Objetivo: Identificar los principales condicionantes que los profesionales de atención primaria indican a la hora de implementar y desarrollar intervenciones sobre el aislamiento y la soledad.Diseño: Investigación cualitativa con análisis Sistemático de Teoría Fundamentada y Diseño narrativo de tópicos.Emplazamiento: Desarrollada en 13 centros de atención primaria del Distrito Sanitario Córdoba y Guadalquivir, abarcando zonas urbanas y rurales.Participantes: Se identificaron 3 perfiles: medicina de familia/atención comunitaria, enfermería comunitaria y enfermería de gestión de casos. La selección se llevó a cabo entre aquellos que mostraron mayor motivación y compromiso con una intervención sobre aislamiento/soledad.Método: Muestreo intencional. El trabajo se fundamentó en entrevistas en profundidad individuales, en grupos focales y entrevistas dialógicas.Resultados :a) Persisten imágenes deformadas sobre la soledad/aislamiento social y el vivir solo que dificultan su identificación; b) Los principales determinantes disruptivos en la estructura y organización del sistema de atención tienen que ver con la ausencia de programas de detección, la hegemonía del modelo biomédico y el déficit de recursos (a la luz de este modelo); c) Los principales facilitadores se vinculan con el rol enfermero, privilegiado para estas intervenciones según los participantes; y, finalmente, d) Es necesario contar con componentes personales, tanto de la persona mayor como de los profesionales.Conclusiones: La intervención sobre el aislamiento social y la soledad en atención primaria está condicionada por factores, organizacionales y estructurales, profesionales y personales. Contar con ellos es fundamental a la hora de garantizar su factibilidad.
Objective: To identify the main conditioning factors that Primary Care professionals indicate when implementing and developing interventions on isolation and loneliness.Design: Qualitative research with grounded theory, systematic analysis and narrative design of topics.Location: Developed in 12 Primary Care centres of the Health District of Córdoba and Guadalquivir, covering urban and rural areas.Participants: Three profiles were identified: family medicine/community care, community nursing and case management nursing. The selection was carried out among those who showed greater motivation and commitment to an intervention on isolation/loneliness.Method: Purposive sampling. The work was based on individual in-depth interviews, focus groups and dialogic interviews.Results: (a) Distorted images persist about loneliness/social isolation and living alone that make it challenging to identify; (b) the main disruptive determinants in the structure and organization of the care system have to do with the absence of screening programs, the hegemony of the biomedical model and the deficit of resources (in light of this model); (c) the main facilitators are linked to the nursing role, privileged for these interventions according to the participants; and, finally, (d) personal components are necessary, both from the older adult and from the professionals.Conclusions: Intervention on social isolation and loneliness in Primary Care is conditioned by organizational and structural, professional and personal factors. It is essential to take them into account in order to guarantee their feasibility.
Humans , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Health Sciences , Primary Health Care , Social Isolation/psychology , Loneliness/psychology , Old Age Assistance/trends , Sampling Studies
OBJECTIVE: To identify the main conditioning factors that Primary Care professionals indicate when implementing and developing interventions on isolation and loneliness. DESIGN: Qualitative research with grounded theory, systematic analysis and narrative design of topics. LOCATION: Developed in 12 Primary Care centres of the Health District of Córdoba and Guadalquivir, covering urban and rural areas. PARTICIPANTS: Three profiles were identified: family medicine/community care, community nursing and case management nursing. The selection was carried out among those who showed greater motivation and commitment to an intervention on isolation/loneliness. METHOD: Purposive sampling. The work was based on individual in-depth interviews, focus groups and dialogic interviews. RESULTS: (a) Distorted images persist about loneliness/social isolation and living alone that make it challenging to identify; (b) the main disruptive determinants in the structure and organization of the care system have to do with the absence of screening programs, the hegemony of the biomedical model and the deficit of resources (in light of this model); (c) the main facilitators are linked to the nursing role, privileged for these interventions according to the participants; and, finally, (d) personal components are necessary, both from the older adult and from the professionals. CONCLUSIONS: Intervention on social isolation and loneliness in Primary Care is conditioned by organizational and structural, professional and personal factors. It is essential to take them into account in order to guarantee their feasibility.
Loneliness , Social Isolation , Aged , Humans , Primary Health Care , Qualitative Research
Fundamento y objetivo: Evaluar la eficacia de la entrevista motivacional para reducir los errores de medicación en pacientes crónicos polimedicados. Pacientes y método: Ensayo clínico aleatorizado por cluster, que incluyó médicos de familia y enfermeras de 16 centros de Atención Primaria, y pacientes crónicos polimedicados mayores de 65 años. Los profesionales fueron asignados al grupo experimental o al control mediante aleatorización estratificada. Las intervenciones del estudio consistieron en la formación de los profesionales y en la invitación a los pacientes a una revisión de su tratamiento: en el grupo experimental estaba sustentada en la entrevista motivacional, mientras que en el grupo control lo estaba en el abordaje habitual. El resultado primario (error de medicación) fue analizado con la reducción del riesgo absoluto (RRA), la reducción del riesgo relativo (RRR), el número de sujetos necesario a tratar (NNT), y la regresión logística múltiple. Resultados: Asignamos aleatoriamente a 32 profesionales (19 médicos y 13 enfermeras), de los que 27 seleccionaron a 154 pacientes (13 profesionales y 70 pacientes en el grupo experimental; 14 profesionales y 84 pacientes en el grupo control) que completaron 6 meses de seguimiento. La edad media de los pacientes era de 76 años (68,8% mujeres). Se observa una disminución en el promedio de errores de medicación, siendo la reducción mayor en el grupo experimental que en el grupo control (F = 5,109; p = 0,035). La RRA fue del 29% (intervalo de confianza del 95% [IC 95%] 15,0-43,0%), la RRR de 0,59 (IC 95% 0,31-0,76), y el NNT de 3,5 (IC 95% 2,3-6,8). Conclusión: La entrevista motivacional resulta más eficaz que el abordaje habitual para reducir los errores de medicación en pacientes con polifarmacia mayores de 65 años (AU)
Background and objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention based on motivational interviewing to reduce medication errors in chronic patients over 65 with polypharmacy. Patients and method: Cluster randomized trial that included doctors and nurses of 16 Primary Care centers and chronic patients with polypharmacy over 65 years. The professionals were assigned to the experimental or the control group using stratified randomization. Interventions consisted of training of professionals and revision of patient treatments, application of motivational interviewing in the experimental group and also the usual approach in the control group. The primary endpoint (medication error) was analyzed at individual level, and was estimated with the absolute risk reduction (ARR), relative risk reduction (RRR), number of subjects to treat (NNT) and by multiple logistic regression analysis. Results: Thirty-two professionals were randomized (19 doctors and 13 nurses), 27 of them recruited 154 patients consecutively (13 professionals in the experimental group recruited 70 patients and 14 professionals recruited 84 patients in the control group) and completed 6 months of follow-up. The mean age of patients was 76 years (68.8% women). A decrease in the average of medication errors was observed along the period. The reduction was greater in the experimental than in the control group (F = 5.109, P = .035). RRA 29% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 15.0-43.0%), RRR 0.59 (95% CI:0.31-0.76), and NNT 3.5 (95% CI 2.3-6.8). Conclusion: Motivational interviewing is more efficient than the usual approach to reduce medication errors in patients over 65 with polypharmacy (AU)
Humans , Medication Errors/prevention & control , Chronic Disease/drug therapy , Motivational Interviewing , Drug Therapy, Combination , Medication Reconciliation , Physician-Patient Relations , Cluster Sampling , Medication Adherence
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention based on motivational interviewing to reduce medication errors in chronic patients over 65 with polypharmacy. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Cluster randomized trial that included doctors and nurses of 16 Primary Care centers and chronic patients with polypharmacy over 65 years. The professionals were assigned to the experimental or the control group using stratified randomization. Interventions consisted of training of professionals and revision of patient treatments, application of motivational interviewing in the experimental group and also the usual approach in the control group. The primary endpoint (medication error) was analyzed at individual level, and was estimated with the absolute risk reduction (ARR), relative risk reduction (RRR), number of subjects to treat (NNT) and by multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-two professionals were randomized (19 doctors and 13 nurses), 27 of them recruited 154 patients consecutively (13 professionals in the experimental group recruited 70 patients and 14 professionals recruited 84 patients in the control group) and completed 6 months of follow-up. The mean age of patients was 76 years (68.8% women). A decrease in the average of medication errors was observed along the period. The reduction was greater in the experimental than in the control group (F=5.109, P=.035). RRA 29% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 15.0-43.0%), RRR 0.59 (95% CI:0.31-0.76), and NNT 3.5 (95% CI 2.3-6.8). CONCLUSION: Motivational interviewing is more efficient than the usual approach to reduce medication errors in patients over 65 with polypharmacy.
Medication Errors/prevention & control , Motivational Interviewing , Polypharmacy , Primary Health Care , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Chronic Disease , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Medication Errors/statistics & numerical data , Multivariate Analysis , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Risk Reduction Behavior
BACKGROUND: Clinical Practice Guidelines recommend using peripheral blood pulse measuring as a screening test for Atrial Fibrillation. However, there is no adequate evidence supporting the efficacy of such procedure in primary care clinical practice. This paper describes a study protocol designed to verify whether early opportunistic screening for Atrial Fibrillation by measuring blood pulse is more effective than regular practice in subjects aged 65 years attending primary care centers. METHODS/DESIGN: An cluster-randomized controlled trial conducted in Primary Care Centers of the Spanish National Health Service. A total of 269 physicians and nurses will be allocated to one of the two arms of the trial by stratified randomization with a 3:2 ratio (three practitioners will be assigned to the Control Group for every two practitioners assigned to the Experimental Group). As many as 12 870 patients aged 65 years or older and meeting eligibility criteria will be recruited (8 580 will be allocated to the Experimental Group and 4 290 to the Control Group). Randomization and allocation to trial groups will be carried out by a central computer system. The Experimental Group practitioners will conduct an opportunistic case finding for patients with Atrial Fibrillation, while the Control Group practitioners will follow the regular guidelines. The first step will be finding new Atrial Fibrillation cases. A descriptive inferential analysis will be performed (bivariate and multivariate by multilevel logistic regression analysis). DISCUSSION: If our hypothesis is confirmed, we expect Primary Care professionals to take a more proactive approach and adopt a new protocol when a patient meeting the established screening criteria is identified. Finally, we expect this measure to be incorporated into Clinical Practice Guidelines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered as NCT01291953 (ClinicalTrials.gob).
Atrial Fibrillation/diagnosis , Mass Screening/methods , Primary Health Care/methods , Pulse/methods , Aged , Humans , Logistic Models , Multivariate Analysis , Secondary Prevention/methods , Spain
