[Psychosocial stress environment and health workers in public health: Differences between primary and hospital care]. / Entorno psicosocial y estrés en trabajadores sanitarios de la sanidad pública: diferencias entre atención primaria y hospitalaria.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the psychosocial environment of health professionals in public health in primary and hospital care, and compare it with that of the general Spanish working population, as well as to evaluate the effect of psychosocial risk factors on symptoms related to perceived stress. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study with stratified random sampling. SETTING: Health care workers in the province of Granada, distributed in 5 hospitals and 4 health districts. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 738 employees (medical and nursing staff) of the Andalusian Health Service (SAS) were invited to take part. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: CopSoQ/Istas21 questionnaire developed for the multidimensional analysis of the psychosocial work environment. Stress symptoms were measured with the Stress Profile questionnaire. RESULTS: The response rate was 67.5%. Compared with the Spanish workforce, our sample showed high cognitive, emotional, and sensory psychological demands, possibilities for development and sense of direction in their work. Primary care physicians were the group with a worse psychosocial work environment. All the groups studied showed high levels of stress symptoms. Multivariate analysis showed that variables associated with high levels of stress symptom were younger and with possibilities for social relations, role conflict, and higher emotional demands, and insecurity at work. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support that the psychosocial work environment of health workers differs from that of the Spanish working population, being more unfavorable in general practitioners.

[Bibliometric map of research done in primary care in Spain during the period 2008-2012]. / Mapa bibliométrico de la investigación realizada en atención primaria en España durante el periodo 2008-2012.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the Spanish scientific production of primary care during 2008-2012. DESIGN: Observational study bibliometric. SETTING: Spanish scientific production in primary care. PARTICIPANTS: The study focused on publications indexed in Medline. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: In each record was obtained journal, year of publication, first/last author, workplace and autonomous community. Later, articles were classified according to their content or areas of research. The impact factor was obtained from the basis of bibliometric analysis Journal Citation Reports. RESULTS: Using search criteria, were selected 1,048 documents. The transiency rate was 62.6%. Production increased from 170 papers in 2008 to 291 in 2012. Most (65.7%) came from health centers, but we observed a significant increase (P=.01) of the articles from units or research institutes (5.9% in 2008, 12.0% in 2012). Of the total, 61.6% were classified as «clinical aspects¼, 22.5% were published in the journal Atención Primaria, 80.5% in journals with impact factor and 33.49% in foreign journals, being higher this proportion (P<.001) in units or research institutes (70.5% vs. 29.8%). In relation to population (articles/100.000 inhab.), the most productive communities were Cataluña (4.1), Castilla-La Mancha (3.6), Aragón (3.4) and Navarra (3.4). CONCLUSIONS: In primary care publications there is great diversity in both research areas such as in journals where published. Most are from health centers, treat clinical aspects and published in Spanish journals. Differences in the volume of scientific production between regions are observed.

Development and validation of a risk model for prediction of hazardous alcohol consumption in general practice attendees: the predictAL study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the risk of progression to hazardous alcohol use in people currently drinking at safe limits. We aimed to develop a prediction model (predictAL) for the development of hazardous drinking in safe drinkers. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of adult general practice attendees in six European countries and Chile followed up over 6 months. We recruited 10,045 attendees between April 2003 to February 2005. 6193 European and 2462 Chilean attendees recorded AUDIT scores below 8 in men and 5 in women at recruitment and were used in modelling risk. 38 risk factors were measured to construct a risk model for the development of hazardous drinking using stepwise logistic regression. The model was corrected for over fitting and tested in an external population. The main outcome was hazardous drinking defined by an AUDIT score ≥8 in men and ≥5 in women. RESULTS: 69.0% of attendees were recruited, of whom 89.5% participated again after six months. The risk factors in the final predictAL model were sex, age, country, baseline AUDIT score, panic syndrome and lifetime alcohol problem. The predictAL model's average c-index across all six European countries was 0.839 (95% CI 0.805, 0.873). The Hedge's g effect size for the difference in log odds of predicted probability between safe drinkers in Europe who subsequently developed hazardous alcohol use and those who did not was 1.38 (95% CI 1.25, 1.51). External validation of the algorithm in Chilean safe drinkers resulted in a c-index of 0.781 (95% CI 0.717, 0.846) and Hedge's g of 0.68 (95% CI 0.57, 0.78). CONCLUSIONS: The predictAL risk model for development of hazardous consumption in safe drinkers compares favourably with risk algorithms for disorders in other medical settings and can be a useful first step in prevention of alcohol misuse.

Development and validation of an international risk prediction algorithm for episodes of major depression in general practice attendees: the PredictD study.

CONTEXT: Strategies for prevention of depression are hindered by lack of evidence about the combined predictive effect of known risk factors. OBJECTIVES: To develop a risk algorithm for onset of major depression. DESIGN: Cohort of adult general practice attendees followed up at 6 and 12 months. We measured 39 known risk factors to construct a risk model for onset of major depression using stepwise logistic regression. We corrected the model for overfitting and tested it in an external population. SETTING: General practices in 6 European countries and in Chile. PARTICIPANTS: In Europe and Chile, 10 045 attendees were recruited April 2003 to February 2005. The algorithm was developed in 5216 European attendees who were not depressed at recruitment and had follow-up data on depression status. It was tested in 1732 patients in Chile who were not depressed at recruitment. Main Outcome Measure DSM-IV major depression. RESULTS: Sixty-six percent of people approached participated, of whom 89.5% participated again at 6 months and 85.9%, at 12 months. Nine of the 10 factors in the risk algorithm were age, sex, educational level achieved, results of lifetime screen for depression, family history of psychological difficulties, physical health and mental health subscale scores on the Short Form 12, unsupported difficulties in paid or unpaid work, and experiences of discrimination. Country was the tenth factor. The algorithm's average C index across countries was 0.790 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.767-0.813). Effect size for difference in predicted log odds of depression between European attendees who became depressed and those who did not was 1.28 (95% CI, 1.17-1.40). Application of the algorithm in Chilean attendees resulted in a C index of 0.710 (95% CI, 0.670-0.749). CONCLUSION: This first risk algorithm for onset of major depression functions as well as similar risk algorithms for cardiovascular events and may be useful in prevention of depression.

Prevalence of common mental disorders in general practice attendees across Europe.

BACKGROUND: There is evidence that the prevalence of common mental disorders varies across Europe. AIMS: To compare prevalence of common mental disorders in general practice attendees in six European countries. METHOD: Unselected attendees to general practices in the UK, Spain, Portugal, Slovenia, Estonia and The Netherlands were assessed for major depression, panic syndrome and other anxiety syndrome. Prevalence of DSM-IV major depression, other anxiety syndrome and panic syndrome was compared between the UK and other countries after taking account of differences in demographic factors and practice consultation rates. RESULTS: Prevalence was estimated in 2,344 men and 4,865 women. The highest prevalence for all disorders occurred in the UK and Spain, and lowest in Slovenia and The Netherlands. Men aged 30-50 and women aged 18-30 had the highest prevalence of major depression; men aged 40-60 had the highest prevalence of anxiety, and men and women aged 40-50 had the highest prevalence of panic syndrome. Demographic factors accounted for the variance between the UK and Spain but otherwise had little impact on the significance of observed country differences. CONCLUSIONS: These results add to the evidence for real differences between European countries in prevalence of psychological disorders and show that the burden of care on general practitioners varies markedly between countries.

[The dimensions of the organisational climate as seen by general practitioners]. / Las dimensiones del clima organizacional percibidas por los médicos de familia.

OBJECTIVE: To create and validate a tool to assess the organizational climate (OC) perceived by general practitioners (GP). DESIGN: Descriptive, cross-sectional, and multi-site, study. SETTING: Health centres (HC) in Jaén and Málaga province Spain. PARTICIPANTS: Random sample of 38 HCs and 387 GPs. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: A self-administered questionnaire in March 2001, with the personal variables of sex, age, graduation date, specialty, kind of contract, time worked in primary care teams, time in current job, list size, case load, tutor of residents and academic qualification. HC variables: urban/rural, team structure, accreditation for teaching residents, service portfolio, out-patient care, and an OC scale of 40 Likert-like questions. We analysed the content validity of the scale by factorial analysis; and its reliability, by Cronbach's alpha and corrected scale-item correlation coefficients. RESULTS: Reply rate was 89.8%, 71% of the GPs were male, mean age was 44, 76% had tenure, and 37% were specialists in family medicine and 28% tutors, 17% with 3rd-year residents, 9% with doctors; 50% of HCs were rural and the mean team structure had 13 GPs and 4 paediatricians. We obtained 12 factors that explained 60% of variance, and 7 factors with reliability coefficients >0.50. We made an OC-positive scale (alpha=.82) with the dimensions for team-work, cohesion and social life; and another OC-negative scale (alpha=.78) composed of team conflict, perceived team failure, excess autonomy, authoritarian management, and GP-nurse tension. CONCLUSIONS: We found a questionnaire with good validity and reliability, which was useful for evaluating the OC perceived by GPs.