[Implementation of simplified diagnostic method Apnealink™Air® to diagnose sleep apnea by general practioners of primary care]. / Implementación del método simplificado Apnealink™Air® por médicos de atención primaria para el diagnóstico del síndrome de apnea-hipopnea durante el sueño.

OBJECTIVES: To assess diagnosis and therapeutic decisions-making by General Practitioners (GP) using ApnealinkTM® (AL) in patients with high suspicion of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), in comparison with conclusions of Hospital Sleep Unit (HSU) specialists based on home respiratory polygraphy (PGR) results. METHODS: This study involved patients previously selected by HSU for sleep testing by PGR. After it, patients were offered to complete AL test. PGR was checked at HSU; AL was checked by hemoglobin desaturation index of 4% (4% ODI), (4% AL) and 3% (3% ODI) patients with positive test to proceed with CPAP; and those with negative test for further testing. Automatically adjusted 4% AL, was considered valid as it was demonstrated to be equivalent to manual AL. Results were compared by automatically adjusted 3%AL against PGR results. RESULTS: 48 patients were collected. 43 had AL valid test, 45 had PGR valid study, and 41 had both valid test. 27 patients (62,8%) had positive 4% AL (OR 5,51, p < 0,05), that showed AHI ≥ 15/h at 3% AL test; and 19 patients (42,2%) had a positive PGR test. 31 (72%) patients had a positive 3% AL. AL had shown to be a good screening method of SAHS. CONCLUSIONS: There is equivalence between the decisions of GP and HSU. AL is a good diagnostic tool and screening method for OSA in primary care when it is used in patients with high suspicion of moderate-severe OSA.

Incidents related to critical patient safety during in-hospital transfer.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the incidents related to patient safety (IRSP) and their risk factors during in-hospital transfer (IHT) of critical patients after the application of a protocol, and to evaluate safety during transfer using quality indicators. DESIGN: A prospective, observational and non-intervention cohort study was carried out. SETTING: A 10-bed multipurpose Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of a second level university hospital. PATIENTS: All IHTs of critical patients in the ICU for diagnostic tests and to the operating room between March 2011 and March 2017 were included in the study. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Demographic variables, patient severity, transfer priority, moment of the day, reason and type of transfer team. Pre-transport checklist items and IRSP were collected. A biannual analysis was made of quality indicators designed for IHT. RESULTS: A total of 805 transfers were registered, mostly of an urgent nature (53.7%) and for diagnostic tests (77%). In turn, 112 transfers (13.9%) presented some type of IRSP; 54% related to the equipment and 30% related to team and organization. Adverse events occurred in 19 (2.4%) transfers. Risk factors identified in the multivariate analysis were mechanical ventilation and the transport team. The evolution of the indicators related to transport was significantly favorable. CONCLUSIONS: After the application of an IHT protocol, IRSP are low. The main risk factor is invasive mechanical ventilation. The experience of the team performing IHT influences the detection of a greater number of incidents.

Incidents related to critical patient safety during in-hospital transfer. / Incidentes relacionados con la seguridad del paciente crítico durante los traslados intrahospitalarios.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the incidents related to patient safety (IRSP) and their risk factors during in-hospital transfer (IHT) of critical patients after the application of a protocol, and to evaluate safety during transfer using quality indicators. DESIGN: A prospective, observational and non-intervention cohort study was carried out. SETTING: A 10-bed multipurpose Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of a second level university hospital. PATIENTS: All IHTs of critical patients in the ICU for diagnostic tests and to the operating room between March 2011 and March 2017 were included in the study. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Demographic variables, patient severity, transfer priority, moment of the day, reason and type of transfer team. Pre-transport checklist items and IRSP were collected. A biannual analysis was made of quality indicators designed for IHT. RESULTS: A total of 805 transfers were registered, mostly of an urgent nature (53.7%) and for diagnostic tests (77%). In turn, 112 transfers (13.9%) presented some type of IRSP; 54% related to the equipment and 30% related to team and organization. Adverse events occurred in 19 (2.4%) transfers. Risk factors identified in the multivariate analysis were mechanical ventilation and the transport team. The evolution of the indicators related to transport was significantly favorable. CONCLUSIONS: After the application of an IHT protocol, IRSP are low. The main risk factor is invasive mechanical ventilation. The experience of the team performing IHT influences the detection of a greater number of incidents.