Inercia clínica o terapéutica en neumología: una reflexión sobre su definición y actores principales / Clinical or therapeutic inertia in pneumology: critical reflection on its definition and main actors

La inercia clínica se define como los fallos del médico en el inicio o la intensificación del tratamiento cuando están indicados. Nuestro objetivo es reflexionar sobre este concepto aplicado en enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica y asma, y el papel del profesional sanitario y del sistema de salud como actores implicados. Dejamos aparte la inercia del paciente para otro ámbito de estudio e intervención. Proponemos definir la inercia clínica para procesos durante el diagnóstico y el tratamiento cuando no se inicia o modifica (intensifica o disminuye) una terapia. También se identifican los factores que contribuyen a la inercia clínica o terapéutica y se plantean estrategias de mejora. (AU)

Clinical inertia is defined as the physician’s failure to initiate or intensify treatment when it is indicated. Our objective is to reflect on this concept applied to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma, and the role of health professional and health system as stakeholders. We leave patient inertia aside for another area of study and intervention. We propose to define clinical inertia for diagnosis and therapeutic processes when a treatment is not started or modified (intensifies or decreases). Factors that contribute to clinical and/or therapeutic inertia are also identified and improvement strategies are proposed. (AU)

Inercia diagnóstica para la hipertensión arterial en pacientes diabéticos con seguimiento en atención primaria / Diagnostic inertia for hypertension in diabetic patients with follow-up in primary care

Objetivos: Se buscó estimar la prevalencia de hipertensión arterial no diagnosticada en pacientes con diabetes mellitus tipo 2 y las variables relacionadas. Métodos: Cohorte histórica mediante auditoría de historias clínicas (años 2012-2015), recogiendo los registros de presión arterial para cuantificar hipertensión arterial no diagnosticada (HTAND) según criterios de la American Diabetes Association (ADA) (presión arterial > 130/80 mm Hg) y criterios de la European Society of Hypertension/European Society of Cardiology (ESC/ESH) (presión arterial > 40/90 mm Hg) (año 2013). Otras variables: edad, sexo, frecuentación sanitaria, control metabólico, antecedentes personales, índice de masa corporal y formación previa a los médicos de familia sobre el tema. Análisis descriptivo, bivariado y multivariado (regresión logística). Aprobado por el Comité de Ética de la Investigación. Resultados: Setecientos treinta y dos pacientes (10% pérdidas) de 10 centros de salud (64 médicos), con una media de edad de 63.1 ± 12.4 años y 62% de mujeres. El 76% consulta a demanda de forma anual, con 72% de visitas programadas y 2.1 ± 2.3 de registros anuales de presión arterial. La duración de la diabetes fue de 6.3 ± 4.5 años, el 67% presentó control óptimo y el 15%, complicaciones vasculares, con el 77% con sobrepeso/obesidad. La incidencia de HTAND con criterios de la ADA fue del 43.2% y se relacionó con la obesidad (OR: 1.06) y las complicaciones vasculares (OR: 6.5). Con los criterios de la ESC/ESH fue del 13.4%, relacionada con polifarmacia (OR: 1.2) y con complicaciones vasculares (OR: 3.0), mientras que el mayor número de registros de presión arterial (OR: 0.9) y la atención programada (OR: 0.8) la evitan. Conclusión: Un elevado porcentaje de diabéticos no son correctamente diagnosticados de HTA, lo cual varía según el criterio diagnóstico empleado. La atención en programas, con especial atención a polifarmacia, complicaciones vasculares y obesidad, puede mejorar la inercia diagnóstica.

We sought to estimate the prevalence of undiagnosed hypertension in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and related variables. Methods: Historical cohort by auditing medical records (years 2012-2015), collecting blood pressure records to quantify undiagnosed arterial hypertension (HTAND) according to criteria of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) (blood pressure> 130/80 mm Hg ) and criteria of the European Society of Hypertension / European Society of Cardiology (ESC / ESH) (blood pressure> 40/90 mm Hg) (year 2013). Other variables: age, sex, health care, metabolic control, personal history, body mass index and previous training for family doctors on the subject. Descriptive, bivariate and multivariate analysis using logistic regression. Approved by the Research Ethics Committee. Results: Seven hundred thirty-two patients (10% losses) from 10 health centers (64 physicians), with a mean age of 63.1 ± 12.4 years and 62% women. 76% consult on demand annually, with 72% scheduled visits and 2.1 ± 2.3 annual blood pressure records. The duration of diabetes was 6.3 ± 4.5 years, 67% presented optimal control and 15% vascular complications, and 77% overweight or obesity. The incidence of undiagnosed arterial hypertension according to the ADA criteria was 43.2% and it was related to obesity (OR: 1.06) and vascular complications (OR: 6.5). With the ESC / ESH criteria prevalence it was 13.4%, related to polypharmacy (OR: 1.2) and with vascular complications (OR: 3.0), while the highest number of blood pressure records (OR: 0.9) and scheduled care (OR: 0.8) avoid it. Conclusion: A high percentage of diabetics are not correctly diagnosed with HT, which varies according to the diagnostic criteria used. Specific diabetic care programs, with special attention to polypharmacy, vascular complications, and obesity, can improve diagnostic inertia

[Impact of cognitive biases in therapeutic inertia in arterial hypertension: Not everything is as it seems]. / Impacto de los sesgos cognitivos en la inercia terapéutica en hipertensión arterial: no todo es lo que parece.

Therapeutic inertia is defined as the failure to take therapeutic decisions, such as initiating, adding or increasing the dose of a drug during patient follow-up, despite there being an indication to do so. It is currently considered that therapeutic inertia is a considerable impediment to achieving adequate control of hypertension, and this has implications for the prognosis of the disease. Therapeutic inertia might be due to various factors involving physicians, patients and the health system. Many studies have attempted to find determinants for therapeutic inertia in hypertension and to explain the reasons why health professionals in charge of treatment are failing to make the appropriate modifications to therapy. The many reasons for therapeutic inertia on the part of physicians include the various cognitive and affective biases that influence clinical reasoning and decision-making during healthcare activity in doctors' surgeries. Identifying and recognising these cognitive and affective biases could be important for planning educational strategies for health professionals. This requires a multi-dimensional approach, including knowledge beyond that observed in terms of insufficient information and updating on the disease, and starting to analyse and consider other reasons. Preventing therapeutic inertia should be made a priority along with other important measures to control hypertension and minimise its consequences.

Inercia clínica en el tratamiento con insulina en el primer nivel de atención.

INTRODUCTION: Refusal of physicians to prescribe insulin to their patients has been scarcely evaluated; the delay in treatment intensification hinders adequate and quality care. OBJECTIVE: To identify the perception of primary care physicians about barriers to initiate insulin treatment in patients with diabetes. METHOD: Using the Smith Index and multivariate analysis, the relevance and grouping of concepts related to barriers to insulin prescription were assessed in 81 family doctors. RESULTS: Only 35.8% of physicians showed confidence for prescribing insulin; almost half of them rated treatment intensification between moderately and little important (39.5% and 6.2%). Barriers were related to the physician (39.5%), the patient (37%), insulin treatment (11.1%) and the institution (6.2%); 6.2 % of physicians did not perceive any barrier. The barriers were grouped in 5 factors that explained 62.48% of the variance: patient cultural level, lack of medical skills, fear of adverse events, insecurity and lack of training. CONCLUSION: Clinical inertia was not the result of a complex medical condition or patient comorbidities, but of doctor's perception and confidence in his/her clinical and communication skills.

INTRODUCCIÓN: Poco se ha evaluado el rechazo de los médicos a prescribir insulina a sus pacientes; el retraso en intensificar el tratamiento impide una atención adecuada y de calidad. OBJETIVO: Identificar la percepción de los médicos acerca de las barreras para iniciar la insulina en los pacientes con diabetes. MÉTODO: Por Índice Smith y análisis multivariado, en 81 médicos familiares se evaluó la relevancia y agrupación de los conceptos relacionados con las barreras para la prescripción de insulina. RESULTADOS: 35.8 % de los médicos mostró confianza en prescribir insulina; casi la mitad calificó la intensificación del tratamiento entre moderadamente y poco importante (39.5 y 6.2 %). Las barreras se relacionaron con el médico (39.5 %), el paciente (37 %), el tratamiento con insulina (11.1 %) y la institución (6.2 %); 6.2 % de los médicos no percibió ninguna barrera. Las barreras se agruparon en cinco factores, que explicaron 62.48 % de la varianza: cultura de los pacientes, falta de habilidades, miedo a los eventos adversos, inseguridad y falta de capacitación. CONCLUSIÓN: La inercia clínica no resultó de una condición clínica compleja o comorbilidades del paciente, sino de la percepción del médico y de su confianza en sus habilidades clínicas y comunicativas.

Inercia clínica en el tratamiento con insulina en el primer nivel de atención / Clinical inertia in insulin treatment at the primary care level

Resumen Introducción: Poco se ha evaluado el rechazo de los médicos a prescribir insulina a sus pacientes; el retraso en intensificar el tratamiento impide una atención adecuada y de calidad. Objetivo: Identificar la percepción de los médicos acerca de las barreras para iniciar la insulina en los pacientes con diabetes. Método: Por Índice Smith y análisis multivariado, en 81 médicos familiares se evaluó la relevancia y agrupación de los conceptos relacionados con las barreras para la prescripción de insulina. Resultados: 35.8 % de los médicos mostró confianza en prescribir insulina; casi la mitad calificó la intensificación del tratamiento entre moderadamente y poco importante (39.5 y 6.2 %). Las barreras se relacionaron con el médico (39.5 %), el paciente (37 %), el tratamiento con insulina (11.1 %) y la institución (6.2 %); 6.2 % de los médicos no percibió ninguna barrera. Las barreras se agruparon en cinco factores, que explicaron 62.48 % de la varianza: cultura de los pacientes, falta de habilidades, miedo a los eventos adversos, inseguridad y falta de capacitación. Conclusión: La inercia clínica no resultó de una condición clínica compleja o comorbilidades del paciente, sino de la percepción del médico y de su confianza en sus habilidades clínicas y comunicativas.

Abstract Introduction: Refusal of physicians to prescribe insulin to their patients has been scarcely evaluated; the delay in treatment intensification hinders adequate and quality care. Objective: To identify the perception of primary care physicians about barriers to initiate insulin treatment in patients with diabetes. Method: Using the Smith Index and multivariate analysis, the relevance and grouping of concepts related to barriers to insulin prescription were assessed in 81 family doctors. Results: Only 35.8% of physicians showed confidence for prescribing insulin; almost half of them rated treatment intensification between moderately and little important (39.5% and 6.2%). Barriers were related to the physician (39.5%), the patient (37%), insulin treatment (11.1%) and the institution (6.2%); 6.2 % of physicians did not perceive any barrier. The barriers were grouped in 5 factors that explained 62.48% of the variance: patient cultural level, lack of medical skills, fear of adverse events, insecurity and lack of training. Conclusion: Clinical inertia was not the result of a complex medical condition or patient comorbidities, but of doctor’s perception and confidence in his/her clinical and communication skills.

[INERTIA study: Clinical inertia in non-insulinized patients on oral hypoglycemic treatment. A study in Spanish primary and specialty care settings]. / Inercia clínica en pacientes con diabetes mellitus tipo 2 no insulinizados en tratamiento con hipoglucemiantes orales. Estudio INERCIA.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To study clinical inertia in the management of oral hypoglycemic agents (OHA) in non-insulin treated patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Spain. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Epidemiological, cross-sectional, retrospective (2 years), multicenter study. Clinical inertia was measured as the total number of patients without OHA treatment intensification divided by the total number of patients with inadequate HbA1c values (≥7%), multiplied by 100. Total clinical inertia (TCI) was the absence of OHA treatment intensification in all visits with a HbA1c≥7% values in the previous 2 years; partial clinical inertia (PCI) occurred when this absence only occurred in some of these visits. We assessed OHA treatment compliance with the Morisky-Green test. RESULTS: We included 2,971 patients, 1,416 adequately controlled (HbA1c<7%) and 1,555 inadequately controlled (HbA1c≥7%). PCI prevalence was 52.5%(95% confidence interval [95% CI] 52.4-52.6%) while TCI prevalence was 12.8% (95% CI 12.2-13.8%). PCI was lower in patients adequately controlled as compared with those inadequately controlled (31.4% vs. 71.8%; P<.001). PCI was associated with sedentary lifestyle, hypertension and higher prevalence of micro and macrovascular complications. Only 38.0% of patients were compliant with the OHA treatment, being this percentage even lower in subjects with ICP. Two variables were independently associated with ICP: female sex (odds ratio [OR] 1.43; 95% CI 1.09-1.86%) and a shorter duration of DM2 (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.95-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: One out of 2 patients with T2DM and treated with OHA without insulin suffer from PCI. Only 4 out of 10 patients are compliant with OHA treatment. Female sex and a shorter duration of T2DM are independently associated with PCI.