ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of a quality-of-care improvement program implemented in emergency departments (EDs) in a Spanish autonomous community with the aim of reducing the use of unrecommended drugs when treating infants for acute bronchiolitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Before-after quasi-experimental intervention study. We retrospectively included infants aged 12 months or less who were treated for acute bronchiolitis in 24 Spanish national health system hospital EDs in December during 2 epidemic periods: in 2018, before implementing the program, and in 2019, after implementation. Data collected included epidemiologic information, clinical and care details, and clinical course. The program consisted of providing informative material and training sessions before the epidemic period started. RESULTS: A total of 7717 episodes (4007 in 2018 and 2710 in 2019) were identified. Epidemiologic and clinical characteristics did not differ between the 2 periods. ED use of the following treatments decreased between the 2 periods: salbutamol, from 29.4% (95% CI, 28.8%-30.8%) in 2018 to 10.6% (95% CI, 9.6%-11.6%) in 2019; epinephrine from 6.0% (95% CI, 5.3%-6.8%) to 0.9% (95% CI, 0.7%-1.3%); and hypertonic saline solution fell from 8.2% (95% CI, 7.3%-9.1%) to 2.1% (95% CI, 1.7%-2.6%) (P.001, all comparisons). Prescriptions for salbutamol on discharge fell from 38.7% (95% CI, 36.9%-40.4%) to 10.6% (95% CI, 9.6%-11.6%) (P.001). Admissions and readmissions did not change, and the median time (interquartile range) spent in the ED fell from 81 (44-138) minutes to 66 (37-127) minutes (P.001). CONCLUSION: The quality-of-care improvement initiative was able to decrease the number of unrecommended therapeutic interventions for acute bronchiolitis. However, we identified great variations between EDs, suggesting that training and assessment of impact should continue.
OBJETIVO: Evaluar el impacto de una iniciativa de mejora realizada en los servicios de urgencias (SU) de una comunidad autónoma para reducir el uso de fármacos no recomendados en lactantes con bronquiolitis aguda (BA). METODO: Estudio cuasi-experimental analítico del tipo "antes y después de una intervención". Se incluyeron de forma retrospectiva todas las BA en niños # 12 meses atendidas en los SU de 24 hospitales públicos durante el mes de diciembre de dos periodos epidémicos: 2018 (preintervención) y 2019 (postintervención). Se recogieron variables epidemiológicas, clínicas, asistenciales y evolutivas. La intervención consistió en difundir material informativo y realizar actividades formativas previas al periodo epidémico. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 7.717 episodios (2018: 4.007 y 2019: 3.710). No existieron diferencias en las características epidemiológicas y clínicas. El empleo de salbutamol en los SU descendió del 29,4% [intervalo de confianza del 95% (IC 95%): 28,8-30,8] en 2018 al 10,6% (IC 95%: 9,6-11,6) en 2019 (p 0,001), el de adrenalina del 6,0% (IC 95%: 5,3-6,8) al 0,9% (IC 95%: 0,7-1,3) y el de suero salino hipertónico del 8,2% (IC 95%: 7,3-9,1) al 2,1% (IC 95%: 1,7-2,6) (p 0,001). La prescripción al alta de salbutamol se redujo del 38,7% (IC 95%: 36,9-40,4) al 10,6% (IC 95%: 9,6-11,6) (p 0,001). La tasa de ingreso y la tasa de readmisión no cambiaron y la mediana de tiempo de estancia en los SU se redujo 81 minutos [rango intercuartil (RIC) 44-138] a 66 (RIQ: 37-127) (p 0,001). CONCLUSIONES: La iniciativa de mejora ha conseguido disminuir la tasa de intervenciones terapéuticas no indicadas en BA. Sin embargo, existe una gran variabilidad entre los diferentes SU por lo que la estrategia y la medición de su impacto deben mantenerse en el tiempo.
Subject(s)
Bronchiolitis , Humans , Infant , Retrospective Studies , Acute Disease , Bronchiolitis/drug therapy , Emergency Service, Hospital , Albuterol/therapeutic useABSTRACT
Introducción: Existen recomendaciones para la toma de decisiones ante padres que no vacunan a sus hijos, pero son escasas las publicaciones que analizan este problema. En noviembre de 2014, se inaugura una consulta pionera en España, sobre asesoramiento en vacunas. El objetivo principal es dedicar tiempo y exclusividad a los padres, aplicar las recomendaciones de la AAP y la AEP, y analizar el éxito de las mismas, según el número de padres que aceptan la vacunación. Pacientes y métodos: Estudio descriptivo, transversal, prospectivo y unicéntrico llevado a cabo en el periodo del 1 de noviembre de 2014 al 1 de marzo de 2016. Se incluyen menores de 16 años no correctamente vacunados según el calendario de la comunidad autónoma donde se realiza el estudio, tras la firma del consentimiento informado. Resultados: Veinte familias acudieron a la consulta. La edad mediana de los niños fue de 2 años. El 80% no tenía ninguna vacuna administrada. El 45% de los padres mostró rechazo absoluto a la vacunación. Los principales motivos para no vacunar fueron: 100% presencia de mercurio, 90% riesgo de desarrollar autismo, 85% presencia de aluminio, 70% presencia de estabilizantes y conservantes, y 65% riesgo de desarrollar anafilaxia. Al 90% de los padres les pareció útil la consulta. Un 90% aceptaron la vacunación (45% completa). Conclusiones: El convencimiento de la filosofía antivacunas es firme y difícil de cambiar. También es complicado que los pediatras no rechacen a los padres que ponen en riesgo la vida de sus hijos. El encuentro es posible y la sociedad lo necesita. Tiempo para escuchar, empatía y trasmisión de buena información han constituido las claves de nuestros resultados (AU)
Introduction: There are recommendations for decision-making as regards parents who do not vaccinate their children, but there are few publications analysing this problem. In November 2014, a pioneer medical clinic opened in Spain, for counselling on immunisation practices. The aim of this study is to determine the success of the recommendations of the American and Spanish Paediatrics Associations according to the number of parents who finally accept vaccination. Patients and methods: A descriptive, cross-sectional, prospective and single-centre study was conducted from November 2014 to March 2016. Children under the age of 16 not properly vaccinated, according to the immunisation schedule of the region where the study was conducted, were included after signing informed consent. Results: A total of 20 families were counselled. The median age of the children was 2 years, and 80% of them received no vaccine. Absolute non-acceptance of vaccination was practiced by 45% of parents. The main reasons for not vaccinating were: 100% thimerosal-containing, 90% risk of autism, 85% aluminium-containing, 70% presence of other stabilisers and preservatives, and 65% risk of anaphylaxis. The immunisation advice was said to be helpful by 90% of parents. Vaccination was accepted by 90% of parents (45% completely). Conclusions: Anti-vaccination ideologies are strong and hard to change. Paediatricians not denying medical care to parents who endanger the lives of their own children are also hard to find. The meeting point is possible, and society needs it. Active listening, empathy, and good quality information were the keys to our results (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Infant, Newborn , Infant , Child, Preschool , Child , Treatment Refusal/statistics & numerical data , Mass Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Immunization Programs/statistics & numerical data , Parental Notification , Health Education/methods , Persuasive CommunicationABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: There are recommendations for decision-making as regards parents who do not vaccinate their children, but there are few publications analysing this problem. In November 2014, a pioneer medical clinic opened in Spain, for counselling on immunisation practices. The aim of this study is to determine the success of the recommendations of the American and Spanish Paediatrics Associations according to the number of parents who finally accept vaccination. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A descriptive, cross-sectional, prospective and single-centre study was conducted from November 2014 to March 2016. Children under the age of 16 not properly vaccinated, according to the immunisation schedule of the region where the study was conducted, were included after signing informed consent. RESULTS: A total of 20 families were counselled. The median age of the children was 2 years, and 80% of them received no vaccine. Absolute non-acceptance of vaccination was practiced by 45% of parents. The main reasons for not vaccinating were: 100% thimerosal-containing, 90% risk of autism, 85% aluminium-containing, 70% presence of other stabilisers and preservatives, and 65% risk of anaphylaxis. The immunisation advice was said to be helpful by 90% of parents. Vaccination was accepted by 90% of parents (45% completely). CONCLUSIONS: Anti-vaccination ideologies are strong and hard to change. Paediatricians not denying medical care to parents who endanger the lives of their own children are also hard to find. The meeting point is possible, and society needs it. Active listening, empathy, and good quality information were the keys to our results.
Subject(s)
Directive Counseling/standards , Parents , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Child, Preschool , Cross-Sectional Studies , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
La oruga procesionaria del pino, forma larvaria de la mariposa nocturna Thaumetopoea pityocampa, es una de las principales plagas forestales del sur de Europa. Con frecuencia, estas orugas producen reacciones locales en humanos debidas a los pelillos urticantes microscópicos que las recubren. La mayoría de los síntomas ocasionados son cutáneos, como urticaria aguda, y son mucho más infrecuentes las reacciones sistémicas. Se presenta un caso de reacción sistémica, con edema orofacial, babeo y urticaria tras la ingesta de una oruga procesionaria del pino en un lactante de 11 meses, en el cual el tratamiento farmacológico fue suficiente para la resolución de los síntomas. No tuvo, en ningún momento, compromiso de la vía aérea ni otros datos de anafilaxia, por lo que se desestimaron actuaciones más agresivas, como intubación orotraqueal, endoscopía o laringoscopía.
The larval form of the moth Thaumetopoea pityocampa, known as pine processionary caterpillar, is one of the main forest pests in southern Europe. Often, these caterpillars cause local reactions in humans, due to their microscopic stinging hairs. Most symptoms affect skin, in form of acute urticaria. Systemic reactions are rare. An eleven month old infant with a systemic reaction after ingestion of a pine processionary caterpillar is presented. The boy reached the Emergency Room with orofacial edema, drooling and urticaria. Drug treatment was enough to resolve the symptoms. The patient did not present airway commitment, nor anaphylaxis data at any moment, so more aggressive actions, such as endotracheal intubation, endoscopy or laryngoscopy, were rejected.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Infant , Urticaria/therapy , Eating , Edema/therapy , Conservative Treatment , Larva , Moths , Urticaria/etiology , Edema/etiology , AnimalsABSTRACT
The larval form of the moth Thaumetopoea pityocampa, known as pine processionary caterpillar, is one of the main forest pests in southern Europe. Often, these caterpillars cause local reactions in humans, due to their microscopic stinging hairs. Most symptoms affect skin, in form of acute urticaria. Systemic reactions are rare. An eleven month old infant with a systemic reaction after ingestion of a pine processionary caterpillar is presented. The boy reached the Emergency Room with orofacial edema, drooling and urticaria. Drug treatment was enough to resolve the symptoms. The patient did not present airway commitment, nor anaphylaxis data at any moment, so more aggressive actions, such as endotracheal intubation, endoscopy or laryngoscopy, were rejected.
La oruga procesionaria del pino, forma larvaria de la mariposa nocturna Thaumetopoea pityocampa, es una de las principales plagas forestales del sur de Europa. Con frecuencia, estas orugas producen reacciones locales en humanos debidas a los pelillos urticantes microscópicos que las recubren. La mayoría de los síntomas ocasionados son cutáneos, como urticaria aguda, y son mucho más infrecuentes las reacciones sistémicas. Se presenta un caso de reacción sistémica, con edema orofacial, babeo y urticaria tras la ingesta de una oruga procesionaria del pino en un lactante de 11 meses, en el cual el tratamiento farmacológico fue suficiente para la resolución de los síntomas. No tuvo, en ningún momento, compromiso de la vía aérea ni otros datos de anafilaxia, por lo que se desestimaron actuaciones más agresivas, como intubación orotraqueal, endoscopía o laringoscopía.
