[Experiencia en la vacunación frente a la COVID-19 en personas con antecedentes de alergia.] / Experience in vaccination against covid-19 in people with a history of allergy.

OBJECTIVE: A common consultation since the beginning of the vaccination campaign against COVID-19 was related to people with a history of allergy to drugs or other vaccines. The objective of the study was to describe what happened after the administration of the vaccine against COVID-19 in people with a history of moderate and severe allergy, vaccinated against COVID-19 in a Primary Care Emergency Center (PCEC). METHODS: Observational descriptive study with sixty-four people with a history of moderate and severe allergy was carried out, vaccinated in PCEP, between May and October 2021, in the Barcelonés Nord and Maresme (Barcelona province), after assessment by primary care pharmacologists and pharmacists. The percentage of people with adverse events that occurred after vaccination during their stay in the PCEP, the types detected and severity were calculated. Subsequently, a telephone survey was conducted to determine patient satisfaction. A descriptive analysis (calculation of proportions) was performed. RESULTS: The mean age of 49.7 years (from twelve to ninety-four years) and 90.6% were women. 87.5% of the administered vaccines were Comirnaty®. Adverse events occurring after vaccination were detected in fifteen patients (23.4%), of whom four (6.25%) were manifestations of hypersensitivity, all classified as mild. The reasons for vaccination were a history of allergy to NSAIDs (45.3%), antibiotics (32.8%), analgesics (17.2%), vaccines (28.1%), other substances (40.6%) and anaphylaxis (26.6%). The degree of general satisfaction was 9.11 (out of 10). CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of patients with a history of anaphylaxis and allergic drug reactions who present hypersensitivity reactions to COVID-19 vaccines is 6.25% and all are mild.

OBJETIVO: Una consulta habitual desde el inicio de la campaña de vacunación frente a la COVID-19 fue la relacionada con personas que tienen antecedentes de alergia a fármacos u otras vacunas. El objetivo del estudio fue describir lo ocurrido tras la administración de la vacuna frente a la COVID-19 en personas con antecedentes de alergia moderada y grave, en un Centro de Urgencias de Atención Primaria (CUAP). METODOS: Se realizó un estudio observacional descriptivo con sesenta y cuatro personas que tenían antecedentes de alergia moderada y grave, vacunadas en CUAP, entre mayo y octubre de 2021, en el Barcelonés Nord i Maresme (provincia de Barcelona), previa valoración por farmacólogos y farmacéuticos de Atención Primaria. Se calculó el porcentaje de personas con acontecimientos adversos ocurridos tras la vacunación en el transcurso de su estancia en el CUAP, los tipos detectados y la gravedad. Posteriormente, se realizó una encuesta telefónica para conocer la satisfacción de los pacientes. Se realizó un análisis descriptivo (cálculo de proporciones). RESULTADOS: La media de edad de las personas participantes fue de 49,7 años (de doce a noventa y cuatro años) y el 90,6% fueron mujeres. El 87,5% de las vacunas administradas fue Comirnaty®. Se detectaron acontecimientos adversos ocurridos tras la vacunación en quince pacientes (23,4%), de los que en cuatro casos (6,25%) fueron manifestaciones de hipersensibilidad, todas catalogadas como leves. Los motivos de vacunación fueron antecedentes de alergia a AINE (45,3%), antibióticos (32,8%), analgésicos (17,2%), vacunas (28,1%), otras sustancias (40,6%) y anafilaxia (26,6%). El grado de satisfacción general fue de 9,11 (sobre 10). CONCLUSIONES: El porcentaje de pacientes con antecedentes de anafilaxia y reacciones alérgicas a medicamentos que presentan reacciones de hipersensibilidad a las vacunas frente a la COVID-19 es del 6,25% y todas son leves.

Experiencia en la vacunación frente a la COVID-19 en personas con antecedentes de alergia / Experience in vaccination against COVID-19 in people with a history of allergy

Fundamentos: Una consulta habitual desde el inicio de la campaña de vacunación frente a la COVID-19 fue la relacionada con personas que tienen antecedentes de alergia a fármacos u otras vacunas. El objetivo del estudio fue describir lo ocurrido tras la administración de la vacuna frente a la COVID-19 en personas con antecedentes de alergia moderada y grave, en un Centro de Urgencias de Atención Primaria (CUAP). Métodos: Se realizó un estudio observacional descriptivo con sesenta y cuatro personas que tenían antecedentes de alergia moderada y grave, vacunadas en CUAP, entre mayo y octubre de 2021, en el Barcelonés Nord i Maresme (provincia de Barcelona), previa valoración por farmacólogos y farmacéuticos de Atención Primaria. Se calculó el porcentaje de personas con acontecimientos adversos ocurridos tras la vacunación en el transcurso de su estancia en el CUAP, los tipos detectados y la gravedad. Posteriormente, se realizó una encuesta telefónica para conocer la satisfacción de los pacientes. Se realizó un análisis descriptivo (cálculo de proporciones). Resultados: La media de edad de las personas participantes fue de 49,7 años (de doce a noventa y cuatro años) y el 90,6% fueron mujeres. El 87,5% de las vacunas administradas fue Comirnaty ®. Se detectaron acontecimientos adversos ocurridos tras la vacunación en quince pacientes (23,4%), de los que en cuatro casos (6,25%) fueron manifestaciones de hipersensibilidad, todas catalogadas como leves. Los motivos de vacunación fueron antecedentes de alergia a AINE (45,3%), antibióticos (32,8%), analgésicos (17,2%), vacunas (28,1%), otras sustancias (40,6%) y anafilaxia (26,6%). El grado de satisfacción general fue de 9,11 (sobre 10). Conclusiones: El porcentaje de pacientes con antecedentes de anafilaxia y reacciones alérgicas a medicamentos que presentan reacciones de hipersensibilidad a las vacunas frente a la COVID-19 es del 6,25% y todas son leves.(AU)

Background: A common consultation since the beginning of the vaccination campaign against COVID-19 was related to people with a history of allergy to drugs or other vaccines. The objective of the study was to describe what happened after the administration of the vaccine against COVID-19 in people with a history of moderate and severe allergy, vaccinated against COVID-19 in a Primary Care Emergency Center (PCEC). Methods/ Observational descriptive study with sixty-four people with a history of moderate and severe allergy was carried out, vaccinated in PCEP, between May and October 2021, in the Barcelonés Nord and Maresme (Barcelona province), after assessment by primary care pharmacologists and pharmacists. The percentage of people with adverse events that occurred after vaccination during their stay in the PCEP, the types detected and severity were calculated. Subsequently, a telephone survey was conducted to determine patient satisfaction. A descriptive analysis (calculation of proportions) was performed. Results: The mean age of 49.7 years (from twelve to ninety-four years) and 90.6% were women. 87.5% of the administered vaccines were Comirnaty ® . Adverse events occurring after vaccination were detected in fifteen patients (23.4%), of whom four (6.25%)were manifestations of hypersensitivity, all classified as mild. The reasons for vaccination were a history of allergy to NSAIDs (45.3%), antibiotics (32.8%), analgesics (17.2%), vaccines (28.1%), other substances (40.6%) and anaphylaxis (26.6%). The degree of generalsatisfaction was 9.11 (out of 10). Conclusions: The percentage of patients with a history of anaphylaxis and allergic drug reactions who present hypersensitivityreactions to COVID-19 vaccines is 6.25% and all are mild.(AU)

Implantación de una Unidad de Enlace Centralizada de Vacunación contra la COVID-19 gestionada por farmacéuticos-farmacólogos de Atención Primaria / Implementation of a Centralized COVID-19 Vaccination Liaison Unit managed by Primary Care pharmacist-pharmacologists

Introducción: La Unidad de Enlace Centralizada de Vacunación contra la COVID19 (UECeV) de la Dirección de Atención Primaria Metropolitana Nord del Institut Català de la Salut se creó para resolver las consultas de usuarios y/o profesionales sa-nitarios relacionadas con la vacunación contra el virus SARS-CoV-2. El objetivo principal del presente análisis fue describir la actividad de la UECeV.Método: Realizamos un estudio observacional retrospectivo a partir del registro de consultas aten-didas desde la UECeV entre 31 de abril y 31 de oc-tubre de 2021. Población de referencia: 1.139.411 habitantes adultos asignados. La UECeV se creó en tres sedes territoriales atendidas cada una por dos farmacéuticos/farmacólogos de Atención Primaria (FAP) y un administrativo. La atención telefónica fue a jornada completa adaptable según actividad. Variable principal del análisis: número y tipos de consultas atendidas. Se calculó valores absolutos y porcentajes, medianas y desviación estándar para las variables cuantitativas y para las variables cuali-tativas se realizó un análisis descriptivo.Resultados: 3.103 consultas gestionadas de 3.030 usuarios; 2.180 (70,25%) contestadas por el FAP. Consulta más frecuente: compatibilidad vacuna según patología/medicación de base 1.008 (32,5%). 2.830 (93,4%) usuarios se vacunaron después de la intervención (2.210 consultaron antes de la primera dosis y 618 antes de la segunda). La vacuna mayo-ritaria fue la Comirnaty®. Conclusiones: Las UECeV coordinadas por el FAP con atención directa a los usuarios y/o profesiona-les sanitarios constituyen un elemento de apoyo a los equipos de vacunación de atención primaria para la gestión experta de las consultas de vacuna-ción contra la COVID19. (AU)

Introduction: The North Metropolitan Primary Care Direction of the Institut Català de la Salut crea-ted the Centralized Liaison Unit for anti-COVID19 vaccination (UECeV) to solve queries from users and/or health professionals related to vaccination against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The main objective of the present analysis was to describe the activity of UECeV.Method: We carried out a retrospective observa-tional study based on the registry of consultations attended from the UECeV between April 31st and October 31, 2021. We have an equal or above 18 years old reference population of 1,139,411 inha-bitants. The UECeV was set up in three territorial offices, each attended by two Primary Care phar-macists/pharmacologists (FAP) and one adminis-trative staff member. The telephone service was full-time and could be adapted according to activity. The main variable of the analysis was the number and types of queries attended. Absolute values and percentages, medians and standard deviation were calculated for the quantitative variables and a descriptive analysis was performed for qualitative variables.Results: 3,103 queries were managed out of 3,030 users; 2,180 (70.25%) were answered by the FAP. Most frequent consultation was: vaccine compa-tibility according to pathology/basic medication 1,008 (32.5%). 2,830 (93.4%) users were vaccinated after the consultation (2,210 consulted before the first dose and 618 before the second). The majority vaccine was Comirnaty® Conclusions: The UECeV coordinated by the FAP with direct attention to users and/or health profes-sionals constitutes a support element for primary care vaccination teams for the expert management of AntiCOVID19 vaccination consultations. (AU)

Antidepressant Drugs and COVID-19: A Review of Basic and Clinical Evidence.

The COVID-19 pandemic has encouraged the repurposing of existing drugs as a shorter development strategy in order to support clinicians with this difficult therapeutic dilemma. There is evidence to support the theory that some antidepressants can reduce concentrations of different cytokines in humans and animals and, recently, the antiviral activity of some antidepressants against SARS-CoV-2 has been reported. The aims of this narrative review are to evaluate the possible role of antidepressants in the treatment of COVID-19 infection and the possible benefits and risks of patients taking antidepressants for mental disorders and COVID-19 infection. A review was performed to analyse the current literature to identify the role of antidepressant medication in the treatment of COVID-19 patients. The electronic search was completed in MEDLINE and MedRxiv/BioRxiv for published literature and in ClinicalTrials.gov for ongoing clinical trials. The results show some evidence from preclinical data and observational studies about the possible efficacy of some specific antidepressants for treating COVID-19 infection. In addition, two published phase II studies testing fluvoxamine showed positive results for clinical deterioration and hospitalization rate versus a placebo. Seven ongoing clinical trials testing fluvoxamine, fluoxetine, and tramadol (as per its anti-inflammatory and antidepressant effect) are still in the early phases. Although the available evidence is limited, the sum of the antiviral and anti-inflammatory preclinical studies and the results from several observational studies and two phase II clinical trials provide the basis for ongoing clinical trials evaluating the possible use of antidepressants for COVID-19 infection in humans. Further investigations will be needed to support the possible use of antidepressants for this application.

Estudio cuasi experimental de una intervención sobre el manejo farmacológico del dolor crónico no oncológico en atención primaria / Quasi-experimental study of an intervention on the pharmacological management of non-oncological chronic pain in Primary Care

OBJETIVO: Analizar el impacto de una intervención formativa/informativa sobre el tratamiento del dolor crónico no oncológico en atención primaria. DISEÑO: Estudio cuasi experimental antes-después y seguimiento de la cohorte de pacientes. Emplazamiento: Sesenta y cuatro equipos de atención primaria (770 médicos). PARTICIPANTES: Pacientes ≥ 14 años sin diagnóstico oncológico con: 1) fentanilo citrato, 2) opioides mayores y ≥ 2 ansiolíticos-hipnóticos, 3) opioides mayores y menores de forma crónica, 4) lidocaína transdérmica fuera de indicación. Intervención: Difusión de recomendaciones del tratamiento del dolor crónico no oncológico y facilitación de las incidencias de sus pacientes a cada médico. MEDICIONES PRINCIPALES: Números de incidencias en 2 cortes transversales (junio 2017 y junio 2018). Número de incidencias en junio de 2017 y que se mantienen en junio de 2018 (cohorte prospectiva). RESULTADOS: De las 2.465 incidencias detectadas en 2017 se produjo una reducción del 21,1% tras la intervención. La reducción fue superior (61,8%; p ≤ 0,0001) en la cohorte prospectiva. En números absolutos, la reducción más importante fue en incidencias de parches de lidocaína fuera de indicación (1.032 incidencias). La indicación aprobada constaba en menos del 8% de los tratados. CONCLUSIONES: La intervención redujo el número de pacientes con incidencias y la disminución fue mayor en la cohorte prospectiva, lo que confirma la eficacia de enviar información sobre pacientes con incidencias. La incorporación de nuevos tratamientos durante el año de seguimiento ha sido importante, por lo que estas intervenciones deben perpetuarse en el tiempo

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the impact of a formative / informative intervention on the treatment of non-oncological chronic pain in Primary Care. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental study before-after, and follow-up of the patient cohort. LOCATION: 64 Primary Care teams/centres (770 physicians). PARTICIPANTS: Patients ≥ 14 years without an oncological diagnosis on: 1) fentanyl citrate, 2) major opioids and ≥ 2 anxiolytics-hypnotics, 3) long-term major and minor opioids, 4) transdermal lidocaine, out of indication. Intervention: Dissemination of recommendations for the treatment of non-oncological chronic pain and the reporting of the incidents of their patients to each doctor. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Number of incidents in 2 cross sections (June 2017 and June 2018). Number of incidents in June 2017, which were maintained in June 2018 (prospective cohort). RESULTS: Of the 2,465 incidents detected in 2017, there was a 21.1% reduction after the intervention. The reduction was higher (61.8%, p < .001) in the prospective cohort. In absolute values, the most important reduction was in incidences of lidocaine patches outside of indication (1,032 incidences). The approved indication was found in less than 8% of the treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention reduced the number of patients with incidences, and this reduction was higher in the prospective cohort, confirming the efficacy of sending information about patients with incidences to their physicians. The incorporation of new treatments during the follow-up year was significant, so these interventions should be perpetuated over time

[Quasi-experimental study of an intervention on the pharmacological management of non-oncological chronic pain in Primary Care]. / Estudio cuasi experimental de una intervención sobre el manejo farmacológico del dolor crónico no oncológico en atención primaria.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the impact of a formative / informative intervention on the treatment of non-oncological chronic pain in Primary Care. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental study before-after, and follow-up of the patient cohort. LOCATION: 64 Primary Care teams/centres (770 physicians). PARTICIPANTS: Patients≥14 years without an oncological diagnosis on: 1) fentanyl citrate, 2) major opioids and≥2 anxiolytics-hypnotics, 3) long-term major and minor opioids, 4) transdermal lidocaine, out of indication. INTERVENTION: Dissemination of recommendations for the treatment of non-oncological chronic pain and the reporting of the incidents of their patients to each doctor. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Number of incidents in 2 cross sections (June 2017 and June 2018). Number of incidents in June 2017, which were maintained in June 2018 (prospective cohort). RESULTS: Of the 2,465 incidents detected in 2017, there was a 21.1% reduction after the intervention. The reduction was higher (61.8%, p<.001) in the prospective cohort. In absolute values, the most important reduction was in incidences of lidocaine patches outside of indication (1,032 incidences). The approved indication was found in less than 8% of the treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention reduced the number of patients with incidences, and this reduction was higher in the prospective cohort, confirming the efficacy of sending information about patients with incidences to their physicians. The incorporation of new treatments during the follow-up year was significant, so these interventions should be perpetuated over time.

Adecuación del tratamiento de la osteoporosis en prevención primaria. Estudio cuantitativo y cualitativo / Adequacy of treatment for osteoporosis in primary prevention. Quantitative and qualitative study

Objetivo: Estudio cuantitativo: conocer la prevalencia de inadecuación del tratamiento para la osteoporosis en prevención primaria (OPP) en mujeres de 60-74 años. Estudio cualitativo: conocer los criterios diagnósticos y de tratamiento de la OPP y su variabilidad en médicos de atención primaria (AP) y especialistas. Material y método: Estudio cuantitativo: estudio observacional, transversal y retrospectivo. Población: mujeres de 60-74 años con tratamiento activo para la OPP (n = 424) en mayo del 2012. Se consideró inadecuación si presentaban ≤ 2 factores de riesgo con DXA realizada o con DXA T-score ≥ −2,4. Estudio cualitativo: técnica Delphi (15 ítems) y dos rondas de consulta. Periodo: marzo-abril del 2014. Población: médicos AP, reumatólogos y traumatólogos (n = 251). Muestreo aleatorio. Resultados: Estudio cuantitativo: grado de inadecuación del 63,4%. En el 43,2% no constaba diagnóstico de osteoporosis. En el 82,3% no constaban factores de riesgo. Tratamiento: 40,3% con bisfosfonatos y 47,9% con calcio + vitamina D. Estudio cualitativo: el 23% respondieron a la primera ronda y, de estos, el 67% a la segunda ronda. Los ítems con mayor acuerdo fueron valoración de factores de riesgo para el diagnóstico y bisfosfonatos como tratamiento. Los ítems con menor consenso fueron utilización del FRAX y densitometría y tratamiento solo con calcio + vitamina D. Conclusiones: El porcentaje de inadecuación es alto. El grado de registro en historia clínica es bajo. La metodología Delphi es útil para detectar discrepancias entre recomendaciones de guías de práctica clínica y resultados (AU)

Objective: Quantitative study: To assess the prevalence of inadequacy of treatment for osteoporosis in primary prevention (OPP) in women aged 60-74 years. Qualitative study: To evaluate the diagnostic and treatment criteria of the OPP and it's variability in primary care physicians (PC) and specialists. Material and methods: Quantitative study: observational, cross-sectional and retrospective study. Population: women aged 60 -74 years with active treatment for OPP (n = 424) in May 2012. Inadequacy if they had ≤ 2 risk factors with a DXA or DXA T-score ≥ −2.4. Qualitative study: Delphi technique (15items) and two rounds of consultation. Period: March-April 2014. Population: PC physicians, rheumatologists and orthopaedic surgeons (n = 251). Random sampling. Results: Quantitative study: degree of inadequacy is 63.4%. In 43.2% isn’t mention a diagnosis of osteoporosis. In 82.3% there isn’t mention of risk factors. Treatment: bisphosphonate 40.3% and calcium + vitamin D 47.9%. Qualitative study: 23% respond to the first round, and of these 67% the second round. Items with higher agreement were the important of the evaluation of risk factors for diagnosis and bisphosphonates for treatment. Items with fewer consensuses were using the FRAX and densitometry and treatment with only calcium + vitamin D. Conclusions: The percentage of inadequacy is high. The degree of registration in medical history is low. The Delphi method is useful for detecting discrepancies between recommendations of clinical practice guidelines and results (AU)

[Adequacy of treatment for osteoporosis in primary prevention. Quantitative and qualitative study]. / Adecuación del tratamiento de la osteoporosis en prevención primaria. Estudio cuantitativo y cualitativo.

OBJECTIVE: Quantitative study: To assess the prevalence of inadequacy of treatment for osteoporosis in primary prevention (OPP) in women aged 60-74years. Qualitative study: To evaluate the diagnostic and treatment criteria of the OPP and it's variability in primary care physicians (PC) and specialists. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Quantitative study: observational, cross-sectional and retrospective study. POPULATION: women aged 60-74years with active treatment for OPP (n=424) in May 2012. Inadequacy if they had ≤2 risk factors with a DXA or DXA T-score ≥-2.4. Qualitative study: Delphi technique (15items) and two rounds of consultation. PERIOD: March-April 2014. POPULATION: PC physicians, rheumatologists and orthopaedic surgeons (n=251). Random sampling. RESULTS: Quantitative study: degree of inadequacy is 63.4%. In 43.2% isn't mention a diagnosis of osteoporosis. In 82.3% there isn't mention of risk factors. TREATMENT: bisphosphonate 40.3% and calcium +vitaminD 47.9%. Qualitative study: 23% respond to the first round, and of these 67% the second round. Items with higher agreement were the important of the evaluation of risk factors for diagnosis and bisphosphonates for treatment. Items with fewer consensuses were using the FRAX and densitometry and treatment with only calcium +vitaminD. CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of inadequacy is high. The degree of registration in medical history is low. The Delphi method is useful for detecting discrepancies between recommendations of clinical practice guidelines and results.

Pancreatitis aguda en un paciente tratado con losartán / Acute pancreatitis in a patient treated with losartan

No disponible

Angioedema lingual por alprazolam / Alprazolam-induced tongue angioedema

No disponible

No disponible

Muerte súbita de causa desconocida en una mujer joven que tomó un preparado antigripal de venta libre / Sudden death attributed to ventricular arrhytmia induced by an over-the-counter cold medicine

No disponible