[Effect of the incorporation of a general practitioner on emergency department effectiveness]. / Efectividad de la incorporación de un médico especialista en medicina familiar y comunitaria en un servicio de urgencias hospitalario.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To know the effect that the presence of a general practitioner (GP) has on emergency department's effectiveness, efficiency and health care. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Prospective interventional study carried out in the emergency medicine unit fast track area (FTA), which is ideally opened from 8 am to 12 am, and staffed by 2 residents. INTERVENTION: 8 resident hours (from 4 pm to 12 am) were substituted by 8 GP hours. The study period was August 2002 (GP presence), and the control period, October 2002. From each period, 10 days and 100 patients were randomly selected. From each day, FTA census (P), percentage of revisits and patients leaving without being seen, elapsed time to FTA actual closing (OT), percentage of patients moved to the observation area, and percentage of admissions were recorded. From each patient, epidemiological and clinical characteristics, waiting time to be seen (WT), number of tests performed, elapsed time to treatment (TT), and length of stay (LOS) were collected along with the number of patients finally discharged without hospital specialist consultation and those discharged with no test ordered. To assess perceived care quality, a telephone survey was performed. Three effectiveness indexes were defined and determined: P/WT (E1), P/OT (E2), and perceived care quality/perceived WT (E3). Finally, fixed and variables costs (C) from both periods were calculated, and cost-effectiveness analysis for each effectiveness index and period performed. RESULTS: Periods showed no differences regarding daily census and patient characteristics. In the study period (GP presence), all time variables significantly improved: 20% reduction in WT, 25% in TT, 36% in LOS, and 17.5% in OT. A decrease in the number of tests ordered (41% less), in the percentage of patients moved to the observation area (78% less), and in the revisit rate (75% less) was also noted. Finally, E1 improved in 77% and E2 in 51%. Cost-effectiveness analysis clearly supported the study period, showing a decrease in C/E1 (55% less), in C/E2 (33% less), and in C/E3 (6% less). From the telephone survey, no differences between periods were detected except a perceived WT in the study period lower than that in the control period. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of a GP in a FTA leads to an improvement in the effectiveness and quality of care received by attended patients. In addition of these important features, this presence is also efficient. Therefore, it is an intervention that could be taken into account by administrators to better manage emergency departments.

[Post-transplantation vaccination of bone-marrow transplant recipients]. / Vacunación de pacientes receptores de trasplante de progenitores hematopoyéticos.

BACKGROUND: Patients subject to bone marrow transplantation (BMT) and other blood stem cell transplantations are severely immunocompromised after transplantation. Some studies have suggested that post-transplantation loss of acquired immunity may play a role. The objective of this study was to determine the susceptibility to vaccine-preventable diseases in people subject to BMT and the serologic response after vaccination. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Study population was people subject to transplantation at least 6 months before initiating vaccination and without immunosuppressive treatment at that time. A prevaccination serologic analysis was carried out, and the hepatitis B, the adult tetanus-diphtheria (Td), the IPV, the influenza and the pneumococccal vaccines were administered in accordance with standard guidelines Depending on the immune status of the patient according to the serologic analysis, the MMR vaccine was administered no sooner than 18 months after transplantation. After vaccination, a serologic analysis was carried out to determine the response. RESULTS: The mean time SD between transplant and the initiation of vaccination was 3.2 2.9 years. Of the 122 recipients of BMT (average age 35.8 13 years; 54.2% male), 51.7% received an allogenic and 48.3% an autologous transplant. Before vaccination, the susceptibility was 48.2% for tetanus, 66.7% for diphtheria, 74.1% for pertussis, 85.9% for hepatitis B, 13.4% for measles, 36.7% for rubella and 9.2% for mumps. The rates of seroconversion with protective titers after vaccination for tetanus, diphtheria and hepatitis B were 94%, 67% and 75% respectively. The response to the MMR vaccine was greater than 70%, with a second dose of the vaccine being needed in 26% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Susceptibility to vaccine-preventable diseases in transplanted patients is high. The acceptable response to vaccination justifies the development of specific programs. Given the special characteristics of this group of patients, vaccination programs must be simple and flexible.