[Morbidity due to chronic diseases and their health care in Asturias: a gender analysis]. / Morbilidad por enfermedades crónicas y su atención sanitaria en Asturias: análisis de género.

OBJECTIVE: To determine gender differences in the magnitude and complexity of chronic diseases and gender inequalities in health care in the adult population of Asturias in 2022. METHOD: A cross-sectional population study in people (>14 years) with at least one diagnosis of chronic disease (780,566 inhabitants). SOURCES OF INFORMATION: computer program for morbidity groups (Ministry of Health), Electronic medical record of primary care and hospital. Comparative analysis by sex and age, the mean values of chronic diseases and complexity index (Student's t test and one-way ANOVA), and probability (odds ratio and 95% CI) of suffering from specific chronic diseases, making one or more visits to the hospital emergency department or one or more admissions to hospital. RESULTS: 89.9% of women and 82.1% of men were registered with at least one chronic disease. The mean was higher in women (4.36) than in men (3.22) (p<0.001). Complexity index: men 4.56 and women 5.85 (p<0.001). Results show that women are more likely to attend the hospital emergency department, with an attendance rate of 50% for the diseases cited, compared with men at 29%. The rate of hospital admission is higher in men in 13 of the 14 diseases studied (85%). CONCLUSIONS: Gender analysis can also be applied to secondary sources of the National Health System. Despite the greater magnitude and complexity of chronic diseases in women, there is a higher frequency of hospital admissions in men compared to women with the same diseases. This implies an unequal care profile in the field of hospital admissions that the scientific literature associates with gender biases in health care.

[Impact of the chronic disease care program on social determinants of health in Asturias.] / Impacto de la Estrategia de Salud y Atención a la Población con Enfermedad Crónica sobre los determinantes sociales de la salud en Asturias.

OBJECTIVE: Providing care for people with chronic diseases is a challenge requiring institutional programs and strategies, thus it necessary to evaluate the impact of the same on the social determinants of health (SDH). The aims were: 1) to describe the impact of the structural determinants of the Health Strategy for the Population with Chronic Diseases (EAPEC) in Asturias and 2) to propose actions for improvement regarding social stratification factors. METHODS: Qualitative study of six strategic programs of the Chronic Disease Strategy: Health Observatory, Social and Healthcare Coordination, School for Patients Program, Caregivers Program, Mental Health Services Continuity, and Quality and Safety in Healthcare. A screening tool was used, validated for evaluation of the health impact on the structural determinants (socioeconomic and political context and social stratification factors) of the SDH. A personal semi-structured interview was carried out with the manager of each program in 2016, and a final report was produced that included the impacts found and proposals for improvement. RESULTS: All programs had a positive impact on social values (social justice, equity) and the state of wellbeing (social and educational policies). In terms of social stratification, the principal positive effects included age and functional diversity. Regarding the factors linked to geographic location, gender, origin/ethnicity, and social class the principal effects were negative. CONCLUSIONS: This strategy aimed at people with chronic diseases has positive effects. However, paying attention to social stratification factors during implementation of the same is a priority.

OBJETIVO: La atención a personas con enfermedades crónicas es un reto que precisa de estrategias y programas institucionales, siendo necesario evaluar su impacto en los determinantes sociales de la salud (DSS). Los objetivos de este trabajo fueron tanto describir el impacto en los determinantes estructurales de la Estrategia de Salud y Atención a la Población con Enfermedad Crónica (EAPEC) de Asturias como proponer acciones de mejora en relación con los factores de estratificación social. METODOS: Se realizó un estudio cualitativo de 6 programas estratégicos de la Estrategia de Cronicidad: Observatorio de Salud, Coordinación Sociosanitaria, Escuela de Pacientes, Atención a Personas Cuidadoras, Continuidad Asistencial en Salud Mental, Calidad y Seguridad en Atención Sanitaria. Se utilizó una herramienta de cribado validada para la evaluación del impacto en la salud sobre los determinantes estructurales (contexto socioeconómico y político, factores de estratificación social) de los DSS. Se realizó una entrevista personal semiestructurada con el responsable de cada programa en 2016, elaborando un informe final con los impactos detectados y propuestas de mejora. RESULTADOS: Todos los programas tuvieron un impacto positivo sobre los valores sociales (justicia social, equidad) y el estado de bienestar (políticas sociales, educativas). Dentro de la estratificación social, los principales efectos positivos afectaron a la edad y a la diversidad funcional. En los factores vinculados a la localización geográfica, género, origen/etnia y clase social se concentraron los principales efectos negativos. CONCLUSIONES: Esta estrategia dirigida a personas con enfermedades crónicas tiene efectos positivos. Sin embargo, es prioritario prestar atención a los factores de estratificación social durante su ejecución.

[Keys to the success of community engagement: dialogues on engagement at local level. SESPAS Report 2018]. / Claves para el éxito de la participación comunitaria: diálogos sobre participación en el ámbito local. Informe SESPAS 2018.

In recent years, successful local health interventions have emerged in the field of community engagement in health. This paper presents a dialogue between different local actors about the key aspects which can enhance the success of these community experiences. The format chosen for our work is a semi-structured conversation where authors discuss different aspects related to the current context of community engagement in health, the identified barriers to participating, and the effective tools which might facilitate the development of successful experiences. Most of the community experiences, which are the basis of this analysis, are found in intersectoral workspaces; mainly in local committees and health councils, in which the authors of this paper are involved. Developing an inclusive model of community engagement is challenging, but we rely on different tools that allow us to promote the participation of citizens in the decisions taken concerning their health and that of their community. To facilitate the development of successful experiences, it is necessary to combine different normative, technical and methodological tools. Furthermore, we also need to guide our intervention to promote participation in all phases of the intervention cycle, including a health perspective in all the policies, and acting on determinants from an equity perspective.

[Tools to assess the impact on health of public health programmes and community interventions from an equity perspective]. / Herramientas para una evaluación del impacto en salud de los programas de salud pública e intervenciones comunitarias con una perspectiva de equidad.

It is essential to develop a comprehensive approach to institutionally promoted interventions to assess their impact on health from the perspective of the social determinants of health and equity. Simple, adapted tools must be developed to carry out these assessments. The aim of this paper is to present two tools to assess the impact of programmes and community-based interventions on the social determinants of health. The first tool is intended to assess health programmes through interviews and analysis of information provided by the assessment team. The second tool, by means of online assessments of community-based interventions, also enables a report on inequality issues that includes recommendations for improvement. In addition to reducing health-related social inequities, the implementation of these tools can also help to improve the efficiency of public health interventions.

[Characteristics and factors associated with dementia caregivers burden]. / Características y factores relacionados con sobrecarga en una muestra de cuidadores principales de pacientes ancianos con demencia.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics and determining factors of carer stress in a group of elderly home care patients with dementia evaluated in a Geriatric Assessment Unit. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An observational descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted using an assessment of baseline characteristics of patients and carers. Estimation of caregiver burden was registered by validated scales: Goldberg Anxiety Scale (GAS), Goldberg Depression Scales (GDS), and Zarit Burden Scale (ZS). RESULTS: A total of 130 patients were included. No item related to dementia patients was associated with caregiver burden. A poor perception of health and quality of life by the caregivers were associated with anxiety risk, depression and burden. Attendance rates for primary care and lack of paid work outside the home were associated with both, depression (GDS>2) and anxiety (GAS>4). Carer age and a lower education were related to depression. Anti-inflammatory, anxiolytics and antidepressants consumption was associated with anxiety, and anti-inflammatory consumption with caregiver burden (ZS >47). CONCLUSIONS: The profile of carers in our sample is comparable to that described in other national studies, but care time is longer. The target population is difficult to identify and in need of help. Although there is not a formal demand for help, we should be encouraged to develop new healthcare methods.

[Professional quality of life in the clinical governance model of Asturias (Spain)]. / Calidad de vida de los profesionales en el modelo de gestión clínica de Asturias.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate professional quality of life in our clinical governance model by comparing differences according to the time since the model's implementation (1-3 years) and the setting (primary or hospital care). METHODS: A cross-sectional descriptive study was performed. The 35-item, anonymous, self-administered Professional Quality of Life Questionnaire, with three additional questions, was applied. A minimum sample size for each clinical governance unit/area (CGU/CGA) was calculated. Descriptive, univariate and bivariate analyses were performed using the 35 items separately. The subscales of « management support ¼, « workload ¼ and « intrinsic motivation ¼ were used as dependant variables, and the setting and time since implementation of the CGU/CGA as independent variables. RESULTS: Of the study population of 2572 professionals, 1395 (54%) responded (67% in primary care and 51% in hospital care). A total of 87% had been working for 5 years or more in their positions. Thirty-three percent had worked for less than a year in clinical governance. The item with the highest score was job training (8.39 ± 1.42) and that with the lowest was conflicts with peers (3.23 ± 2.2). Primary healthcare professionals showed better results in management support and quality of life at work and hospital professionals in workload. The clinical governance model obtained the best scores at 3 years and the worst at 1 year. These differences were especially favorable for clinical governance in hospitals: professionals working longer perceived a lower workload and more intrinsic motivation and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: A longer time working in the clinical governance model was associated with better perception of professional quality of life, especially in hospital care.