Effectiveness of a On-site Medicalization Program for Nursing Homes With COVID-19 Outbreaks.

BACKGROUND: Nursing homes are highly vulnerable to the occurrence of COVID-19 outbreaks, which result in high lethality rates. Most of them are not prepared to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. METHOD: A coordinated on-site medicalization program (MP) in response to a sizeable COVID-19 outbreak in 4 nursing homes was organized, with the objectives of improving survival, offering humanistic palliative care to residents in their natural environment, and reducing hospital referrals. Ten key processes and interventions were established (provision of informatics infrastructure, medical equipment, and human resources, universal testing, separation of "clean" and "contaminated" areas, epidemiological surveys, and unified protocols stratifying for active or palliative care approach, among others). Main outcomes were a composite endpoint of survival or optimal palliative care (SOPC), survival, and referral to hospital. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy-two of 457 (59.5%) residents and 85 of 320 (26.5%) staff members were affected. The SOPC, survival, and referrals to hospital occurred in 77%, 72.5%, and 29% of patients diagnosed before the start of MP, with respect to 97%, 83.7%, and 17% of those diagnosed during the program, respectively. The SOPC was independently associated to MP (OR = 15 [3-81]); and survival in patients stratified to active approach, to the use of any antiviral treatment (OR = 28 [5-160]). All outbreaks were controlled in 39 [37-42] days. CONCLUSIONS: A coordinated on-site MP of nursing homes with COVID-19 outbreaks achieved a higher SOPC rate, and a reduction in referrals to hospital, thus ensuring rigorous but also humanistic and gentle care to residents.

Death risk stratification in elderly patients with covid-19. A comparative cohort study in nursing homes outbreaks.

Elderly people are more severely affected by COVID-19. Nevertheless scarce information about specific prognostic scores for this population is available. The main objective was to compare the accuracy of recently developed COVID-19 prognostic scores to that of CURB-65, Charlson and PROFUND indices in a cohort of 272 elderly patients from four nursing homes, affected by COVID-19. Accuracy was measured by calibration (calibration curves and Hosmer-Lemeshov (H-L) test), and discriminative power (area under the receiver operation curve (AUC-ROC). Negative and positive predictive values (NPV and PPV) were also obtained. Overall mortality rate was 22.4 %. Only ACP and Shi et al. out of 10 specific COVID-19 indices could be assessed. All indices but CURB-65 showed a good calibration by H-L test, whilst PROFUND, ACP and CURB-65 showed best results in calibration curves. Only CURB-65 (AUC-ROC = 0.81 [0.75-0.87])) and PROFUND (AUC-ROC = 0.67 [0.6-0.75])) showed good discrimination power. The highest NPV was obtained by CURB-65 (95 % [90-98%]), PROFUND (93 % [77-98%]), and their combination (100 % [82-100%]); whereas CURB-65 (74 % [51-88%]), and its combination with PROFUND (80 % [50-94%]) showed highest PPV. PROFUND and CURB-65 indices showed the highest accuracy in predicting death-risk of elderly patients affected by COVID-19, whereas Charlson and recent developed COVID-19 specific tools lacked it, or were not available to assess. A comprehensive clinical stratification on two-level basis (basal death risk due to chronic conditions by PROFUND index, plus current death risk due to COVID-19 by CURB-65), could be an appropriate approach.

Mortalidad y factores asociados de los pacientes con enfermedades crónicas complejas del ámbito rural y zonas de transformación social en Andalucía / Mortality and associated factors of patients with complex chronic diseases in rural and social transformation areas in Andalusia

OBJETIVO: Determinar la mortalidad al año y los factores relacionados en pacientes crónicos complejos (PCC) de centros de salud rurales y zonas de necesidades de transformación social (ZNTS) de Atención Primaria (AP) de Andalucía. MATERIAL Y MÉTODO: Diseño: descriptivo longitudinal prospectivo abierto de un año. Ámbito: 40 centros de salud. Sujetos: PCC mayores de 18 años con criterios de pluripatología y consentimiento a participar. Muestra: 814 sujetos (intervalo de confianza del 95%; riesgo alfa 0,03; p 0,2; incremento del 20% por posibles pérdidas). Variables: Dependiente: Mortalidad al año. Independientes: sociodemográficas, sociofamiliares, clínicas, funcionales (índice de Barthel -IB-, índice de Lawton-Brody), cognitivas (test de Pfeiffer), fármacos prescritos, uso de recursos sociosanitarios y calidad de vida (EQ-5D). Recogida de datos: entrevista e historia clínica. RESULTADOS: 832 PCC fueron incluidos (48,8% mujeres). La mortalidad al año fue 17,8% (n=148). El modelo de regresión logística para mortalidad incluyó: edad mayor de 85 años, presencia de cuidador, hemoglobina menor de 10g/L, ingreso hospitalario en el último año, IB menor de 60 puntos y neoplasia activa. La calibración del modelo fue buena (p = 0,85 en el test de Hosmer-Lemeshow) con buen poder de discriminación (área bajo la curva ROC 0,72 [IC 95% 0,68 a 0,77]). CONCLUSIONES: La mortalidad al año en PCC atendidos en centros de salud rurales y ZNTS de AP fue del 17,8%. El conocimiento de los factores relacionados con la mortalidad en este grupo de pacientes contribuye al abordaje de necesidades y gestión de los recursos sociosanitarios

OBJECTIVE: To determine one-year mortality and associated factors in patients with complex chronic diseases (CCP) in rural health centres and social transformation needs areas (STNA) in Primary Health Care (PHC) in Andalusia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Design: 1-Year longitudinal observational prospective open study. SETTING: 40 health centre. Subjects: consenting subjects over 18yr according multiple health condition criteria. Sample Size: 814 subjects (confidence interval 95%, alpha risk 0.03%, p=.2; 20% of sample increase due to possible losses). End-point: 1-year Mortality. Independent variables: socio-demographic, socio-familial, clinical, functional (Barthel Index -BI-, Lawton-Brody Index), cognitive (Pfeiffer Test), prescribed drugs, social healthcare resources consumption, and quality of life (EQ-5D). Data source: Interview and computerised clinical history. RESULTS: A total of 832 CCP were included (48.8% women). One-year mortality was 17.8% (n=148). Logistic regression model for mortality included: aged 85 and over, having a caregiver, haemoglobin level less 10g/L, hospital admission in last year, BI under 60 points, and active neoplasia. The calibration obtained from model was good (p=.85 in the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test), and the discrimination power also good (AUC=0.772 [0.68-0.77] in ROC curve). CONCLUSIONS: 1-year mortality of CCP in rural centres and STNA in PHC was 17.8%. Knowledge of the factors related to the mortality of CCP helps to approach the needs and social-health resources management

Comanejo de la fractura de cadera del anciano en un hospital de tercer nivel: un estudio de cohortes / Hip fracture co-management in the elderly in a tertiary referral hospital: a cohorts study

INTRODUCCIÓN: La fractura de cadera del anciano es de los diagnósticos más prevalentes en los servicios de Traumatología, con gran impacto en términos clínicos, económicos y sociales. Nuestro objetivo es analizar el impacto clínico de un modelo de comanejo entre Traumatología y Medicina Interna para pacientes ancianos ingresados por fractura de cadera en un hospital de tercer nivel. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Cohortes retrospectivas de pacientes mayores de 65 años ingresados por fractura de cadera entre enero de 2005 y agosto de 2006 (cohorte HIST) sin modelo de comanejo, y entre enero de 2008 y agosto de 2010 (cohorte COFRAC) con dicho modelo. Se analizaron características demográficas, clínicas y quirúrgicas, incidencia de complicaciones, mortalidad y reingreso a los 30 días. RESULTADOS: Se incluyó a 701 pacientes (471 HIST, 230 COFRAC). No hubo diferencias en edad, género, demora quirúrgica, tiempo y tipo de cirugía e intervención, estancia, deambulación al alta, consulta en urgencias ni reingreso o mortalidad a 30 días. Hubo diferencias en identificación de pluripatológicos (16,8 vs. 24,4%; p = 0,02), osteoporosis (3,9 vs. 7,6%; p = 0,03) o déficit motor (3,5 vs. 8,8%; p = 0,03), fármacos del tratamiento (3,7+/-2,5 vs. 4,3+/-3,2; p < 0,01), aparición de delirium (15,6 vs. 20,9%, p = 0,048) e hipomotilidad intestinal (80,3 vs. 74,7%; p < 0,001), seguimiento de anemia (83,3 vs. 97,1%; p > 0,01) y de función renal (44,5 vs. 97,3%; p < 0,01) y mortalidad intrahospitalaria (4,6 vs. 1,3%; p = 0,02). CONCLUSIONES: El comanejo de pacientes ancianos ingresados por fractura de cadera permite mejorar la documentación de los problemas crónicos previos y el control de complicaciones hospitalarias y disminuye la mortalidad intrahospitalaria

INTRODUCTION: Hip fracture in the elderly is one of the most prevalent diagnoses in Orthopedic Surgery Departments. It has a great impact in medical, economic and social terms. Our objective is to analyze clinical impact of a co-management care model between orthopedic surgery and internal medicine departments for elderly patients admitted with hip fracture in a tertiary referral hospital. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of patients older than 65 years old admitted with hip fracture between January 2005-August 2006 (HIST cohort) without a co-management care model, and between January 2008-August 2010 (COFRAC cohort) with a co-manEdadment care model. Analysis of demographic, clinical and surgery characteristics, complications incidence and mortality and re-admissions at 30 days was made. RESULTS: A total of 701 patients were included (471 HIST, 230 COFRAC). There were no differences in sex, gender, time to surgery, type of anesthesia and surgery, length of stay, ambulation at discharge and 30-days emergency room consultation, readmissions or mortality at 30 days. There were differences in identification of polypatological patients (16.8 vs. 24.4%, P=0.02), presence of osteoporosis (3.9 vs. 7.6%, P=0.03), motor deficit (3.5 vs. 8.8%, P=0.03), number of chronic drugs (3.7+/-2.5 vs. 4.3+/-3.2, P<0.01), diagnosis of delirium (15.6 vs. 20.9%, P=0.048), constipation (80.3 vs. 74.7%, p < 0.001), monitoring of anemia (83.3 vs. 97.1%, P>0.01) and renal failure at discharge (44.5 vs. 97.3%, P<0.01) and hospital mortality (4.6 vs. 1.3%, P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Co-management for elderly patients admitted with hip fracture provides a better information about previously chronic conditions, a higher control of hospital complications and decreases hospital mortality

Hip fracture co-management in the elderly in a tertiary referral hospital: A cohorts study. / Comanejo de la fractura de cadera del anciano en un hospital de tercer nivel: un estudio de cohortes.

INTRODUCTION: Hip fracture in the elderly is one of the most prevalent diagnoses in Orthopedic Surgery Departments. It has a great impact in medical, economic and social terms. Our objective is to analyze clinical impact of a co-management care model between orthopedic surgery and internal medicine departments for elderly patients admitted with hip fracture in a tertiary referral hospital. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of patients older than 65 years old admitted with hip fracture between January 2005-August 2006 (HIST cohort) without a co-management care model, and between January 2008-August 2010 (COFRAC cohort) with a co-manEdadment care model. Analysis of demographic, clinical and surgery characteristics, complications incidence and mortality and re-admissions at 30 days was made. RESULTS: A total of 701 patients were included (471 HIST, 230 COFRAC). There were no differences in sex, gender, time to surgery, type of anesthesia and surgery, length of stay, ambulation at discharge and 30-days emergency room consultation, readmissions or mortality at 30 days. There were differences in identification of polypatological patients (16.8 vs. 24.4%, P=0.02), presence of osteoporosis (3.9 vs. 7.6%, P=0.03), motor deficit (3.5 vs. 8.8%, P=0.03), number of chronic drugs (3.7±2.5 vs. 4.3±3.2, P<0.01), diagnosis of delirium (15.6 vs. 20.9%, P=0.048), constipation (80.3 vs. 74.7%, p<0.001), monitoring of anemia (83.3 vs. 97.1%, P>0.01) and renal failure at discharge (44.5 vs. 97.3%, P<0.01) and hospital mortality (4.6 vs. 1.3%, P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Co-management for elderly patients admitted with hip fracture provides a better information about previously chronic conditions, a higher control of hospital complications and decreases hospital mortality.

[Mortality and associated factors of patients with complex chronic diseases in rural and social transformation areas in Andalusia]. / Mortalidad y factores asociados de los pacientes con enfermedades crónicas complejas del ámbito rural y zonas de transformación social en Andalucía.

OBJECTIVE: To determine one-year mortality and associated factors in patients with complex chronic diseases (CCP) in rural health centres and social transformation needs areas (STNA) in Primary Health Care (PHC) in Andalusia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Design: 1-Year longitudinal observational prospective open study. SETTING: 40 health centre. SUBJECTS: consenting subjects over 18yr according multiple health condition criteria. SAMPLE SIZE: 814 subjects (confidence interval 95%, alpha risk 0.03%, p=.2; 20% of sample increase due to possible losses). End-point: 1-year Mortality. INDEPENDENT VARIABLES: socio-demographic, socio-familial, clinical, functional (Barthel Index -BI-, Lawton-Brody Index), cognitive (Pfeiffer Test), prescribed drugs, social healthcare resources consumption, and quality of life (EQ-5D). DATA SOURCE: Interview and computerised clinical history Results: A total of 832 CCP were included (48.8% women). One-year mortality was 17.8% (n=148). Logistic regression model for mortality included: aged 85 and over, having a caregiver, haemoglobin level less 10g/L, hospital admission in last year, BI under 60 points, and active neoplasia. The calibration obtained from model was good (p=.85 in the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test), and the discrimination power also good (AUC=0.772 [0.68-0.77] in ROC curve). CONCLUSIONS: 1-year mortality of CCP in rural centres and STNA in PHC was 17.8%. Knowledge of the factors related to the mortality of CCP helps to approach the needs and social-health resources management.

Simplificación de la escala de Barthel para el cribado de fragilidad y dependencia severa en pacientes pluripatológicos / Simplification of the Barthel scale for screening for frailty and severe dependency in polypathological patients

OBJETIVOS: Analizar la sensibilidad (S), la especificidad (E) y los valores predictivos positivo (VPP) y negativo (VPN) de cada dimensión del índice de Barthel (IB) con respecto al cuestionario completo en pacientes pluripatológicos (PPP). MÉTODOS: Estudio transversal multicéntrico. Se consideraron dos puntos de corte del IB (≥90 puntos para el cribado de fragilidad y <60 puntos para el diagnóstico de dependencia severa). Para cada dimensión y combinaciones de dos dimensiones se calcularon la S, la E, el VPP y el VPN con respecto al IB completo. RESULTADOS: El IB medio de los 1.632 PPP incluidos (edad media de 77,9+/-9,8años, 53% varones) fue 69+/-31 (<90 en el 58,7% y <60 en el 31,4% de pacientes). La dimensión «alimentación» obtuvo los mayores VPN para tener un IB≥60 y ≥90 puntos (87% y 99,6%, respectivamente). Las dimensiones «deambular» y «subir y bajar escaleras» obtuvieron el mayor VPP para tener un IB≥60 y ≥90 (99,2/99,5% y 81/92%, respectivamente; la combinación de ambas preguntas aumentó el VPP al 95 y al 99,6%, respectivamente. CONCLUSIONES: Los PPP de ámbito hospitalario presentan con elevada frecuencia deterioro funcional. La dimensión referente a alimentarse obtuvo el mayor VPN, por lo que se puede utilizar para el diagnóstico de dependencia severa, mientras que la combinación de deambular y subir y bajar escaleras obtuvo el mayor VPP, pudiendo utilizarse para plantear el cribado de fragilidad de los PPP

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive (PPV) and negative predictive (NPV) values of each measure of the Barthel index (BI) compared with the full questionnaire for polypathological patients (PPPs). METHODS: Multicentre cross-sectional study. We considered 2 cut-off points for the BI (≥90 points for screening frailty and <60 points for diagnosing severe dependence). For each measure and combination of 2 measures, we calculated the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV with respect to the full BI. RESULTS: The mean BI of the 1,632 included PPPs (mean age, 77.9+/-9.8years; 53% men) was 69+/-31 (<90 for 58.7% and <60 for 31.4% of the patients). The "feeding" measure achieved the highest NPV, for a BI ≥60 and ≥90 points (87% and 99.6%, respectively). The "walking" and "going up and down stairs" measures achieved the highest PPV, for a BI ≥60 and ≥90 (99.2%/99.5% and 81%/92%, respectively. The combination of the 2 measures increased the PPV to 95% and 99.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: PPPs in hospital settings have a high rate of functional impairment. The measure for feeding achieved the highest NPV and can therefore be employed for diagnosing severe dependence. The combination of the measures for walking and going up and down stairs achieved the highest PPV and can therefore be employed to propose frailty screening for PPPs

Simplification of the Barthel scale for screening for frailty and severe dependency in polypathological patients. / Simplificación de la escala de Barthel para el cribado de fragilidad y dependencia severa en pacientes pluripatológicos.

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive (PPV) and negative predictive (NPV) values of each measure of the Barthel index (BI) compared with the full questionnaire for polypathological patients (PPPs). METHODS: Multicentre cross-sectional study. We considered 2 cut-off points for the BI (≥90 points for screening frailty and <60 points for diagnosing severe dependence). For each measure and combination of 2 measures, we calculated the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV with respect to the full BI. RESULTS: The mean BI of the 1,632 included PPPs (mean age, 77.9±9.8years; 53% men) was 69±31 (<90 for 58.7% and <60 for 31.4% of the patients). The "feeding" measure achieved the highest NPV, for a BI ≥60 and ≥90 points (87% and 99.6%, respectively). The "walking" and "going up and down stairs" measures achieved the highest PPV, for a BI ≥60 and ≥90 (99.2%/99.5% and 81%/92%, respectively. The combination of the 2 measures increased the PPV to 95% and 99.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: PPPs in hospital settings have a high rate of functional impairment. The measure for feeding achieved the highest NPV and can therefore be employed for diagnosing severe dependence. The combination of the measures for walking and going up and down stairs achieved the highest PPV and can therefore be employed to propose frailty screening for PPPs.

Estratificación pronóstica y abordaje asistencial de los pacientes pluripatológicos / Prognostic stratification and healthcare approach in patients with multiple pathologies

Los pacientes pluripatológicos constituyen una población prevalente y homogénea, caracterizada por su complejidad clínica, vulnerabilidad, consumo de recursos y mortalidad que requiere una asistencia integral y coordinada. Establecer un pronóstico certero en esta población resulta de utilidad para la toma de decisiones clínicas por parte de los profesionales, la planificación de las preferencias de pacientes y familiares, y el diseño de estrategias en el ámbito de la gestión sanitaria. También es importante para la investigación clínica, al facilitar la posible incorporación de estos pacientes a ensayos clínicos y otros estudios de intervención. Los índices PROFUND y PROFUNCTION son 2 instrumentos pronósticos que predicen de manera fidedigna el riesgo de fallecer o de sufrir un deterioro funcional, respectivamente. Para el abordaje asistencial de los pacientes pluripatológicos se propugna la construcción y ejecución de un plan de acción personalizado, consensuado y adaptado a la realidad del paciente. Este tendrá en cuenta el pronóstico, la evidencia y viabilidad de las intervenciones, así como la sinergia de las metas y estrategias del equipo sanitario con los valores y las preferencias de las personas para conseguir un modelo de salud centrado en apoyar la capacidad de las mismas para gestionar sus enfermedades. En este plan los principales ámbitos de intervención son: la promoción y prevención de la salud, la activación y autogestión del paciente y el cuidador, la red de apoyo social, la optimización farmacoterapéutica, la rehabilitación y medidas de preservación funcional y cognitiva, y la planificación anticipada de decisiones (AU)

Polypathological patients constitute a prevalent, fairly homogeneous population, which is characterised by high clinical complexity, substantial vulnerability and significant resource consumption, in addition to high mortality and the need for comprehensive, coordinated care. It is particularly important to establish a reliable prognosis in these patients. It is also extremely useful for professionals involved in the decision-making process for patients and their families in vital planning and their preferences, for strategic health planning in management fields, and for clinical research, by facilitating their incorporation into clinical trials and other intervention studies. Two prognostic instruments stand out in terms of suitability for polypathological patients: PROFUND and PROFUNCTION. The former faithfully stratifies the risk of dying at 12 months and four years and the latter, the risk of suffering a significant functional deterioration at 12 months. In terms of the healthcare approach in patients with multiple pathologies, creating and executing a consensual, personalised action plan that is adapted to the patient's reality is encouraged. The plan will consider the prognosis, and the evidence and viability of interventions; its ultimate aim will be to ensure the synergy and alignment of the health team's goals and strategies with peoples’ values and preferences, in order to achieve a more proactive health model focused on supporting patients in their ability to manage their illnesses. In the personalised action plan, the main areas of intervention are: health promotion and prevention; patient and caregiver activation and self-management; activation of a social support network and social support; optimisation of pharmacotherapy; rehabilitation, functional and cognitive preservation measures; and anticipated decision planning (AU)

Valor diagnóstico de un cuestionario de Pfeiffer simplificado en pacientes pluripatológicos / Diagnostic value of a simplified Pfeiffer questionnaire for polypathological patients

Objetivos. Analizar la concordancia, sensibilidad, especificidad y valores predictivos positivo (VPP) y negativo (VPN) de cada pregunta del cuestionario de Pfeiffer (SPMSQ) con respecto al cuestionario completo en pacientes pluripatológicos (PPP). Métodos. Estudio transversal multicéntrico. El SPMSQ se consideró patológico si se registraban 3 o más errores. Para cada pregunta y combinaciones de 2 preguntas se calcularon la concordancia (índice kappa), sensibilidad, especificidad y valores predictivos con respecto al SPMSQ completo. Resultados. De los 1.632 pacientes pluripatológicos incluidos (edad media 77,9±9,8 años, 53% varones), se realizó el SPMSQ a 1.434 (los restantes presentaban delirium) y resultó patológico en el 39%. Las preguntas «¿qué día es hoy?» y «reste de 3 en 3 desde 20» obtuvieron buena concordancia y VPN (85% y 89%, respectivamente); la combinación de ambas aumentó el VPN al 97%. La pregunta «¿cuándo nació?» alcanzó buena concordancia y el mayor VPP (93%). Conclusiones. La combinación de las preguntas «¿qué día es hoy?» y «reste de 3 en 3 desde 20» obtuvo un VPN elevado, y la relacionada con la fecha de nacimiento fue la que consiguió el mayor VPP (AU)

Objectives. To analyse the correlation, sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive (PPV) and negative predictive (NPV) values of each question on the Pfeiffer questionnaire (SPMSQ) compared with the full questionnaire for polypathological patients (PPPs). Methods. Multicentre cross-sectional study. An SPMSQ score is considered pathological if 3 or more errors are recorded. For each question and combination of 2 questions, we calculated the correlation (kappa index), sensitivity, specificity and predictive values compared with the full SPMSQ. Results. Of the 1632 PPPs included (mean age, 77.9±9.8 years, 53% men), 1434 performed the SPMSQ (the remaining presented delirium); 39% of the PPPs were pathological. The question 'What day is it today?' and the command 'Count backwards by 3s from 20' obtained good correlation and NPV (85 and 89%, respectively); the combination of both increased the NPV to 97%. The question "When were you born?" achieved good correlation and greater PPV (93%). Conclusions. The combination of the question 'What day is it today?' and the command 'Count backwards by 3s from 20' achieved a high NPV. The question related to the date of birth achieved the highest PPV (AU)

Diagnostic value of a simplified Pfeiffer questionnaire for polypathological patients. / Valor diagnóstico de un cuestionario de Pfeiffer simplificado en pacientes pluripatológicos.

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the correlation, sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive (PPV) and negative predictive (NPV) values of each question on the Pfeiffer questionnaire (SPMSQ) compared with the full questionnaire for polypathological patients (PPPs). METHODS: Multicentre cross-sectional study. An SPMSQ score is considered pathological if 3 or more errors are recorded. For each question and combination of 2 questions, we calculated the correlation (kappa index), sensitivity, specificity and predictive values compared with the full SPMSQ. RESULTS: Of the 1632 PPPs included (mean age, 77.9±9.8 years, 53% men), 1434 performed the SPMSQ (the remaining presented delirium); 39% of the PPPs were pathological. The question "What day is it today?" and the command "Count backwards by 3s from 20" obtained good correlation and NPV (85 and 89%, respectively); the combination of both increased the NPV to 97%. The question "When were you born?' achieved good correlation and greater PPV (93%). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of the question "What day is it today?" and the command "Count backwards by 3s from 20" achieved a high NPV. The question related to the date of birth achieved the highest PPV.

Prognostic stratification and healthcare approach in patients with multiple pathologies. / Estratificación pronóstica y abordaje asistencial de los pacientes pluripatológicos.

Polypathological patients constitute a prevalent, fairly homogeneous population, which is characterised by high clinical complexity, substantial vulnerability and significant resource consumption, in addition to high mortality and the need for comprehensive, coordinated care. It is particularly important to establish a reliable prognosis in these patients. It is also extremely useful for professionals involved in the decision-making process for patients and their families in vital planning and their preferences, for strategic health planning in management fields, and for clinical research, by facilitating their incorporation into clinical trials and other intervention studies. Two prognostic instruments stand out in terms of suitability for polypathological patients: PROFUND and PROFUNCTION. The former faithfully stratifies the risk of dying at 12 months and four years and the latter, the risk of suffering a significant functional deterioration at 12 months. In terms of the healthcare approach in patients with multiple pathologies, creating and executing a consensual, personalised action plan that is adapted to the patient's reality is encouraged. The plan will consider the prognosis, and the evidence and viability of interventions; its ultimate aim will be to ensure the synergy and alignment of the health team's goals and strategies with peoples' values and preferences, in order to achieve a more proactive health model focused on supporting patients in their ability to manage their illnesses. In the personalised action plan, the main areas of intervention are: health promotion and prevention; patient and caregiver activation and self-management; activation of a social support network and social support; optimisation of pharmacotherapy; rehabilitation, functional and cognitive preservation measures; and anticipated decision planning.

Comparación de la pregunta sorpresa frente a un índice objetivo (Índice PALIAR) para la identificación de situación terminal en pacientes con enfermedades crónicas avanzadas / Comparison surprise question against a target index (PALIAR Index) for identifying terminal status in patients with advanced chronic disease

No disponible

Concordancia entre sistemas de estratificación e identificación de pacientes crónicos complejos en Atención Primaria / Concordance between stratification systems and identification of patients with multiple chronic diseases in Primary Care

Objetivo. Conocer la prevalencia de pacientes crónicos complejos en el ámbito de Atención Primaria utilizando los criterios de pluripatología y los Clinical Risk Groups y el grado de concordancia entre estos 2 sistemas de identificación de los pacientes que precisan gestión de caso. Material y método. Estudio observacional transversal de 240 pacientes, seleccionados por muestreo aleatorio de 16 cupos asistenciales de 2 centros de salud de Atención Primaria de un área sanitaria. Solicitado consentimiento informado para acceder a su historia clínica electrónica con fines de investigación. Se registró la edad, el sexo, el estado de salud según los Clinical Risk Groups, nivel de gravedad, los criterios de pluripatológico e índice de Charlson por su médico durante la práctica clínica. Se excluyeron 3 pacientes por datos incompletos. Resultados. La prevalencia de pacientes pluripatológicos, siguiendo los criterios del Ministerio de Sanidad entre los demandantes, fue del 4,1% (IC 95% 2,1-7,3). La frecuencia de pacientes con Clinical Risk Groups de alto riesgo denominados G3 en la estrategia de cronicidad de la Comunidad Valenciana fue del 7,5% (IC 95% 4,7-11,7), que sumó los pacientes estado de salud 6 con nivel de complejidad 5 y 6 y los estados de salud 7, 8 y 9. La concordancia entre ambas clasificaciones fue baja con un índice kappa 0,17 (IC 95% 0-0,5). Conclusiones. Las prevalencias no difirieron significativamente de lo esperado y la concordancia entre ambas estratificaciones fue muy débil, no seleccionando a los mismos pacientes de alta complejidad para gestión de casos (AU)

Objective. To determine the prevalence of patients with multiple chronic diseases in Primary Care using the multiple morbidity criteria and Clinical Risk Groups, and the agreement in identifying high-risk patients that require case management with both methods. Material and method. A cross-sectional study was conducted on 240 patients, selected by random sampling of 16 care quotas from two Primary Health Care centres of a health area. Informed consent was obtained to access their electronic medical records for the study, and a record was made of age, sex, health status of Clinical Risk Groups, severity, multiple morbidity criteria, and Charlson index by physicians during clinical practice. Three patients were excluded due to incomplete data. Results. The prevalence of patients with multiple chronic diseases following the criteria of the Ministry of Health among users was 4.11 (95% CI; 2.13-7.30). The frequency of patients with high risk Clinical Risk Groups (G3) in the chronicity strategy of Valencian Community was 7.59 (95% CI; 4.70-11.70), which includes patients with health status 6 and complexity level 5-6, and health status 7, 8, and 9. Agreement between the two classifications was low, with a kappa index 0.17 (95% CI; 0-0.5). Conclusions. The prevalence did not differ significantly from that expected, and the agreement between the two stratifications was very weak, not selecting the same patients for highly complex case management (AU)

Concordance of Barthel Index, ECOG-PS, and Palliative Performance Scale in the assessment of functional status in patients with advanced medical diseases.

OBJECTIVE: Analysing most relevant clinical features and concordance between different functional scales in patients with advanced medical diseases (PAMD). METHODS: Cross-sectional multicentre study that included PAMD (heart, lung, kidney, liver, and neurological diseases) in hospital settings from February 2009 to October 2010. We analysed clinical, biological and functional features in performing activities of daily living (ADL) by medians of Barthel Index (BI); additionally we assessed their performance status by medians of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-Performance Status (ECOG-PS) and Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) scores. We evaluated the concordance of these instruments in assessing functional impairment by κ and intraclass correlation coefficient tests. RESULTS: 1847 patients were included (average age 79 years, 50.1% men). Most common symptoms were dyspnoea (62.31%), asthenia (23%) and delirium (20.14%). Functional assessment showed a high prevalence of severe or total impairment in performing basic ADL by medians of used instruments (BI median=35 (IQR=70), and 52.1% of patients with severe-total impairment; ECOG-PS median=2 (IQR 30), and 44% of patients with severe-total impairment; and PPS median=50 (IQR 30), and 32% of patients with severe-total impairment). Concordance among these instruments was acceptably good (κ indexes ranging from 0.653 to 0.745 (p<0.0001)). CONCLUSIONS: PAMD represent a population with severe functional impairment, which requires a multidisciplinary approach for proper management. Assessment of functional ability in this population by BI, ECOG-PS, and PPS showed good concordance.

[Concordance between stratification systems and identification of patients with multiple chronic diseases in Primary Care]. / Concordancia entre sistemas de estratificación e identificación de pacientes crónicos complejos en Atención Primaria.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of patients with multiple chronic diseases in Primary Care using the multiple morbidity criteria and Clinical Risk Groups, and the agreement in identifying high-risk patients that require case management with both methods. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 240 patients, selected by random sampling of 16 care quotas from two Primary Health Care centres of a health area. Informed consent was obtained to access their electronic medical records for the study, and a record was made of age, sex, health status of Clinical Risk Groups, severity, multiple morbidity criteria, and Charlson index by physicians during clinical practice. Three patients were excluded due to incomplete data. RESULTS: The prevalence of patients with multiple chronic diseases following the criteria of the Ministry of Health among users was 4.11 (95% CI; 2.13-7.30). The frequency of patients with high risk Clinical Risk Groups (G3) in the chronicity strategy of Valencian Community was 7.59 (95% CI; 4.70-11.70), which includes patients with health status 6 and complexity level 5-6, and health status 7, 8, and 9. Agreement between the two classifications was low, with a kappa index 0.17 (95% CI; 0-0.5) CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence did not differ significantly from that expected, and the agreement between the two stratifications was very weak, not selecting the same patients for highly complex case management.

Validation of PROFUND prognostic index over a four-year follow-up period.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The PROFUND index stratifies accurately the 12-month mortality risk of polypathological patients (PPs), but its fitness over a longer follow-up period remains unknown. We aimed to explore the calibration and discrimination power of PROFUND index over 4-years, in order to assess its follow-up interval generalizability. DESIGN: Multicenter prospective cohort-study. SETTING: 33 Spanish hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: PPs included after hospital discharge, outpatient clinics, or home hospitalization. MEASUREMENTS: Mortality over a 4-year follow-up period. METHODS: PROFUND index calibration was assessed by risk-quartiles predicted/observed mortality (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test), and its discrimination power by ROC curves. RESULTS: A total of 768 patients were included (630 [82%] of them completed the 4-year follow-up). Global mortality rate was 63.5%. When assessing individual patient scores, mortality was 52% in the lowest risk group (0-2 points in PROFUND score); 73.5% in the low-intermediate risk group (3-6 points), 85% in the intermediate-high group (7-10 points); and 92% in the highest risk group (≥11 points). Accuracy testing of the PROFUND index showed good calibration (P=.8 in the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test), and also a good discrimination power (AUC=0.71 [0.67-0.77] in ROC curve). CONCLUSIONS: The PROFUND index maintained its accuracy in predicting mortality of polypathological patients over a 4-year follow-up period. This index may be of potential usefulness in deciding the most appropriate health-care interventions in populations with multimorbidity.

Adherencia terapéutica en la enfermedad crónica: estado de la situación y perspectiva de futuro / Treatment compliance in chronic illness: current situation and future perspectives

Las enfermedades crónicas de larga duración poseen una elevada mortalidad y afectan por igual a ambos sexos. La falta de adherencia a las recomendaciones terapéuticas continúa siendo un obstáculo para mejorar la salud y la calidad de vida de los pacientes, además de conllevar un elevado coste sociosanitario. En este trabajo se desarrolla el concepto «adherencia terapéutica» que engloba tratamientos farmacológicos (cumplimiento terapéutico) y no farmacológicos (grado de coincidencia entre las recomendaciones ofrecidas, como pueden ser cambios en los hábitos de vida y su implantación por el paciente). También se analiza el impacto clínico y sociosanitario de la «adherencia terapéutica», así como las causas de la falta de adherencia y métodos y estrategias para mejorarla. Concluimos que la adherencia terapéutica debe ser un objetivo esencial del sistema sanitario, englobando todos los agentes implicados en la salud del paciente (AU)

Long-term chronic diseases have a high mortality rate around the world, affecting both genders equally. Despite improvements in the diagnosis and treatment of various health problems, lack of treatment compliance remains an obstacle to improving health and patient quality of life, and it carries a high associated socio-healthcare cost. The objectives of this study were to develop the concept of «therapeutic adherence», which includes both pharmacological compliance as well as non-pharmacological (level of agreement and patient involvement, lifestyle changes, etc.) treatments. The study also aimed to establish the clinical and socio-health impact of non-compliance, the reasons for non-compliance, and methods and strategies to improve compliance. The results of this study support therapeutic adherence as an essential goal of the healthcare system that encompasses all stakeholders involved in patient health (AU)

Treatment compliance in chronic illness: Current situation and future perspectives. / Adherencia terapéutica en la enfermedad crónica: estado de la situación y perspectiva de futuro.

Long-term chronic diseases have a high mortality rate around the world, affecting both genders equally. Despite improvements in the diagnosis and treatment of various health problems, lack of treatment compliance remains an obstacle to improving health and patient quality of life, and it carries a high associated socio-healthcare cost. The objectives of this study were to develop the concept of «therapeutic adherence¼, which includes both pharmacological compliance as well as non-pharmacological (level of agreement and patient involvement, lifestyle changes, etc.) treatments. The study also aimed to establish the clinical and socio-health impact of non-compliance, the reasons for non-compliance, and methods and strategies to improve compliance. The results of this study support therapeutic adherence as an essential goal of the healthcare system that encompasses all stakeholders involved in patient health.