Patrón olfativo en lesiones cerebrales no psiquiátricas ni traumáticas / Olfactory Disorder Pattern In Patients With Neurological Diseases Excluding Psychiatric And Traumatic Aetiologies

INTRODUCCIÓN: Las etiologías más frecuente de las patologías olfativas dentro de la otorrinolaringología suelen ser las producidas por resfriados, inflamaciones nasosinusales, alergias y traumatismos craneo-faciales, fuera de estas etiologías tenemos, con menor frecuencia, las enfermedades neurológicas, psiquiátricas, metabólicas. Nuestro servicio ha podido atender a pacientes con alteraciones neurológicas que presentan patologías olfativas. OBJETIVO: Este trabajo tiene por finalidad verificar qué tipo de alteraciones olfativas se hallan en las personas que padecen lesiones del sistema nervioso central excluidos los traumatismos craneales, las enfermedades psiquiátricas, las epilepsias, las enfermedades de Parkinson y Alzheimer y las sinestesias. Material métodos: Se trata de un estudio descriptivo basado en un grupo de 61 pacientes diagnosticados de diversas lesiones neurológicas y de un grupo control. Ambos grupos fueron valorados por medio del olfatómetro BAST-24. Se comparan los resultados con un grupo control de 120 personas. RESULTADOS: Los resultados muestran que las personas con estos tipos de lesiones neurológicas tienen una capacidad de percibir olores que oscila entre el 60 y el 77% mientras que el grupo control se sitúa entre el 98 y el 100%. Respecto a la capacidad de reconocer correctamente los olores, los paciente neurológicos no superan el 32% de aciertos, mientras que el grupo control se sitúa entre el 59 y el 75% de aciertos, siendo las diferencias olor a olor presentado estadísticamente significativas (p < 0,05) tanto para la detección como para el acierto. CONCLUSIONES: a) Las alteraciones neurológicas no causadas por traumatismos craneales ni por alteraciones psiquiátricas pueden presentar una pérdida olfativa que oscila entre el 68 y el 89%. b) En este tipo de lesiones debe tenerse en cuenta la presencia de alteraciones olfativas. c) Hay alteraciones olfativas por afectación de otras áreas cerebrales distintas a las clásicas olfativas. d) Debe establecerse una colaboración entre los servicios de ORL y Neurología para poder atender dichas alteraciones

INTRODUCTION: The most common cause of olfactory ENT disorders are colds and flu, chronic sinusitis, allergies and traumatic brain injury. Rarer aetiologies include certain neurological, psychiatric and metabolic injuries. TARGET: The aim of this paper was to check the sort of olfactory disorders found in people who have suffered a brain injury, excluding: cranial traumas, psychiatric diseases, epilepsy, Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease, and synaesthesia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A descriptive study based on 61 patients with diagnoses of various neurological injuries, which were tested by BAST-24 olfactometer. The results were compared with those of a control group (n= 120). RESULTS: The results show major impairment in these patients' olfactory sense. The neurological injury patients were able to detect from 60-77% of the odours, while the control group were able to detect between 98-100%. The neurological patients were able, at best, to identify, 11-32% of the odours correctly, while the control group were able to correctly detect between 59 -75%. The differences between odour detection and correct identification were statistically significant (p<.05). CONCLUSIONS: We concluded: a) Neurological injury, not caused by traumatic brain injury, psychiatric disorders or ENT diseases, ranged from 68-89% of the olfactory failures. b) We must bear in mind that these sorts of injuries can cause olfactory disorders. c) ENT and Neurologists should collaborate in the treatment of these disorders

Olfactory Disorder Pattern In Patients With Neurological Diseases Excluding Psychiatric And Traumatic Aetiologies. / Patrón olfativo en lesiones cerebrales no psiquiátricas ni traumáticas.

INTRODUCTION: The most common cause of olfactory ENT disorders are colds and flu, chronic sinusitis, allergies and traumatic brain injury. Rarer aetiologies include certain neurological, psychiatric and metabolic injuries. TARGET: The aim of this paper was to check the sort of olfactory disorders found in people who have suffered a brain injury, excluding: cranial traumas, psychiatric diseases, epilepsy, Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease, and synaesthesia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A descriptive study based on 61 patients with diagnoses of various neurological injuries, which were tested by BAST-24 olfactometer. The results were compared with those of a control group (n= 120). RESULTS: The results show major impairment in these patients' olfactory sense. The neurological injury patients were able to detect from 60-77% of the odours, while the control group were able to detect between 98-100%. The neurological patients were able, at best, to identify, 11-32% of the odours correctly, while the control group were able to correctly detect between 59 -75%. The differences between odour detection and correct identification were statistically significant (p<.05). CONCLUSIONS: We concluded: a) Neurological injury, not caused by traumatic brain injury, psychiatric disorders or ENT diseases, ranged from 68-89% of the olfactory failures. b) We must bear in mind that these sorts of injuries can cause olfactory disorders. c) ENT and Neurologists should collaborate in the treatment of these disorders.

Resfriado-gripe: pérdida grave del olfato a largo plazo / Long term serious olfactory loss in colds and/or flu

Introducción: Las personas afectadas por pérdida olfativa total y de por vida se sitúan entre el 2 y el 3% de la población. Dos de las causas más frecuentes son los resfriados comunes y las gripes. El objetivo de este trabajo es mostrar el grado de afectación de las alteraciones olfativas sufridas, a largo plazo, a causa de un resfriado o una gripe. Métodos: Este estudio se ha basado en la asistencia a 240 pacientes, aquejados de pérdida olfativa por resfriado o gripe. Fueron excluidos todos aquellos que padecían otras enfermedades intercurrentes (66 pacientes), el resto (n = 174) estaba formado por 51 hombres (29,3%) y 123 mujeres (70,7%). Fueron sometidos a estudio olfatométrico ( I y V par craneal) y tomografía axial computarizada nasosinusal, y resonancia magnètica del sistema nervioso central (RM-SNC) comparándose el resultado con un grupo control (n = 120). Resultados: Se confirmó que la pérdida olfativa tanto para el nervio olfativo (p < 0,00001) como la alteración del nervio trigémino (p < 0,0001) eran muy significativas. Conclusiones: La pérdida del olfato, pasados más de 6 meses desde su inicio supone una reducción grave de las capacidades olfativas de las personas afectadas (AU)

Introduction: In the general population, we can find 2%–3% of lifelong olfactory disorders (from hyposmia to anosmia). Two of the most frequent aetiologies are the common cold and flu. The aim of this study was to show the degree of long-term olfactory dysfunction caused by a cold or flu. Methods: This study was based on 240 patients, with olfactory loss caused only by flu or a cold. We excluded all patients with concomitant illness (66 patients), the rest of patients (n = 174) consisted of 51 men (29.3%) and 123 women (70.7%). They all underwent olfactometry study ( I and V cranial nerve) and a nasal sinus computed tomography scan, as well as magnetic resonance imaging of the brain. Results were compared with a control group (n = 120). Results: Very significant differences in levels of olfactory impairment for the olfactory nerve (P<0.00001) and trigeminal nerve (P<0.0001) were confirmed. Conclusions: People who suffer olfactory dysfunction for more than 6 months, from flu or a cold, present serious impairment of olfactory abilities (AU)

Long term serious olfactory loss in colds and/or flu.

INTRODUCTION: In the general population, we can find 2-3% of lifelong olfactory disorders (from hyposmia to anosmia). Two of the most frequent aetiologies are the common cold and flu. The aim of this study was to show the degree of long-term olfactory dysfunction caused by a cold or flu. METHODS: This study was based on 240 patients, with olfactory loss caused only by flu or a cold. We excluded all patients with concomitant illness (66 patients), the rest of patients (n=174) consisted of 51 men (29.3%) and 123 women (70.7%). They all underwent olfactometry study (i and v cranial nerve) and a nasal sinus computed tomography scan, as well as magnetic resonance imaging of the brain. Results were compared with a control group (n=120). RESULTS: Very significant differences in levels of olfactory impairment for the olfactory nerve (P<.00001) and trigeminal nerve (P<.0001) were confirmed. CONCLUSIONS: People that suffer olfactory dysfunction for more than 6 months, from flu or a cold, present serious impairment of olfactory abilities.

Adjusted Clinical Groups use as a measure of the referrals efficiency from primary care to specialized in Spain.

BACKGROUND: To determine the referral rate (RR) per centre, its main causes and the adjusted efficiency indexes, through the retrospective implementation of the Adjusted Clinical Groups (ACG) in a Spanish primary care setting. METHODS: Design descriptive-retrospective study. Attended patients by five primary care teams (PCT) during the year 2004 were included. General parameters, age, gender, dependent (visits and episodes), and comorbidity of each patient relative to each ACG are used as measures. The RR was defined as the quotient between the number of referrals and the visits made. Efficiency Index (EI) was established dividing the observed by the expected referrals obtained by indirect standardization. Statistical significance P<0.05. RESULTS: Studied patients 81,335 (use: 76.9%), 5.0+/-3.6 episodes and 7.9+/-7.8 visits/patient/year. Percentage of visits with a referral, adjusted for morbidity burden, was 7.5% (CI: 7.3-7.7); age: 48.3+/-22.7 years (women: 55.9%), P=0.000. The average of referrals was of 59.6 per 100 attended patients/year (P=0.000). Visits and episodes explain 34.1-68.1%, respectively (P=0.000), the explanatory power of the classification's variability was of 23.6% (P=0.0001). EI per centre were: 0.95 (CI: 0.82-1.08); 0.78 (CI: 0.63-0.93); 0.88 (CI: 0.73-1.03); 1.15 (CI: 1.03-1.27) and 1.08 (CI: 0.95-1.21), P=0.034 (family practice); and 0.83 (CI: 0.70-0.96); 0.83 (CI: 0.68-0.98); 0.84 (CI: 0.70-0.98); 1.24 (CI: 1.12-1.36) and 1.16 (CI: 1.03-1.29), P=0.041 (paediatrics), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Adjusted morbidity by ACG explains an important part of the referrals variability. The study results must be interpreted cautiously even after adjustment by age, gender and morbidity. Should the results be confirmed, it would allow an improvement in the measurement of referrals for clinical management in the PCT.

[Comparative study at 4 health centres of efficiency, measured on the basis of ambulatory care groups]. / Estudio comparativo de la eficiencia, medida a partir de los Ambulatory Care Groups, entre 4 centros de salud.

OBJECTIVE: To measure efficiency in the use of resources for the care lists of four primary care centres (PCC), by using ambulatory care Groups (ACGs). DESIGN: Retrospective, observational study. SETTING: Four PC teams. PARTICIPANTS: All patients attended during 2003. MEASUREMENTS: Dependent variables (costs per patient, between medical lists [family medicine, paediatrics] and PCCs) and case load variables. The model of costs for each patient was set by differentiating the semi-fixed and variable costs. The efficiency index (EI) was set as the quotient between the observed real cost and the expected cost on the basis of ACG distribution, by indirect standardization. The study population was 62,311 patients seen, with an average of 4.8+/-3.2 episodes/patient/year. MAIN RESULTS: The total health care cost reached 24,135,236.62 euro, of which 65.2% was for prescription, 28.9% for semi-fixed costs, and 2.9% for cost of specialist referrals. The average total cost per patient/year was 387.34 euro+/-145.87 euro (average relative weight). The EI for each centre was: 0.93 (95% CI, 0.85-1.01), 0.97 (95% CI, 0.89-1.05), 1.04 (95% CI, 0.96-1.12), and 1.05 (95% CI, 0.97-1.13), P < .0001. In addition, differences between the medical lists (rank, 0.63-1.56) and between the paediatrics lists (rank, 0.73-1.26) were found (P = .005). CONCLUSIONS: The ACGs enabled us to estimate the efficiency of our PCCs and care lists. Efficiency cannot be isolated from other dimensions of the quality of health care delivery. Study of the EI improved our understanding of the profile of professionals and health centres.

Estudio comparativo de la eficiencia, medida a partir de los Ambulatory Care Groups, entre 4 centros de salud / Comparative study at 4 health centres of efficiency, measured on the basis of ambulatory care groups

Objetivo. Medir la eficiencia en el uso de recursos entre los cupos asistenciales de 4 centros de atención primaria de salud (APS), a partir de la utilización de los Ambulatory Care Groups (ACG). Diseño. Estudio observacional retrospectivo. Emplazamiento. Cuatro equipos de atención primaria. Participantes. Todos los pacientes atendidos durante el año 2003. Mediciones. Variables dependientes (costes por paciente, entre cupos médicos [medicina de familia, pediatría] y centros asistenciales) y de casuística. El modelo de costes para cada paciente se estableció diferenciando los costes semifijos y los variables. El índice de eficiencia (IE) se estableció entre el cociente entre el coste real observado y el coste esperado en función de la distribución ACG, por estandarización indirecta. Resultados principales. La población de estudio fue de 62.311 pacientes atendidos, con una media de 4,8 ± 3,2 episodios/paciente/año. El coste total de la atención sanitaria ascendió a 24.135.236,62 €, de los cuales el 65,2% correspondió a la prescripción de farmacia, el 28,9% a los costes semifijos y el 2,9% al coste de las derivaciones a especialistas. El promedio de coste total por paciente/año fue de 387,34 ± 145,87 € (peso relativo medio). El IE por centro fue de 0,93 (intervalo de confianza [IC] del 95% 0,85-1,01), 0,97 (IC del 95% del 95% 0,89-1,05), 1,04 (IC del 95% 0,96-1,12) y 1,05 (IC del 95%, 0,97-1,13), respectivamente (p < 0,0001). Además, se observan diferencias entre los cupos médicos (rango, 0,63-1,56) y entre los cupos pediátricos (rango, 0,73-1,26) (p = 0,005). Conclusiones. Los ACG permiten realizar una aproximación a la medida de la eficiencia de centros y cupos asistenciales de APS de nuestro entorno. La eficiencia no puede ser considerada de manera aislada de otras dimensiones de la calidad asistencial. El estudio del IE permite profundizar en el conocimiento del perfil de los profesionales y de los centros de salud

Objective. To measure efficiency in the use of resources for the care lists of four primary care centres (PCC), by using ambulatory care Groups (ACGs). Design. Retrospective, observational study. Setting. Four PC teams. Participants. All patients attended during 2003. Measurements. Dependent variables (costs per patient, between medical lists [family medicine, paediatrics] and PCCs) and case load variables. The model of costs for each patient was set by differentiating the semi-fixed and variable costs. The efficiency index (EI) was set as the quotient between the observed real cost and the expected cost on the basis of ACG distribution, by indirect standardization. The study population was 62 311 patients seen, with an average of 4.8±3.2 episodes/patient/year. Main results. The total health care cost reached €24 135 236.62, of which 65.2% was for prescription, 28.9% for semi-fixed costs, and 2.9% for cost of specialist referrals. The average total cost per patient/year was €387.34±€145.87 (average relative weight). The EI for each centre was: 0.93 (95% CI, 0.85-1.01), 0.97 (95% CI, 0.89-1.05), 1.04 (95% CI, 0.96-1.12), and 1.05 (95% CI, 0.97-1.13), P<.0001. In addition, differences between the medical lists (rank, 0.63-1.56) and between the paediatrics lists (rank, 0.73-1.26) were found (P=.005). Conclusions. The ACGs enabled us to estimate the efficiency of our PCCs and care lists. Efficiency cannot be isolated from other dimensions of the quality of health care delivery. Study of the EI improved our understanding of the profile of professionals and health centres