, comparative bivariate statistical analysis was carried out, as well as a multivariate analysis using binary logistic regression (SPSS.v.24.) Results: 234 patients were included. The prevalence of hyperglycaemia in the population under study was 44.0%. The main differences observed in the bivariate analysis between hyperglycaemic and normoglycemic patients were related to age, previous comorbidities, medical department, presence of sepsis, duration and glucose contribution in PN, as well as blood glucose levels and corticosteroids. The predictors of hyperglycaemia obtained after the multivariate analysis were: renal clearance (OR=.982, 95% CI .968-.996, P=.010), pre-PN glycaemia (OR=1.039, 95% CI 1.026-1.051, P<.001), diabetes mellitus (OR=11.016, 95% CI 3.028-31.697, P<.001), intensive medicine (OR=3.303, 95% CI 1.183-9.219, P=.023), corticosteroids (OR=3.155, 95% CI 1.179-8.226, P=.022). Conclusions: Decreased renal clearance, high blood glucose levels, diabetes, corticosteroid use, and critical patients are predictors of hyperglycaemia, therefore it would be advisable to consider them in the design of PN start formula

Predictive factors of hyperglycaemia in patients with parenteral nutrition. / Factores predictores de hiperglucemia en pacientes con nutrición parenteral.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the predictive factors of hyperglycaemia in patients receiving parenteral nutrition (PN). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective observational study (January 2016-December 2016) conducted in a 450-bed university hospital. Adult hospitalized patients who received total PN through a central line for at least 48hours were included. The required variables to characterize patients, and those related to the PN received were collected and hyperglycaemia was defined as 3 consecutive glycaemias greater than 150mg/dl or 2 greater than 180mg/dl. A descriptive, comparative bivariate statistical analysis was carried out, as well as a multivariate analysis using binary logistic regression (SPSS.v.24.) RESULTS: 234 patients were included. The prevalence of hyperglycaemia in the population under study was 44.0%. The main differences observed in the bivariate analysis between hyperglycaemic and normoglycemic patients were related to age, previous comorbidities, medical department, presence of sepsis, duration and glucose contribution in PN, as well as blood glucose levels and corticosteroids. The predictors of hyperglycaemia obtained after the multivariate analysis were: renal clearance (OR=.982, 95% CI .968-.996, P=.010), pre-PN glycaemia (OR=1.039, 95% CI 1.026-1.051, P<.001), diabetes mellitus (OR=11.016, 95% CI 3.028-31.697, P<.001), intensive medicine (OR=3.303, 95% CI 1.183-9.219, P=.023), corticosteroids (OR=3.155, 95% CI 1.179-8.226, P=.022). CONCLUSIONS: Decreased renal clearance, high blood glucose levels, diabetes, corticosteroid use, and critical patients are predictors of hyperglycaemia, therefore it would be advisable to consider them in the design of PN start formula.

Registro de participación en ensayo clínico en el informe de alta hospitalaria / Record of participation in a clinical trial in hospital discharge reports

No disponible

Errores de conciliación en el ingreso y en el alta hospitalaria en pacientes ancianos polimedicados. Estudio prospectivo aleatorizado multicéntrico / Reconciliation errors at admission and departure in old and polymedicated patients. Prospective, multicenter randomized study

Fundamento y objetivo: El objetivo del estudio es conocer la incidencia de los errores de conciliación en el ingreso y en el alta hospitalaria en pacientes ancianos polimedicados así como los factores de riesgo asociados. Pacientes y método: Estudio prospectivo aleatorizado y multicéntrico en el ingreso o en el alta hospitalaria. Cualquier discrepancia no justificada entre el tratamiento crónico y el prescrito en el hospital se consideró un error de conciliación. Resultados: Se incluyeron 603 pacientes, de los cuales 318 (52,7%) presentaron al menos un error de conciliación. De las 3.991 prescripciones, 2.340 prescripciones (59%) no mostraron discrepancias, mientras que 970 prescripciones (24%) fueron discrepancias justificadas y 644 prescripciones (16%) fueron discrepancias no justificadas; en 37 prescripciones (1%) no fue posible determinarlo. De las 644 discrepancias no justificadas, en 555 discrepancias, el médico las aceptó como error de conciliación (tasa de errores de conciliación del 13,9%). Discusión: El 52,7% de los pacientes ancianos polimedicados presentaron errores de conciliación durante su estancia hospitalaria, lo que implica el 13,9% de los medicamentos. La conciliación de la medicación debe ser un objetivo estratégico para mejorar la seguridad de los pacientes (AU)

Background and objective: The objective of this study was to know of the incidence rate of reconciliation errors in elderly poly-medicated patients. Patients and method: A prospective randomized multicenter study in a cohort of patients at admission or at discharge. Any unjustified discrepancy in medication between chronic treatment and the treatment prescribed in the hospital was considered as a Reconciliation Error. Results: From January 2006 to April 2008 603 patients were analyzed: 318 (52.7%) showed at least one Reconciliation Error. The patients had a total of 3.991 medications registered, 2.340 (59%) showed no discrepancies, 970 (24%) HAD justified discrepancies and 644 (16%) not justified; in 37 (1%) it was not possible to determine whether this was an error or not. Of the 644 unjustified discrepancies, 555 were accepted by the doctor as Reconciliation Errors. Reconciliation Error rate of 13.9%. Conclusion: According to this study, 52.7% of elderly poly-medicated patients have reconciliation errors during hospitalization. Medication reconciliation should be a strategic objective to increase the safety of patients (AU)

[Reconciliation errors at admission and departure in old and polymedicated patients. Prospective, multicenter randomized study]. / Errores de conciliación en el ingreso y en el alta hospitalaria en pacientes ancianos polimedicados. Estudio prospectivo aleatorizado multicéntrico.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to know of the incidence rate of reconciliation errors in elderly poly-medicated patients. PATIENTS AND METHOD: A prospective randomized multicenter study in a cohort of patients at admission or at discharge. Any unjustified discrepancy in medication between chronic treatment and the treatment prescribed in the hospital was considered as a Reconciliation Error. RESULTS: From January 2006 to April 2008 603 patients were analyzed: 318 (52.7%) showed at least one Reconciliation Error. The patients had a total of 3.991 medications registered, 2.340 (59%) showed no discrepancies, 970 (24%) HAD justified discrepancies and 644 (16%) not justified; in 37 (1%) it was not possible to determine whether this was an error or not. Of the 644 unjustified discrepancies, 555 were accepted by the doctor as Reconciliation Errors. Reconciliation Error rate of 13.9%. CONCLUSION: According to this study, 52.7% of elderly poly-medicated patients have reconciliation errors during hospitalization. Medication reconciliation should be a strategic objective to increase the safety of patients.

Conciliación de la medicación / Conciliation in medication

No disponible