Fatal Case of Nosocomial Legionella pneumophila Pneumonia, Spain, 2018.

A nosocomial case of Legionella pneumophila pneumonia likely caused by a serogroup 3 strain was detected by a urinary antigen test in Spain in 2018. Although Legionella bacteria could not be isolated from respiratory samples, molecular methods implicated the sink faucet of the patient's room as the probable infection source.

Impacto de la identificación de pacientes en un programa de cuidados paliativos del País Vasco / The impact of patient identification on an integrated program of palliative care in Basque Country

Objetivo: Evaluar el proceso y el impacto económico de un programa integrado de cuidados paliativos. Diseño: Estudio transversal comparativo. Emplazamiento: Organizaciones Sanitarias Integradas Alto Deba y Goierri Alto-Urola, País Vasco. Participantes: Pacientes fallecidos (oncológicos y no oncológicos) en 2012 (grupo control) y 2015 (grupo intervención) susceptibles de necesitar cuidados paliativos según la estimación mínima de McNamara. Intervenciones: Identificación de pacientes con el código de cuidados paliativos en atención primaria, uso de rutas asistenciales conjuntas en atención primaria y hospitalaria e impartición de cursos formativos. Mediciones principales: Cambio en el perfil de uso de recursos del paciente durante sus últimos 3 meses de vida. Se utilizó el genetic matching para evitar sesgos. Mediante análisis univariante se compararon los grupos y mediante regresiones logísticas y modelos lineales generalizados se analizaron las relaciones entre variables. Resultados: Se identificaron 1.023 pacientes en 2012 y 1.142 en 2015. En 2015 aumentó al doble la probabilidad de ser identificado como paliativo en pacientes oncológicos (19-33%) y no oncológicos (7-16%). La prescripción de opiáceos subió (25-68%) y el fallecimiento en hospital se mantuvo estable. Los contactos por paciente con atención primaria y hospitalización a domicilio aumentaron, mientras que las hospitalizaciones tradicionales disminuyeron. El coste por paciente aumentó un 26%. Conclusiones: El modelo integrado incrementó la identificación de la población diana. La relación entre variables mostró que la identificación repercutió positivamente en la prescripción de opiáceos, fallecimiento fuera del hospital y extensión a enfermedades no oncológicas. Aunque también disminuyeron los ingresos, el coste aumentó debido al uso de hospitalización a domicilio

Objective: Evaluate the process and the economic impact of an integrated palliative care program. Design: Comparative cross-sectional study. Location: Integrated Healthcare Organizations of Alto Deba and Goierri Alto-Urola, Basque Country. Participants: Patients dead due to oncologic and non-oncologic causes in 2012 (control group) and 2015 (intervention group) liable to need palliative care according to McNamara criteria. Interventions: Identification as palliative patients in primary care, use of common clinical pathways in primary and secondary care and arrange training courses for health professionals. Main measures: Change in the resource use profile of patients in their last 3 months. Propensity score by genetic matching method was used to avoid non-randomization bias. The groups were compared by univariate analysis and the relationships between variables were analysed by logistic regressions and generalized linear models. Results: One thousand and twenty-three patients were identified in 2012 and 1,142 patients in 2015. In 2015 doubled the probability of being identify as palliative patient in deaths due to oncologic (19-33%) and non-oncologic causes (7-16%). Prescriptions of opiates rise (25-68%) and deaths in hospital remained stable. Contacts per patient with primary care and home hospitalization increased, while contacts with hospital admissions decreased. Cost per patient rise 26%. Conclusions: The integrated palliative care model increased the identification of the target population. Relationships between variables showed that the identification had a positive impact on prescription of opiates, death outside the hospital and extension to non-oncologic diseases. Although the identification decreased admissions in hospital, costs per patient had a slight increase due to home hospitalizations

[The impact of patient identification on an integrated program of palliative care in Basque Country]. / Impacto de la identificación de pacientes en un programa de cuidados paliativos del País Vasco.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the process and the economic impact of an integrated palliative care program. DESIGN: Comparative cross-sectional study. LOCATION: Integrated Healthcare Organizations of Alto Deba and Goierri Alto-Urola, Basque Country. PARTICIPANTS: Patients dead due to oncologic and non-oncologic causes in 2012 (control group) and 2015 (intervention group) liable to need palliative care according to McNamara criteria. INTERVENTIONS: Identification as palliative patients in primary care, use of common clinical pathways in primary and secondary care and arrange training courses for health professionals. MAIN MEASURES: Change in the resource use profile of patients in their last 3 months. Propensity score by genetic matching method was used to avoid non-randomization bias. The groups were compared by univariate analysis and the relationships between variables were analysed by logistic regressions and generalized linear models. RESULTS: One thousand and twenty-three patients were identified in 2012 and 1,142 patients in 2015. In 2015 doubled the probability of being identify as palliative patient in deaths due to oncologic (19-33%) and non-oncologic causes (7-16%). Prescriptions of opiates rise (25-68%) and deaths in hospital remained stable. Contacts per patient with primary care and home hospitalization increased, while contacts with hospital admissions decreased. Cost per patient rise 26%. CONCLUSIONS: The integrated palliative care model increased the identification of the target population. Relationships between variables showed that the identification had a positive impact on prescription of opiates, death outside the hospital and extension to non-oncologic diseases. Although the identification decreased admissions in hospital, costs per patient had a slight increase due to home hospitalizations.

Cost-utility analysis of an integrated care model for multimorbid patients based on a clinical trial / Análisis de coste-utilidad de un modelo de atención integrada a pacientes pluripatológicos basado en un ensayo clínico

Objective: To conduct a cost-utility analysis on an integrated healthcare model comprising an assigned internist and a hospital liaison nurse for patients with multimorbidity, compared to a conventional reactive healthcare system. Methods: A cluster randomised clinical trial was conducted. The model consisted of a reference internist and a liaison nurse, who aimed to improve coordination and communication between levels and to enhance continuity of care after hospitalisation. We recorded sociodemographic data, diagnoses and corresponding clinical categories, functional status, use of healthcare resources and quality of life. Data were collected by reviewing electronic medical records and administering questionnaires. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses both for utilities and total costs. Bootstrapping methods were applied to calculate the confidence ellipses of incremental costs and efficiency. Results: We recruited a total of 140 patients. The model assessed was not found to be efficient in general. We found an incremental cost of €1,035.90 and an incremental benefit of −0.0762 QALYs for the initiative compared to standard care after adjusting for the main variables. However, the subgroup of patients under 80 years of age with three or more clinical categories resulted in an 89% cost saving in the simulations. Conclusions: The integrated model was not suitable for all study patients. However, the subgroup analysis identified a narrow target population that should be analysed in future studies

Objetivo: Evaluar en términos de coste-utilidad un modelo de atención integrada a pacientes pluripatológicos basado en el internista de referencia y la enfermera de enlace hospitalario, comparado con un sistema asistencial convencional reactivo por episodios. Métodos: Se realizó un ensayo clínico aleatorizado por conglomerados. La intervención se basó en un internista de referencia y una enfermera de enlace hospitalario. Ambos trabajaron en la coordinación y la comunicación entre niveles y en la mejora de la continuidad de cuidados después de un ingreso. Se recogieron datos sociodemográficos y los diagnósticos con sus correspondientes categorías clínicas, así como el estado funcional, la utilización de recursos y la calidad de vida. Se utilizaron los registros electrónicos médicos existentes y cuestionarios administrados. Se realizaron análisis univariados y multivariados tanto para las utilidades como para los costes totales. Mediante bootstrapping se calcularon las elipses de confianza de los costes incrementales y la eficiencia. Resultados: Se incluyeron en el estudio 140 pacientes. En general, la intervención no resultó eficiente. El coste incremental de la intervención frente al modelo convencional fue de 1035,90 € y la efectividad incremental fue de -0,0762 años de vida ajustados por calidad, al ajustar los datos por las variables más relevantes. Sin embargo, el subgrupo de pacientes menores de 80 años con tres o más categorías clínicas ahorró costes en el 89% de las simulaciones. Conclusiones: La intervención integrada no resultó adecuada para todos los pacientes objetivo; no obstante, el análisis de subgrupos permitió identificar una población objetivo más concreta que debería ser analizada en estudios futuros

Cost-utility analysis of an integrated care model for multimorbid patients based on a clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a cost-utility analysis on an integrated healthcare model comprising an assigned internist and a hospital liaison nurse for patients with multimorbidity, compared to a conventional reactive healthcare system. METHODS: A cluster randomised clinical trial was conducted. The model consisted of a reference internist and a liaison nurse, who aimed to improve coordination and communication between levels and to enhance continuity of care after hospitalisation. We recorded sociodemographic data, diagnoses and corresponding clinical categories, functional status, use of healthcare resources and quality of life. Data were collected by reviewing electronic medical records and administering questionnaires. We performed univariate and multivariate analyses both for utilities and total costs. Bootstrapping methods were applied to calculate the confidence ellipses of incremental costs and efficiency. RESULTS: We recruited a total of 140 patients. The model assessed was not found to be efficient in general. We found an incremental cost of €1,035.90 and an incremental benefit of -0.0762 QALYs for the initiative compared to standard care after adjusting for the main variables. However, the subgroup of patients under 80 years of age with three or more clinical categories resulted in an 89% cost saving in the simulations. CONCLUSIONS: The integrated model was not suitable for all study patients. However, the subgroup analysis identified a narrow target population that should be analysed in future studies.