Patient-reported outcome measures in severe asthma: an expert consensus.

OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to reach a consensus on the most relevant patient-reported outcomes (PROs), the corresponding measures (PROMs), and measurement frequency during severe asthma patient follow-up. METHODS: Two Delphi rounds were conducted. The questionnaire was developed based on a systematic literature review, a focus group with patients, and a nominal group with experts. It assessed PROs' relevance and the appropriateness (A) and feasibility (F) of PROMs using a Likert scale (1=totally agree; 9=totally disagree). The consensus was established when ≥75% of participants agreed (1-3) or disagreed (7-9). RESULTS: Sixty-three professionals (25 hospital pharmacists, 14 allergists, 13 pulmonologists, and 11 nurses) and 5 patients answered the Delphi questionnaire. A consensus was reached on all PROs regarding their relevance. Experts agreed on the use of ACT (A:95.24%; F:95.24%), mini AQLQ (A:93.65; F:79.37%), mMRC dyspnea scale (A:85.71%; F:85.71%), TAI (A:92.06%; F:85.71%), MMAS (A:75.40%; F:82%), and the dispensing register (A:96.83%; F:92.06%). Also considered suitable were: SNOT-22 (A:90.48%; F:73.80%), PSQI (A:82.54; F:63.90%), HADS (A:82.54; F:64%), WPAI (A:77.78%; F:49.20%), TSQM-9 (A:79.37; F:70.50%) and knowledge of asthma questionnaire (A:77%; F:68.80%); however, their use in clinical practice was considered unfeasible. Panelists also agreed on the appropriateness of EQ-5D, which was finally included despite being considered unfeasible (A: 84.13%; F:67.20%) in clinical practice. Agreement was reached on using ACT, TAI, mMRC, and a dispensing register every three months; mini-AQLQ and MMAS every six months; and EQ-5D every twelve months. CONCLUSION: This consensus paves the way toward patient-centered care, promoting the development of strategies supporting routine assessment of PROs in severe asthma management.

Lista de comprobación para la atención farmacéutica del paciente con enfermedad pulmonar intersticial (CheckEPID): un consenso basado en el método Delphi / Checklist for Pharmaceutical Care of the Patient with interstitial lung disease (CheckEPID): A Delphi-based consensus

Objetivo desarrollar una lista de comprobación para facilitar la atención farmacéutica al paciente con enfermedad pulmonar intersticial que requieren o están en tratamiento con antifibróticos. Método 5 especialistas en farmacia hospitalaria desarrollaron un listado inicial de 37 ítems divididos en 4 bloques: 1) primera visita del paciente, que incluía datos generales del paciente y datos del primer tratamiento; 2) visitas de seguimiento, valorando aspectos del seguimiento del tratamiento con nintedanib o pirfenidona; 3) telefarmacia, consistente en la evaluación de la inclusión de pacientes en un programa de este tipo, evolución de la enfermedad e identificación del contacto con el servicio de farmacia y 4) tratamiento no farmacológico e información al paciente. Para decidir su potencial inclusión en el listado de comprobación se realizaron 2 rondas del Delphi en las que los panelistas tenían que valorar de cada ítem propuesto su grado de acuerdo con su «utilidad», que fue el criterio determinante para su inclusión y su «aplicabilidad». Resultados se contactó con 48 farmacéuticos hospitalarios, 30 (63%) aceptaron por escrito participar, 28 (58%) completaron la primera ronda del Delphi y 27 (56%) completaron la segunda ronda. Después de la primera ronda el cuestionario se modificó y quedó constituido por 40 ítems. De los 40 ítems evaluados tras las 2 rondas del Delphi, hubo 2 que, basados en la utilidad, los participantes del Delphi no alcanzaron el consenso para su inclusión en el listado: el referido a «Antecedentes de intervención quirúrgica, específicamente cirugía abdominal en las últimas 4 semanas» (finalmente mantenido en el listado por su implicación en la indicación de nintedanib) y el de realizar recomendaciones sobre «Relajación». En 2 de los ítems no se alcanzó consenso sobre su aplicabilidad: «Estratificación del paciente según el modelo del paciente crónico de la SEFH» y «Recogida de resultados comunicados por el paciente». Conclusiones... (AU)

Objective To develop a checklist to facilitate pharmaceutical care for patients with interstitial lung disease who require or are undergoing treatment with antifibrotic drugs. Method Five hospital pharmacists developed an initial list of 37 items divided into 4 blocks: 1) First visit, which included general patient data and data from the first treatment; 2) Follow-up visits, assessing aspects of the follow-up of the treatment with nintedanib or pirfenidone; 3) Telepharmacy, consisting of the evaluation of the inclusion of patients in a program of this type, course of the disease, and identification of the contact with the pharmacy service; 4) Non-pharmacological treatment and patient information. To decide its potential inclusion in the checklist, two rounds of the Delphi were carried out in which the panelists had to assess the degree of agreement of each proposed item according to its “utility”, which was the determining criterion for its inclusion, and its “applicability”. Results 48 hospital pharmacists were contacted, 30 (63%) agreed in writing to participate, 28 (58%) completed the first round of the Delphi, and 27 (56%) completed the second round. After the first round of the Delphi the questionnaire was amended and comprised 40 items. Of the 40 items evaluated after the two rounds of the Delphi, there were two that, based on utility, the participants did not reach consensus for inclusion in the checklist: The one referring to “History of surgical intervention, specifically abdominal surgery in the last 4 weeks” (finally kept on the checklist due to its involvement in the indication of nintedanib) and to make recommendations on “Relaxation”. No consensus was reached on their applicability for two of the items: “Patient stratification according to the Spanish Society of Hospital Pharmacy (SEFH) chronic patient model” and “Collection of Results Reported by the Patient”. Conclusions ... (AU)

[Telemedicine and severe asthma in our environment: Views on the experience of professionals and suggestions to make it a reality]. / Telemedicina y asma grave en nuestro entorno: reflexiones sobre la experiencia de los profesionales y propuestas para hacerla realidad.

This paper aims to examine the recent experience in telemedicine (TM) management of patients with severe asthma (SA). A committee of health professionals involved in asthma management (pulmonology, allergology, respiratory nursing, and hospital pharmacy) held discussion meetings on the practical experience of TM for the management of SA and the means available complemented with a bibliographic search to know the current status of TM in SA. The main barriers detected for the implementation of TM in SA have been the lack of technological training, the lack of registration of TM in the clinical history, the care overload, or the connectivity problems at the administration level. The practical solutions are provided such as the selection of the patient suitable for TM, the registration of TM in the medical record, its inclusion in the care objectives or the increase of funding for systems. Moreover, the main App and Webapp for use by patients are provided, and the portable equipment for remote functional respiratory tests. In conclusion, it is necessary that the teleconsultation has the same entity as the face-to-face visit with a schedule in the appointment's agenda and a structure of both the medical interview and the tests to be performed in each consultation. Additionally, should be promoted the implementation of a video call system, tools that allow the monitoring of both therapeutic adherence and inhalation technique, as well as the patient's lung function.

[Translated article] Checklist for the pharmaceutical care of patients with interstitial lung disease (CheckEPID): A Delphi-based consensus.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a checklist to facilitate pharmaceutical care for patients with interstitial lung disease who require or are undergoing treatment with antifibrotic drugs. METHOD: Five hospital pharmacists developed an initial list of 37 items divided into 4 blocks: (1) First visit, which included general patient data and data from the first treatment; (2) follow-up visits, assessing aspects of the follow-up of the treatment with nintedanib or pirfenidone; (3) telepharmacy, consisting of the evaluation of the inclusion of patients in a program of this type, course of the disease, and identification of the contact with the pharmacy service; (4) non-pharmacological treatment and patient information. To decide its potential inclusion in the checklist, 2 rounds of the Delphi were carried out in which the panelists had to assess the degree of agreement of each proposed item according to its "utility", which was the determining criterion for its inclusion, and its "applicability". RESULTS: Forty-eight hospital pharmacists were contacted, 30 (63%) agreed in writing to participate, 28 (58%) completed the first round of the Delphi, and 27 (56%) completed the second round. After the first round of the Delphi, the questionnaire was amended and comprised 40 items. Of the 40 items evaluated after the 2 rounds of the Delphi, there were 2 that, based on utility, the participants did not reach consensus for inclusion in the checklist: the one referring to "History of surgical intervention, specifically abdominal surgery in the last 4 weeks" (finally kept on the checklist due to its involvement in the indication of nintedanib) and to make recommendations on "Relaxation". No consensus was reached on their applicability for 2 of the items: "Patient stratification according to the Spanish Society of Hospital Pharmacy (SEFH) chronic patient model" and "Collection of Results Reported by the Patient". CONCLUSIONS: The management of patients with ILD and/or pulmonary fibrosis is complex and requires a multidisciplinary approach where the hospital pharmacist plays a key role, especially, although not only, in monitoring drug treatment. We believe that this checklist can contribute from pharmaceutical care to improving the integrated care of patients with ILD who require or are undergoing treatment with antifibrotic drugs.

Checklist for Pharmaceutical Care of the Patient with interstitial lung disease (CheckEPID): A Delphi-based consensus. / Lista de comprobación para la atención farmacéutica del paciente con enfermedad pulmonar intersticial (CheckEPID): un consenso basado en el método Delphi.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a checklist to facilitate pharmaceutical care for patients with interstitial lung disease who require or are undergoing treatment with antifibrotic drugs. METHOD: Five hospital pharmacists developed an initial list of 37 items divided into 4 blocks: 1) First visit, which included general patient data and data from the first treatment; 2) Follow-up visits, assessing aspects of the follow-up of the treatment with nintedanib or pirfenidone; 3) Telepharmacy, consisting of the evaluation of the inclusion of patients in a program of this type, course of the disease, and identification of the contact with the pharmacy service; 4) Non-pharmacological treatment and patient information. To decide its potential inclusion in the checklist, two rounds of the Delphi were carried out in which the panelists had to assess the degree of agreement of each proposed item according to its "utility", which was the determining criterion for its inclusion, and its "applicability". RESULTS: 48 hospital pharmacists were contacted, 30 (63%) agreed in writing to participate, 28 (58%) completed the first round of the Delphi, and 27 (56%) completed the second round. After the first round of the Delphi the questionnaire was amended and comprised 40 items. Of the 40 items evaluated after the two rounds of the Delphi, there were two that, based on utility, the participants did not reach consensus for inclusion in the checklist: The one referring to "History of surgical intervention, specifically abdominal surgery in the last 4 weeks" (finally kept on the checklist due to its involvement in the indication of nintedanib) and to make recommendations on "Relaxation". No consensus was reached on their applicability for two of the items: "Patient stratification according to the Spanish Society of Hospital Pharmacy (SEFH) chronic patient model" and "Collection of Results Reported by the Patient". CONCLUSIONS: The management of patients with ILD and/or pulmonary fibrosis is complex and requires a multidisciplinary approach where the hospital pharmacist plays a key role, especially, although not only, in monitoring drug treatment. We believe that this checklist can contribute from pharmaceutical care to improving the integrated care of patients with ILD who require or are undergoing treatment with antifibrotic drugs.

Delayed Pressure Urticaria: Clinical and Diagnostic Features and Response to Omalizumab.

BACKGROUND: Delayed pressure urticaria (DPU) is a rare form of chronic inducible urticaria (CIndU) when it manifests alone. Treatment of DPU is disappointing owing to the lack of response to antihistamines, even when up-dosing. In addition, the absence of randomized clinical trials and the low number of patients included in the studies mean that there is little scientific evidence for the validity of omalizumab in DPU. OBJECTIVE: Objectives of the study were to perform a real-world study of the effectiveness and safety of omalizumab in DPU patients without chronic spontaneous urticaria or other forms of CIndU and to describe their clinical and diagnostic features. METHOD: We performed an ambispective observational study of 14 patients with DPU who did not respond to 2 or more second-generation H1-antihistamines in an up-dosing regimen and/or corticosteroids, montelukast, or cyclosporine. Treatment was initiated with omalizumab 300 mg every 4 weeks. We recorded the following: age, time to diagnosis, previous treatment, diagnostic testing (mean time threshold after removing the stimulus and duration of the lesions), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), D dimer, total IgE, antithyroid peroxidase (anti-TPO) antibodies, and the Urticaria Control Test (UCT) score before and after the first dose. We evaluated the efficacy of omalizumab according to the Urticaria Control Test score. We analyzed the time to complete or satisfactory response after the first dose (superfast) and its adverse effects. RESULTS: Women accounted for 64.28% patients. The mean age at diagnosis was 43.64 (±13.78) years. The time to diagnosis was 4.53 (±5.54) years. The mean time threshold after removing the stimulus was 4.18 h (±2.75). The mean duration of lesions after testing was 32.42 (±13.8) hours. High ERS values (>20.0 mm/h) were detected in 50% of patients. CRP was >0.5 mg/dL in 42.85% and D dimer levels were high (>500.0 ng/mL) in 3/10 patients. Anti-TPO level was normal in 100% of patients. Total IgE was >100 IU/mL in 6/8 patients. Medium UCT levels before treatment with omalizumab were 3.07 (±2.40), reaching 15.28/16 (±1.72) after the first dose of omalizumab. All 14 patients responded superfast, and none experienced an adverse reaction. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the limitation of a low sample size in this real-life study, our findings suggest that omalizumab is a rapid, effective, and safe treatment for patients with DPU refractory to antihistamines in an up-dosing regimen. We recommend omalizumab for patients who do not respond to up-dosing antihistamines and montelukast.

Wound Infusion of 0.35% Levobupivacaine Reduces Mechanical Secondary Hyperalgesia and Opioid Consumption After Cesarean Delivery: A Prospective, Randomized, Triple-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Some patients still report moderate-to-severe postoperative pain after cesarean delivery. Local anesthetic wound infusion improves acute pain and might act on peripheral and central sensitization mechanisms; however, no studies have proved this hypothesis. We evaluated the potential benefits of continuous wound infusion of levobupivacaine after cesarean delivery on secondary hyperalgesia (primary end point) and primary hyperalgesia, pain relief, persistent pain, and inflammatory and metabolic stress response. METHODS: Healthy women scheduled for elective cesarean delivery participated in this prospective, randomized, triple-blind, placebo-controlled trial (NCT01458431). All patients received spinal anesthesia with 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine with fentanyl and a multiholed wound catheter placed under the fascia. Women were randomized to receive continuous wound infusion (0.35% levobupivacaine 7 mL/h for 48 hours; group L) or an equal volume of saline (group S). Secondary hyperalgesia to punctate mechanical stimuli was evaluated using dynamic tests, and primary hyperalgesia was evaluated using an electronic von Frey anesthesiometer; both were assessed at 24, 48, and 72 hours. The following variables were collected: intensity of postoperative parietal and visceral pain at rest and on movement rated on a visual analog scale >72 hours, time to first bolus of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), cumulative dose of rescue morphine (PCA) and acetaminophen, ability to sleep and sleep quality, and patient satisfaction. Persistent postoperative pain was evaluated during a telephone interview at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. C-reactive protein, acid glycoprotein, preprandial glucose, insulin, cortisol, prolactin, growth hormone, and interleukin-6 were measured before cesarean delivery and at 8, 24, and 48 hours. Adverse events and patient outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: Seventy women were included. In group L, the area of secondary hyperalgesia was significantly reduced (43.4 [18.5-80] vs 68.4 [39.0-136] cm2 and 45.1 [0.9-89.8] vs 67.3 [31.3-175] cm2 at 24 and 48 hours, respectively; group:time interaction P value < .001), the mechanical pain threshold was significantly higher at 24 hours (633 [441-802] vs 417 [300-572] g.mm-2; P = .001), and morphine consumption was significantly lower at 24 hours (4 [2-11] vs 11[6-23]; P = .003) compared with group S. Levobupivacaine had no effect on persistent postoperative pain at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Plasma insulin levels in the immediate postoperative period and at 8, 24, and 48 hours were significantly lower in group L (P < .001). There were no significant differences in other biochemical parameters of inflammatory and endocrine-metabolic response. CONCLUSIONS: Levobupivacaine wound infusion provides adequate analgesia and might be an effective antihyperalgesic adjunct.

A complexity scale for clinical trials from the perspective of a pharmacy service.

OBJECTIVE: To establish a method for evaluating the complexity of clinical trials (CTs) from the perspective of a pharmacy service (PS) and to analyse the complexity of CTs carried out in a tertiary level hospital. METHODS: An observational, prevalence and retrospective study was carried out in a Spanish tertiary level hospital during the period 2008-2013. A scale of complexity was developed, whose internal consistency was determined by Cronbach's alpha. The study involved five steps: an analysis of the activities involved, score allocation to the activities, identification of CTs started in the study period, data collection and assessment of the complexity. Three complexity levels were determined: low, medium and high. The variables calculated were mean overall complexity, mean complexity per medical specialty, per pathology, per phase of CT, per initiation year and percentage of CTs by complexity level. RESULTS: Cronbach's alpha of the scale of complexity was 0.738. The two most influential items were dose preparation and number of professionals involved. 55.0% of CTs were in the medium level of complexity and 12.1% of CTs were in the high level. The mean complexity of CTs studied was 13.3±4.7 (median 12, range 6-32). Statistically significant differences were found in the complexity values between CTs of different medical specialties, pathologies, phase and dose preparation in the PS (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The scale designed to evaluate the complexity of CTs had internal consistency. More than half of the CTs are in the medium level if complexity. The largest number of CTs with a high level of complexity were in rheumatology and oncology.