[Factors associated with dissatisfaction with pharmacological treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A cross-sectional study]. / Factores asociados a la insatisfacción con el tratamiento farmacológico en pacientes con diabetes mellitus tipo 2: estudio transversal.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Diabetes is a chronic disease with a high impact on both health and Quality of Life Related to Health (QLRH). To evaluate the satisfaction of treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus through the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) and its relationship with sociodemographic variables, with antidiabetic medication and clinical-analytical variables. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in General University Hospital of San Juan de Alicante between September 2016 and December 2017. Two hundred thirty-two patients diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus at least 1 year before inclusion, treated with antidiabetic medication were included. The Spanish version of the DTSQ scale was used to measure satisfaction with treatment. Factors associated with low satisfaction were analyzed by applying the Chi-square test for qualitative variables and Student-T for quantitative variables. To estimate magnitudes of association, logistic models were adjusted. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-two patients were included in this study. 21.5% of the patients presented low satisfaction with the treatment. Patients who presented low satisfaction with treatment were associated with medications that could cause hypoglycemia (OR: 2.872 [1.195-6.903]), HbA1c levels higher than 7% (OR: 2.260 [1.005-5.083]) and drugs administered by the route oral (OR: 2.749 [1.233-6.131]). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who had a lower score on the DTSQ questionnaire were associated with medications that produced hypoglycaemia, and with higher levels of HbA1c higher than 7%, and those who took oral medication.

[Analysis of two health attendance models for the non-hospital emergencies in Gipuzkoa: Retrospective study]. / Análisis de dos modelos asistenciales para la atención de las emergencias extrahospitalarias en Guipúzcoa: Estudio retrospectivo.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Out-of-hospital medical emergency services are defined as a functional organization that performs a set of sequential human and material activities. The objective of this study was to compare the mortality of patients attended by the out-of-hospital medical emergency services in 2 neighboring Spanish regions with different models of healthcare transport assistance for emergency care. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Retrospective observational cohort study, done between June 1, 2007 and December 31, 2008 in 2 regions of Gipuzkoa, Alto Deba (AD) and Bajo Deba (BD). The study variables were age, sex and place of exposure (AD/BD), heart rate, blood pressure, initial reason for the call defined by the European Resuscitation Council, unconsciousness and digestive bleeding. 3452 subjects were analyzed. RESULTS: The risk of in situ mortality in BD was 1.31 times higher than in AD (P=.050), that of hospital mortality in BD was 0.71 times lower than in AD (P=.011) and the risk of mortality at one year between counties and the combined mortality (in situ+hospital) did not contribute significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality (in situ+in-hospital, and one year aftercare) of patients treated by the out-of-hospital emergency medical services in AD (non-medicalized healthcare transport model) was similar to that of the BD region (mixed healthcare transport model).

HLA-G as a new tumor biomarker: detection of soluble isoforms of HLA-G in the serum and saliva of patients with colorectal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Recent medical investigations suggest that HLA-G, due to its tolerogenic properties, can be used as a biomarker in the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of different neoplasms. This observational prospective pilot study aims at detecting sHLA-G in the serum and saliva of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC). For this purpose, we compared the expression of sHLA-G from patients with a control sample from a healthy population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the specific enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) method, the expression of sHLA-G in the serum and saliva samples from patients affected by CRC (n = 20) and in a control sample (n = 10) were analyzed. RESULTS: The data showed that in patients with CRC, salivary sHLA-G values were significantly higher than in the control group (18.84 U/ml versus 6.3 U/ml, p = 0.036). In addition, higher levels of sHLA-G were observed in the saliva of patients with CRC in more advanced stages, compared with patients in early stages (24.2 U/ml vs. 8.1 U/ml, p = 0.019). A significant correlation was observed between the concentration of sHLA-G in the serum and saliva of the analyzed samples (Spearman correlation 0.7, p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates, for the first time, the possibility of detecting sHLA-G in the saliva of patients with CRC, resulting in a less invasive alternative to venipuncture. Likewise, we propose that sHLA-G could be an attractive molecular target based on its significant high levels in advanced stages.

Herramienta para mejorar la eficiencia en el manejo clínico de pacientes hipertensos / Tools to improve efficiency in the clinical management of hypertensive patients

Objetivo: Crear una herramienta que permita evaluar la eficiencia de la gestión clínica de los pacientes hipertensos en atención primaria. Material y métodos: Se creó un cuestionario dirigido a los centros de atención primaria, con acceso vía Web, para la autoevaluación del manejo de la hipertensión, respecto a 5 áreas de gestión: sistemas de información; pruebas diagnósticas y analíticas; aspectos organizativos; demanda asistencial y consumo de recursos; y programas de atención continuada para profesionales y para pacientes. Previamente, un comité de expertos definió estas preguntas, así como su respuesta ideal o «control», basándose en la literatura científica o, en caso de no haber referencias publicadas, de manera consensuada por dicho comité. Se realizó un análisis descriptivo de los datos y se creó un índice de adherencia de sus resultados con respecto al «control», que oscila entre 0 (ninguna adherencia) y 1 (total adherencia). Resultados: Un total de 35 centros de salud introdujeron sus datos de gestión de pacientes hipertensos en la Web de gestión clínica. Se observó la mayor adherencia en el área «Pruebas diagnósticas y analíticas» (0,69±0,10) y la menor en el área «Programas de formación continuada para pacientes y profesionales» (0,42±0,21). Conclusiones: La eficiencia de la gestión clínica en pacientes hipertensos puede analizarse mediante la herramienta web creada para este fin. Su uso permite realizar una auditoría interna para detectar las áreas que necesitan mejoras y también sirve para hacer evaluaciones comparativas en las distintas áreas de gestión a lo largo del tiempo

Objective: To create a tool to evaluate the efficiency of the clinical management of hypertensive patients in Primary Care. Material and methods: A web-based questionnaire was designed for Primary Care centres to self-evaluate the management of hypertension in five specific areas: information systems, diagnostic and analytical tests, organisational aspects, use of resources, and continuous training programmes for patients and healthcare professionals. A committee of experts previously defined these questions and their ideal responses or "control", based on the scientific literature or, if there were no published references, by consensus of the committee. A descriptive analysis was performed on the data, and an adherence score was created that ranged from 0 (no adherence) to 1 (total adherence). Results: A total of 35 Primary Care centres entered their data into the website for the clinical management of hypertensive patients. The highest adherence to the ideal algorithm was observed in the area "Diagnostic and analytical tests" (0.69±0.10), and the lowest in "Continuous training programmes for patients and professionals" (0.42±0.21). Conclusions: The efficiency of clinical management in hypertensive patients can be analysed using the website tool created for this purpose. Its use allows an internal audit to detect the areas that need improvement, and also serves to make comparative evaluations in the different areas of management over time

[Tools to improve efficiency in the clinical management of hypertensive patients]. / Herramienta para mejorar la eficiencia en el manejo clínico de pacientes hipertensos.

OBJECTIVE: To create a tool to evaluate the efficiency of the clinical management of hypertensive patients in Primary Care. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A web-based questionnaire was designed for Primary Care centres to self-evaluate the management of hypertension in five specific areas: information systems, diagnostic and analytical tests, organisational aspects, use of resources, and continuous training programmes for patients and healthcare professionals. A committee of experts previously defined these questions and their ideal responses or "control", based on the scientific literature or, if there were no published references, by consensus of the committee. A descriptive analysis was performed on the data, and an adherence score was created that ranged from 0 (no adherence) to 1 (total adherence). RESULTS: A total of 35 Primary Care centres entered their data into the website for the clinical management of hypertensive patients. The highest adherence to the ideal algorithm was observed in the area "Diagnostic and analytical tests" (0.69±0.10), and the lowest in "Continuous training programmes for patients and professionals" (0.42±0.21). CONCLUSIONS: The efficiency of clinical management in hypertensive patients can be analysed using the website tool created for this purpose. Its use allows an internal audit to detect the areas that need improvement, and also serves to make comparative evaluations in the different areas of management over time.

Percepción de los médicos de atención primaria sobre la integración con cardiología mediante programas de continuidad asistencial en prevención secundaria / Perception of Primary Care physicians on the integration with cardiology through continuity of healthcare programs in secondary prevention

Objetivo: Conocer la percepción de los médicos de atención primaria (AP) sobre la integración con cardiología (CA) mediante programas de continuidad asistencial. Material y métodos: Estudio transversal y multicéntrico en el que participaron 200 médicos de AP de todo el territorio nacional cumplimentando una encuesta cualitativa para evaluar el grado de integración con CA en prevención secundaria. Los médicos fueron agrupados según el grado de integración entre AP-CA. Resultados: Existe una buena percepción del grado de integración AP-CA, aunque mejor en los centros con mayor integración (74,0% vs. 60,0%; p=0,02) y en general se considera que ha mejorado (92,0% vs. 73,0%; p<0,001). Prácticamente todos los médicos de AP recibían el informe de alta. En la mayoría de los informes se realizaban recomendaciones para el seguimiento cardiológico y en AP, control de factores de riesgo y duración del tratamiento en prevención secundaria, sin diferencias según el grado de integración. El 55,8% de los informes contenían indicaciones sobre cuándo realizar el siguiente control analítico, un 63,6% información sobre el regreso a la vida laboral y un 51,3% sobre la reanudación de la actividad sexual. El papel sigue siendo el medio de comunicación dominante (75 vs. 84%; p=NS). La comunicación entre niveles asistenciales fue mayor en aquellos centros con mayor integración, así como la periodicidad de la comunicación y la satisfacción de los médicos (80,0% vs. 63,0%; p=0,005). Conclusiones: El grado de integración entre AP y CA en general es satisfactorio, pero los centros con mayor integración se benefician de una mayor comunicación y satisfacción

Objective: To determine the perception of Primary Care (PC) physicians on the integration with cardiology (CA) through continuity of healthcare programs. Material and methods: A cross-sectional and multicentre study was conducted, in which a total of 200 PC physicians from all over Spain completed a qualitative survey that evaluated the level of integration with CA in secondary prevention. Physicians were grouped according to the level of PC-CA integration. Results: The integration between CA and PC was good, but it was better in those centres with a higher integration (74.0% vs. 60.0%; p=.02) and in general, physicians considered that integration had improved (92.0% vs. 73.0%; p<.001). Almost all PC physicians received the hospital discharge report. The majority of the hospital discharge reports included recommendations about the CA and PC follow-up, control of risk factors, as well as the duration of secondary prevention treatment, with not significant differences according to the level of integration. In 55.8%, 63.6%, and 51.3% of hospital discharge reports, indications were given on when to perform the follow-up blood analysis, as well as information about returning to working life and sexual activity, respectively. The most common communication method was the paper-based report (75 vs. 84%; p=NS). The communication between healthcare levels was greater in those Primary Care centres with a higher level of integration, as well as periodicity of the communication and the satisfaction of physicians (80.0% vs. 63.0%; p=.005). Conclusions: The level of integration between PC and CA is, in general, satisfactory, but those centres with a higher level of integration benefit more from a greater communication and satisfaction

Prognostic factors and predictive model for in-hospital mortality following hip fractures in the elderly.

PURPOSE: The incidence of hip fractures is increasing within the aging population. Our objective was to identify and quantify the risk factors and develop a predictive model for the in-hospital mortality among hip fracture patients older than 65 years. METHODS: This is a prospective study conducted on 331 hip fracture patients older than 65 years admitted to our hospital from 2011 to 2014. Patients' demographics, prehospitalization residential status, prefracture comorbidity data, anti-aggregant and anticoagulant medication, preoperative hemoglobin value, type of fractures, type of treatments, time to surgery, and complications were recorded. RESULTS: The average age was 83 years, 73% female, and 57% of them sustained a femoral neck fracture. In 62.8% of patients, the number of pre-fracture baseline comorbidities was ≥2. The in-hospital mortality rate was 11.4%. In multivariate analysis, age over 90 years, congestive heart failure, asthma, rheumatologic disease, lung cancer, and not taking antiaggregant medication were independently associated with in-hospital mortality. A formula and risk stratification scoring for predicting the risk for in-hospital mortality was developed. Risk-adjustment model based on these variables had acceptable accuracy for predicting in-hospital mortality (c-statistic 0.77). CONCLUSION: Advanced age, and five prefracture comorbidities have a strong association with in-hospital mortality in a hip fracture patient older than 65 years old. Our predictive model was specifically designed for the old hip fracture population. It has an accuracy similar to other risk models. The specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value are high. In addition, it could discriminate a high risk patient from a low risk patient for in-hospital mortality.

[Perception of Primary Care physicians on the integration with cardiology through continuity of healthcare programs in secondary prevention]. / Percepción de los médicos de atención primaria sobre la integración con cardiología mediante programas de continuidad asistencial en prevención secundaria.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the perception of Primary Care (PC) physicians on the integration with cardiology (CA) through continuity of healthcare programs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A cross-sectional and multicentre study was conducted, in which a total of 200 PC physicians from all over Spain completed a qualitative survey that evaluated the level of integration with CA in secondary prevention. Physicians were grouped according to the level of PC-CA integration. RESULTS: The integration between CA and PC was good, but it was better in those centres with a higher integration (74.0% vs. 60.0%; p=.02) and in general, physicians considered that integration had improved (92.0% vs. 73.0%; p<.001). Almost all PC physicians received the hospital discharge report. The majority of the hospital discharge reports included recommendations about the CA and PC follow-up, control of risk factors, as well as the duration of secondary prevention treatment, with not significant differences according to the level of integration. In 55.8%, 63.6%, and 51.3% of hospital discharge reports, indications were given on when to perform the follow-up blood analysis, as well as information about returning to working life and sexual activity, respectively. The most common communication method was the paper-based report (75 vs. 84%; p=NS). The communication between healthcare levels was greater in those Primary Care centres with a higher level of integration, as well as periodicity of the communication and the satisfaction of physicians (80.0% vs. 63.0%; p=.005). CONCLUSIONS: The level of integration between PC and CA is, in general, satisfactory, but those centres with a higher level of integration benefit more from a greater communication and satisfaction.

Factores de riesgo de mortalidad intrahospitalaria en la fractura proximal de fémur / Risk factors for in-hospital mortality following hip fracture

Objetivo. Identificar y cuantificar los factores relacionados con la mortalidad intrahospitalaria en pacientes mayores de 65 años con fractura proximal de fémur. Material y métodos. Estudio observacional de cohortes retrospectivo de una base de datos prospectiva de pacientes mayores de 65 años con fractura proximal de fémur entre 2011 y 2014. Se incluyeron en el estudio 331 pacientes. Se registraron variables demográficas, procedencia del paciente, grado de deambulación y dependencia, comorbilidades asociadas, estado mental, toma de medicación anticoagulante o antiagregante, valor de la hemoglobina al ingreso, tipo de fractura, tipo de tratamiento, demora quirúrgica y presencia de complicaciones. Resultados. La edad media de los pacientes fue de 83 años. En un 73% eran mujeres. Y el 57% presentaron fractura subcapital de fémur. El número de comorbilidades era igual o mayor de 2 en un 62,8%. La mortalidad intrahospitalaria fue del 11,4%. En el estudio univariante, la edad mayor de 90 años, sexo varón, no antiagregación, el tratamiento ortopédico de la fractura, un valor de la hemoglobina ≤ 10g/dl, un número de comorbilidades ≥ 2, un índice de Charlson ≥ 2, un índice de Charlson ajustado a la edad ≥ 6, la insuficiencia cardíaca, el asma, la enfermedad reumática, fueron variables asociadas a la mortalidad intrahospitalaria. Conclusiones. Los factores preoperatorios relacionados con el paciente influyen directamente en la mortalidad intrahospitalaria del paciente con fractura proximal de fémur mayor de 65 años. Dado que estos factores no son modificables, recomendamos el desarrollo de protocolos de actuación que permitan reducir la mortalidad intrahospitalaria en este grupo de pacientes (AU)

Objective: To identify and quantify the risk factors for in-hospital mortality in patients older than 65 years with a hip fracture. Materials and methods: retrospective review of prospectively collected data. We studied a cohort of 331 hip fracture patients older than 65 years of age admitted to our hospital from 2011 to 2014. Patients demographics, type of residence, physical function, mobility, prefracture comorbidities data, cognitive status, anti-aggregant and anticoagulant medication, preoperative haemoglobin value, type of fracture, type of treatment, surgical delay, and complications, were recorded. Results: The average age was 83, 73% female, and 57% had sustained a subcapital fracture. In 62.8% pre-fracture baseline co-morbidities were equal or greater than 2. The in-hospital mortality rate was 11.4%. In univariate analysis, age over 90, male gender, haemoglobin ≤ 10g/dl, no antiplatelet agents, orthopaedic treatment, number of co-morbidities ≥ 2, Charlson index ≥ 2, age-adjusted Charlson index ≥ 6, congestive heart failure, asthma, rheumatologic disease, were associated with in-hospital mortality. Conclusions: Preoperative patient-related factors have a strong relationship with in-hospital mortality in a hip fracture patients aged older than 65 years. These factors are non-modifiable; we recommend the development of protocols to reduce in-hospital mortality in this group of patients (AU)

Aspectos metodológicos de los procesos asistenciales integrados (PAI) / Methodological aspects of integrated care pathways

Un proceso asistencial integrado (PAI) es una herramienta cuyo propósito es aumentar la efectividad de las actuaciones clínicas a través de una mayor coordinación y garantía de continuidad asistencial. Los PAI sitúan al paciente como el eje central de la organización asistencial. Se definen como el conjunto de actividades que realizan los proveedores de la atención sanitaria con la finalidad de incrementar el nivel de salud y el grado de satisfacción de la población que recibe los servicios. La elaboración de un PAI precisa analizar el flujo de actividades, la interrelación entre profesionales y dispositivos asistenciales y las expectativas del paciente. En este artículo se presenta y se discute la metodología para la elaboración de un PAI, así como los factores de éxito para su definición y su efectiva implantación. Se explica también, a modo de ejemplo, el reciente PAI para hipoglucemias en personas con diabetes mellitus tipo 2 elaborado por un equipo multidisciplinar y avalado por varias sociedades científicas (AU)

An Integrated Healthcare Pathway (PAI) is a tool which has as its aim to increase the effectiveness of clinical performance through greater coordination and to ensure continuity of care. PAI places the patient as the central focus of the organisation of health services. It is defined as the set of activities carried out by the health care providers in order to increase the level of health and satisfaction of the population receiving services. The development of a PAI requires the analysis of the flow of activities, the inter-relationships between professionals and care teams, and patient expectations. The methodology for the development of a PAI is presented and discussed in this article, as well as the success factors for its definition and its effective implementation. It also explains, as an example, the recent PAI for Hypoglycaemia in patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus developed by a multidisciplinary team and supported by several scientific societies (AU)

Factores de riesgo para la demora quirúrgica en la fractura de cadera / Risk-factors for surgical delay following hip fracture

Objetivo. Identificar los factores al ingreso relacionados con una demora quirúrgica mayor de 2 días en pacientes mayores de 65 años con fractura de cadera. Material y métodos. Estudio de una base de datos prospectiva de pacientes mayores de 65 años con fractura proximal de fémur entre enero de 2015 y abril de 2016. Se incluyeron en el estudio 180 pacientes. Se registraron variables demográficas, día de ingreso, comorbilidades asociadas, estado mental, nivel de deambulación y dependencia, tipo de fractura, toma de medicación anticoagulante o antiagregante, valor de la hemoglobina al ingreso, tipo de tratamiento, y demora quirúrgica. Resultados. La edad media de los pacientes fue de 83,7 años. El valor medio del índice de comorbilidad de Charlson era de 2,8; con un 70% de pacientes con al menos 2 comorbilidades. La demora quirúrgica media fue de 3,1 días. En el momento del ingreso, 122 pacientes (67,7%) se consideraron aptos para la intervención quirúrgica. De ellos, 80 pacientes (44,4%) fueron intervenidos en los 2 primeros días tras el ingreso. El análisis multivariante mostraba el índice de comorbilidad de Charlson mayor de 2, la anticoagulación, y el ingreso hospitalario de jueves a sábado, como factores independientes asociados a la demora quirúrgica mayor de 2 días. Conclusiones. El porcentaje de pacientes con fractura de cadera intervenidos en los 2 primeros días del ingreso hospitalario es bajo. Los factores asociados a la demora quirúrgica no son modificables. Sin embargo, su conocimiento debería permitir el desarrollo de protocolos de actuación que consiguieran reducir la demora quirúrgica en este grupo de pacientes (AU)

Objective. To identify pre-operative risk factors for surgical delay of more than 2 days after admission in patients older than 65 years with a hip fracture. Material and methods. A prospective observational study was conducted on 180 hip fractures in patients older than 65 years of age admitted to our hospital from January 2015 to April 2016. The data recorded included, patient demographics, day of admission, pre-fracture comorbidities, mental state, level of mobility and physical function, type of fracture, antiaggregant and anticoagulant medication, pre-operative haemoglobin value, type of treatment, and surgical delay. Results. The mean age of the patients was 83.7 years. The mean Charlson Index was 2.8. The pre-fracture baseline co-morbidities were equal or greater than 2 in 70% of cases. Mean timing of surgery was 3.1 days. At the time of admission, 122 (67.7%) patients were fit for surgery, of which 80 (44.4%) underwent surgery within 2 days. A Charlson index greater than 2, anticoagulant therapy, and admission on Thursday to Saturday, were independently associated with a surgical delay greater than 2 days. Conclusions. The rate of hip fracture patients undergoing surgery within 2 days is low. Risk factors associated to surgical delay are non-modifiable. However, their knowledge should allow the development of protocols that can reduce surgical delay in this group of patients (AU)

Risk factors for in-hospital mortality following hip fracture. / Factores de riesgo de mortalidad intrahospitalaria en la fractura proximal de fémur.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and quantify the risk factors for in-hospital mortality in patients older than 65 years with a hip fracture. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data. We studied a cohort of 331 hip fracture patients older than 65 years of age admitted to our hospital from 2011 to 2014. Patients demographics, type of residence, physical function, mobility, prefracture comorbidities data, cognitive status, anti-aggregant and anticoagulant medication, preoperative haemoglobin value, type of fracture, type of treatment, surgical delay, and complications, were recorded. RESULTS: The average age was 83, 73% female, and 57% had sustained a subcapital fracture. In 62.8% pre-fracture baseline co-morbidities were equal or greater than 2. The in-hospital mortality rate was 11.4%. In univariate analysis, age over 90, male gender, haemoglobin ≤ 10g/dl, no antiplatelet agents, orthopaedic treatment, number of co-morbidities≥2, Charlson index≥2, age-adjusted Charlson index≥6, congestive heart failure, asthma, rheumatologic disease, were associated with in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative patient-related factors have a strong relationship with in-hospital mortality in a hip fracture patients aged older than 65 years. These factors are non-modifiable; we recommend the development of protocols to reduce in-hospital mortality in this group of patients.

Risk-factors for surgical delay following hip fracture. / Factores de riesgo para la demora quirúrgica en la fractura de cadera.

OBJECTIVE: To identify pre-operative risk factors for surgical delay of more than 2 days after admission in patients older than 65 years with a hip fracture. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted on 180 hip fractures in patients older than 65 years of age admitted to our hospital from January 2015 to April 2016. The data recorded included, patient demographics, day of admission, pre-fracture comorbidities, mental state, level of mobility and physical function, type of fracture, antiaggregant and anticoagulant medication, pre-operative haemoglobin value, type of treatment, and surgical delay. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 83.7 years. The mean Charlson Index was 2.8. The pre-fracture baseline co-morbidities were equal or greater than 2 in 70% of cases. Mean timing of surgery was 3.1 days. At the time of admission, 122 (67.7%) patients were fit for surgery, of which 80 (44.4%) underwent surgery within 2 days. A Charlson index greater than 2, anticoagulant therapy, and admission on Thursday to Saturday, were independently associated with a surgical delay greater than 2 days. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of hip fracture patients undergoing surgery within 2 days is low. Risk factors associated to surgical delay are non-modifiable. However, their knowledge should allow the development of protocols that can reduce surgical delay in this group of patients.

[Methodological aspects of integrated care pathways]. / Aspectos metodológicos de los procesos asistenciales integrados (PAI).

An Integrated Healthcare Pathway (PAI) is a tool which has as its aim to increase the effectiveness of clinical performance through greater coordination and to ensure continuity of care. PAI places the patient as the central focus of the organisation of health services. It is defined as the set of activities carried out by the health care providers in order to increase the level of health and satisfaction of the population receiving services. The development of a PAI requires the analysis of the flow of activities, the inter-relationships between professionals and care teams, and patient expectations. The methodology for the development of a PAI is presented and discussed in this article, as well as the success factors for its definition and its effective implementation. It also explains, as an example, the recent PAI for Hypoglycaemia in patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus developed by a multidisciplinary team and supported by several scientific societies.

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 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.

Analysing the concept of diagnostic inertia in hypertension: a cross-sectional study.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to quantify diagnostic inertia (DI) when the physician fails to diagnose hypertension and determine its associated factors. METHODS: This cross-sectional, observational study involved all patients without a diagnosis of hypertension who had their blood pressure (BP) measured at least three times during the second half of 2010 (N = 48,605). Patients with altered mean BP figures (≥ 140/90 mmHg) were considered to experience DI. Secondary variables: gender, atrial fibrillation, diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, cardiovascular disease, age and the physician having attended a cardiovascular training course (ESCARVAL). Associated factors were assessed by multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Diagnostic inertia was present in 6450 patients (13.3%, 95% CI: 13.0-13.6%). Factors significantly associated with DI were: male gender (OR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.37-1.55, p < 0.001), atrial fibrillation (OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.58-0.92, p = 0.007), the ESCARVAL cardiovascular course (OR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.81-0.96, p = 0.005), diabetes mellitus (OR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.87-0.99, p = 0.016), cardiovascular disease (OR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.67-0.88, p < 0.001) and older age (years) (18-44→OR = 1; 45-59→OR = 12.45, 95% CI: 11.11-13.94; 60-74→OR = 18.11, 95% CI: 16.30-20.12; ≥ 75→OR = 20.43, 95% CI: 18.34-22.75; p < 0.001). The multivariate model had an area under the ROC curve of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.80-0.81, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study will help clinical researchers differentiate between the two forms of DI (interpretation of a positive screening test and interpretation of positive diagnostic criteria). The results found here in patients with hypertension suggest that this problem is prevalent, and that a set of associated factors can explain the outcome well (AUC>0.80).

Basal insulin initiation in primary vs. specialist care: similar glycaemic control in two different patient populations.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of healthcare provider (HCP) type (primary vs. specialist) on glycaemic control and other treatment parameters. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Study of Once-Daily Levemir (SOLVE(™) ) is an international, 24-week, observational study of insulin initiation in people with type 2 diabetes. RESULTS: A total of 17,374 subjects were included, comprising 4144 (23.9%) primary care subjects. Glycaemic control improved in both HCP groups from baseline to final visit [glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) -1.2 ± 1.4% (-13.1 ± 15.3 mmol/mol) and -1.3 ± 1.6% (-14.2 ± 17.5 mmol/mol), respectively]. After adjustment for known confounders, there was no statistically significant effect of HCP group on final HbA1c [-0.04%, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.09 to -0.01 (-0.4 mmol/mol, 95% CI -1.0-0.1 mmol/mol), p = 0.1590]. However, insulin doses at the final visit were higher in primary care patients (+0.06, 95% CI 0.06-0.07 U/kg, p < 0.0001). Logistic regression demonstrated a significant effect of HCP type (primary vs. specialist care) on hypoglycaemia risk [odds ratio (OR) 0.75, 95% CI 0.64-0.87, p = 0.0002]. Primary care physicians took more time to train patients and had more frequent contact with patients than specialists (both p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Primary care physicians and specialists achieved comparable improvements in glycaemic control following insulin initiation.

Differences in the management of hypertension, diabetes mellitus and dyslipidemia between obesity classes.

We did not find any paper that assessed clinical inertia in obese patients. Therefore, no paper has compared the clinical inertia rates between morbidly and nonmorbidly obese patients. A cross-sectional observational study was carried out. We analysed 8687 obese patients ⩾40 years of age who attended their health-care center for a checkup as part of a preventive program. The outcome was morbid obesity. Secondary variables were as follows: failure in the management of high blood pressure (HBP), high blood cholesterol (HBC) and high fasting blood glucose (HFBG); gender; personal history of hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes, smoking and cardiovascular disease; and age (years). We analysed the association between failures and morbid obesity by calculating the adjusted odds ratio (OR). Of 8687 obese patients, 421 had morbid obesity (4.8%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 4.4-5.3%). The prevalence rates for failures were as follows: HBP, 34.7%; HBC, 35.2%; and HFBG, 12.4%. Associated factors with morbid obesity related with failures were as follows: failure in the management of HBP (OR=1.42, 95% CI: 1.15-1.74, P=0.001); failure in the management of HBC (OR=0.73, 95% CI: 0.58-0.91, P=0.004); and failure in the management of HFBG (OR=2.24, 95% CI: 1.66-3.03, P<0.001). Morbidly obese patients faced worse management for HBP and HFBG, and better management for HBC. It would be interesting to integrate alarm systems to avoid this problem.

Hacia un manejo integral del paciente con diabetes y obesidad. Posicionamiento de la SEMI, SED, redGDPS, SEC, SEEDO, SEEN, SEMERGEN y SEMFYC / Position statement of the SEMI, SED, redGDPS, SEC, SEEDO, SEEN, SEMERGEN y SEMFYC

La obesidad y el sobrepeso constituyen la principal causa modificable de diabetes tipo 2 (DM2). En el momento del diagnóstico de la diabetes tipo 2 se debe establecer el grado de obesidad según el índice de masa corporal y, en los pacientes con sobrepeso, determinar el perímetro de la cintura. El adecuado tratamiento de la DM2 requiere un abordaje simultáneo del sobrepeso/obesidad y el resto de factores de riesgo cardiovascular, como la hipertensión, la dislipemia o el tabaquismo. Las intervenciones no farmacológicas (dieta, ejercicio) con beneficio demostrado en la prevención y tratamiento del paciente con DM2 y sobrepeso/obesidad deben seguir un enfoque individualizado y multidisciplinario, con programas estructurados dotados de recursos específicos. La ganancia de peso asociada al tratamiento antidiabético puede dificultar el control glucémico, comprometer la adherencia al tratamiento, empeorar el perfil de riesgo vascular de los pacientes y limitar los beneficios cardiovasculares del tratamiento. Por ello, es importante evitarla; una medida que resulta coste-efectiva. Los fármacos antidiabéticos con beneficios sobre el peso corporal también han demostrado su beneficio en pacientes con un índice de masa corporal<30kg/m2. Globalmente, el tratamiento del paciente con DM2 y obesidad dependerá tanto del grado de obesidad como de la comorbilidad asociada. Los ensayos clínicos de intervención en DM2 deben contemplar objetivos combinados que incluyan no solo el control glucémico, sino otras variables como el riesgo de hipoglucemia y el efecto del tratamiento sobre el peso corporal (AU)

Obesity and excess weight are the main preventable causes of type 2 diabetes (DM2). When diagnosing type 2 diabetes, clinicians should establish the degree of obesity according to the body mass index (BMI) and, for patients with excess weight, measure the waist circumference. The proper treatment of DM2 requires a simultaneous approach to excess weight/obesity and the other cardiovascular risk factors, such as hypertension, dyslipidaemia and smoking. Nondrug interventions (e.g., diet and exercise) have proven benefits in preventing and treating patients with DM2 and excess weight/obesity and should follow an individual and multidisciplinary approach, with structured programs equipped with specific resources. Weight gain associated with antidiabetic treatment can hinder glycaemic control, compromise treatment adherence, worsen the vascular risk profile and limit the cardiovascular benefits of treatment. Therefore, it is significant to avoid weight gain, a measure that can be cost-effective. Antidiabetic drugs with benefits in body weight have also demonstrated their benefit in patients with BMIs <30. In general, the treatment of patients with DM2 and obesity will depend both on the degree of obesity and the associated comorbidity. Clinical trials on DM2 intervention should consider combined objectives that include not only glycaemic control but also other variables such as the risk of hypoglycaemia and the effect of treatment on body weight (AU)