RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To describe the proportion of patients with liver fibrosis in at-risk populations in primary care (PC). To know the agreement between FIB-4 and transitional elastography (TE), interobserver agreement between PC and hospital care (HC) in TE, and associated risk Factors (RF). METHODS: Observational, descriptive, cross-sectional study in ≥16 years of age with RF for chronic liver disease. Sex and age, RF (alteration of liver tests [LT], metabolic syndrome, diabetes, obesity, alcohol consumption, hepatic steatosis), and FIB-4, controlled attenuation parameter and TE in PC and in HC, were collected. According to a consensus algorithm, vibration-controlled TE was performed in PC in patients with FIB-4≥1,3, and those with measurement ≥8kPa were referred to HC. RESULTS: 326 patients were studied. 71% were not referred to HC, due to liver stiffness <8kPa. 83 of the 95 derivations did TE in HC. 45 (54%) had TE ≥8, and 25 (30%) ≥12. The proportion of patients with stiffness ≥8kPa was 13,8% (45/326) and ≥12kPa, 7,6% (25/326). The predictive values of the FIB-4 were low. The interobserver correlation coefficient between TE in PC and HC was 0,433. Variables associated with TE ≥8 in PC: LT alteration, diabetes and steatosis. With TE ≥12: LT alteration, diabetes and obesity. PREDICTOR VARIABLES: LT alteration and obesity. CONCLUSIONS: The study supports the sequential performance of serum indices and TE as a screening for fibrosis in the at-risk population in PC, which allows a reduction in the percentage of patients referred to AH, and a better stratification of risk patients.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Most studies of medication errors are focused only on finding global prevalence by patients, by phases or according to a certain group of medication. It's just a partial view of the problem. To analyze and compare the prevalence of errors in prescription, transcription and administration, and their clinical repercussions in different pharmacological groups in a third-level hospital. METHODS: Prospective inclusion study with direct observation disguised as medication administration and comparison with prescriptions and transcriptions at history clinical. The ME and its clinical effects were classified by expert consensus. We calculated the different error rates and their repercussions with their confidence intervals at 95%. Then we compared using Chi-square tests. RESULTS: We studied 5,578 prescribed drugs and we observed the administration of 1,879 doses. A total of 117 different pharmacological groups were found, although 50.1% of the prescriptions belonged to only 9 types. We found heparins had a lower prevalence of errors in prescription and transcription and aspirin also had a lower prevalence of prescription errors. On the opposite side, a greater number of errors were obtained in transcription of Paracetamol, Metamizole and Laxatives and a prevalence of errors in the administration phase superior to rest in Paracetamol and in Proton Pump Inhibitors. The impact of medication error increased as medication process progressed, being similar between groups in prescription. In transcription, Heparins and Corticosteroids presented more serious errors. In administration, medication error are more serious for Diuretics and Statins (p <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Drugs considered potentially dangerous present fewer errors (Heparins, Corticoids), but more serious. Drugs with the highest prevalence of errors were Paracetamol and Inhibitors of proton pump but had a lower impact.
OBJETIVO: La mayoría de los estudios sobre errores de medicación se centran sólo en hallar prevalencias globales por pacientes, por fases del proceso o según un determinado grupo de fármacos, por lo que se da una visión parcial. El objetivo de este trabajo fue analizar y comparar la prevalencia de errores en prescripción, trascripción y administración y sus repercusiones clínicas en los principales grupos farmacológicos en un hospital de tercer nivel. METODOS: Estudio de inclusión prospectiva con observación directa disfrazada de la administración de medicamentos y comparación con prescripciones médicas y trascripciones presentes en la historia clínica. Los errores de medicación y sus efectos fueron clasificados por consenso de expertos. Se calcularon las diferentes tasas de errores y sus repercusiones con sus intervalos de confianza al 95% y se compararon utilizando la prueba de Chi cuadrado. RESULTADOS: Se estudiaron 5578 fármacos prescritos, aunque se observó sólo la administración de 1879 dosis. Se encontraron un total de 117 grupos farmacológicos, donde el 50,1% (2795) de las prescripciones pertenecían sólo a 9 tipos. La prevalencia de errores de prescripción global fue de 4,79%, de trascripción de 14,61% y de administración 9,32%. Por grupos, las Heparinas tuvieron una menor prevalencia de errores en la fase de prescripción y en la de trascripción. Se obtuvo mayor número de errores en trascripción de los Analgésicos como el Paracetamol y el Metamizol y de los Laxantes, y una prevalencia de errores en administración superior al resto en Analgésicos como el Paracetamol y en los Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones. Las repercusiones clínicas de los errores de medicación en la fase de prescripción fueron parecidas entre grupos farmacológicos. En trascripción Heparinas y Corticoides presentaron errores más graves, mientras que en la administración fueron los IECAS y las Estatinas (p<0,05). CONCLUSIONES: Los fármacos considerados clásicamente como de alto riesgo presentaron menos errores (Heparinas, Corticoides), pero más graves. Los fármacos con mayor prevalencia de errores fueron los Analgésicos (Paracetamol) y los Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones, pero tuvieron una menor repercusión clínica.