Riesgos psicosociales: ¿Hay que evaluar las condiciones de ocupación? / No disponible

No disponible

The European general practice research network presents the translations of its comprehensive definition of multimorbidity in family medicine in ten European languages.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity, according to the World Health Organization, exists when there are two or more chronic conditions in one patient. This definition seems inaccurate for the holistic approach to Family Medicine (FM) and long-term care. To avoid this pitfall the European General Practitioners Research Network (EGPRN) designed a comprehensive definition of multimorbidity using a systematic literature review. OBJECTIVE: To translate that English definition into European languages and to validate the semantic, conceptual and cultural homogeneity of the translations for further research. METHOD: Forward translation of the EGPRN's definition of multimorbidity followed by a Delphi consensus procedure assessment, a backward translation and a cultural check with all teams to ensure the homogeneity of the translations in their national context. Consensus was defined as 70% of the scores being higher than 6. Delphi rounds were repeated in each country until a consensus was reached. RESULTS: 229 European medical expert FPs participated in the study. Ten consensual translations of the EGPRN comprehensive definition of multimorbidity were achieved. CONCLUSION: A comprehensive definition of multimorbidity is now available in English and ten European languages for further collaborative research in FM and long-term care.

Say it in Croatian--Croatian translation of the EGPRN definition of multimorbidity using a Delphi consensus technique.

Patients coming to their family physician (FP) usually have more than one condition or problem. Multimorbidity as well as dealing with it, is challenging for FPs even as a mere concept. The World Health Organization (WHO) has simply defined multimorbidity as two or more chronic conditions existing in one patient. However, this definition seems inadequate for a holistic approach to patient care within Family Medicine. Using systematic literature review the European General Practitioners Research Network (EGPRN) developed a comprehensive definition of multimorbidity. For practical and wider use, this definition had to be translated into other languages, including Croatian. Here presented is the Croatian translation of this comprehensive definition using a Delphi consensus procedure for forward/backward translation. 23 expert FPs fluent in English were asked to rank the translation from 1 (absolutely disagreeable) to 9 (fully agreeable) and to explain each score under 7. It was previously defined that consensus would be reached when 70% of the scores are above 6. Finally, a backward translation from Croatian into English was undertaken and approved by the authors of the English definition. Consensus was reached after the first Delphi round with 100% of the scores above 6; therefore the Croatian translation was immediately accepted. The authors of the English definition accepted the backward translation. A comprehensive definition of multimorbidity is now available in English and Croatian, as well as other European languages which will surely make further implications for clinicians, researchers or policy makers.

Nivel socioeconómico y desigualdades de salud en la prevención cardiovascular de la población española de edad avanzada / Socioeconomic status and health inequalities for cardiovascular prevention among elderly spaniards

Introducción y objetivos. Aunque se sabe que los determinantes sociales pueden ser causa de desigualdades en la salud, se ha evaluado escasamente si hay diferencias socioeconómicas relacionadas con el tratamiento preventivo. El objetivo de este estudio es analizar la relación entre el nivel socioeconómico de una población con alto riesgo cardiovascular y las desigualdades en el tratamiento cardiovascular recibido en un sistema sanitario gratuito y universal. Métodos. Estudio transversal de 7.447 pacientes con alto riesgo cardiovascular (el 57,5% mujeres; media de edad, 67 años) procedentes del estudio PREDIMED, un ensayo clínico de intervención nutricional para la prevención cardiovascular. El nivel educativo alcanzado se usó como indicador del nivel socioeconómico para evaluar las diferencias en el tratamiento farmacológico contra la hipertensión, la diabetes mellitus y la dislipemia. Resultados. Los participantes que con mayor frecuencia se encontraban en niveles socioeconómicos inferiores eran mujeres, ancianos, pacientes con sobrepeso y sedentarios y aquellos con peor patrón de adherencia a la dieta mediterránea; sin embargo, eran menos fumadores y consumidores habituales de alcohol. Asimismo, este subgrupo mostró mayor proporción de factores de riesgo cardiovascular. El análisis multivariable ajustado en la población general no mostró diferencias en el tratamiento de fármacos preventivos prescritos para los principales factores de riesgo cardiovascular en relación con el nivel socioeconómico (odds ratio [intervalo de confianza del 95%]): participantes hipertensos (0,75 [0,56-1,00] frente a 0,85 [0,65-1,10]); participantes diabéticos: (0,86 [0,61-1,22] frente a 0,90 [0,67-1,22]); participantes con dislipemia: (0,93 [0,75-1,15] frente a 0,99 [0,82-1,19]). Conclusiones. No se observaron diferencias en el tratamiento recibido en prevención cardiovascular primaria por los pacientes de edad avanzada en relación con el nivel socioeconómico. Un sistema de salud universal y gratuito basado en un modelo de atención primaria puede ser eficaz en la reducción de las desigualdades en la salud (AU)

Introduction and objectives. Although it is known that social factors may introduce inequalities in cardiovascular health, data on the role of socioeconomic differences in the prescription of preventive treatment are scarce. We aimed to assess the relationship between the socioeconomic status of an elderly population at high cardiovascular risk and inequalities in receiving primary cardiovascular treatment, within the context of a universal health care system. Methods. Cross-sectional study of 7447 individuals with high cardiovascular risk (57.5% women, mean age 67 years) who participated in the PREDIMED study, a clinical trial of nutritional interventions for cardiovascular prevention. Educational attainment was used as the indicator of socioeconomic status to evaluate differences in pharmacological treatment received for hypertension, diabetes, and dyslipidemia. Results. Participants with the lowest socioeconomic status were more frequently women, older, overweight, sedentary, and less adherent to the Mediterranean dietary pattern. They were, however, less likely to smoke and drink alcohol. This socioeconomic subgroup had a higher proportion of coexisting cardiovascular risk factors. Multivariate analysis of the whole population found no differences between participants with middle and low levels of education in the drug treatment prescribed for 3 major cardiovascular risk factors (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]): hypertension (0.75 [0.56-1.00] vs 0.85 [0.65-1.10]); diabetic participants (0.86 [0.61-1.22] vs 0.90 [0.67-1.22]); and dyslipidemia (0.93 [0.75-1.15] vs 0.99 [0.82-1.19], respectively). Conclusions. In our analysis, socioeconomic differences did not affect the treatment prescribed for primary cardiovascular prevention in elderly patients in Spain. Free, universal health care based on a primary care model can be effective in reducing health inequalities related to socioeconomic status (AU)