Diálisis peritoneal en pacientes incidentes con glomerulonefritis primaria. Resultados de un registro multicéntrico durante 20 años de seguimiento / Peritoneal dialysis in incident patients with primary glomerulonephritis. Results of a 20-year multicenter registry study

ANTECEDENTES Y OBJETIVOS: Las glomerulonefritis (GN) constituyen una de las principales causas de enfermedad renal crónica estadio 5 en diálisis, sin embargo, pocos estudios se centran en su pronóstico en diálisis. Analizamos la supervivencia y características de los pacientes con GN primaria (GNP) en diálisis peritoneal (DP) y comparamos sus resultados con otros enfermos. MÉTODOS: Estudio observacional con recogida de datos de manera prospectiva durante 2 décadas (1995-2014). Incluimos a todos los pacientes del registro Levante que iniciaron DP como primera técnica dialítica. Los datos se transfirieron a una base de datos anonimizada en Access. El análisis estadístico se realizó mediante el programa SPSS (versión 19.0). RESULTADOS: El estudio incluyó a 2.243 pacientes, siendo las GN la principal causa de enfermedad renal primaria (21,5%). La nefropatía IgA fue la GNP con confirmación histológica más frecuente. Comparados con el resto de la muestra, los pacientes con GNP fueron en mayor proporción varones (65 vs. 58%, p = 0,004), con menor edad (48 vs. 55 años, p < 0,001), menos comorbilidad y mayor tasa de inclusión en lista de espera de trasplante renal (87 vs. 63%, p < 0,001). Asimismo, los pacientes con GNP se trasplantaron más (48,9%, p < 0,001) y este fue su motivo más frecuente de salida de DP; además de presentar menor tasa global de peritonitis (0,34 vs. 0,45 episodios/paciente-año, p < 0,001). La supervivencia técnica fue del 90,6% al año, del 71,7% a los 3 años y del 59% a los 5 años (mediana 76,8 meses), sin diferencias entre grupos. La supervivencia de los pacientes fue del 94,9% al año, del 80,1% a los 3 años y del 63,7% a los 5 años (mediana 90,7 meses). Los enfermos con GNP presentaron mejor supervivencia media que el resto de patologías (153,5 meses [IC 95%: 137-169,9) vs. 110,3 meses [IC 95%: 100,8-119,7], p < 0,001). En el multivariante, se relacionó de manera negativa con la supervivencia técnica tener mayor transporte peritoneal (p = 0,018), y con la supervivencia del paciente tener mayor edad (p < 0,001) y alguna comorbilidad, especialmente diabetes y hepatopatía (p < 0,001). Por el contrario, la inclusión en lista de espera y la función renal residual (p < 0,001) favorecieron ambas supervivencias. CONCLUSIONES: A la vista de nuestros resultados y teniendo en cuenta las ventajas de la DP como primer tratamiento dialítico, consideramos que esta terapia es una excelente técnica para los enfermos con GNP mientras esperan un trasplante renal

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Glomerulonephritis (GN) is one of the main causes of chronic terminal kidney disease; however, few studies assess its prognosis in dialysis. We analyze the survival and characteristics of patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD) with primary GN (PGN), and compare their results with other kidney patients. METHODS: This prospective observational study took place from 1995 to 2014. We included all incident patients who were initiated on the technique in the Levante registry. Data were transferred to an anonymized database in Access. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software (version 19.0). RESULTS: The study included 2,243 patients, with GN representing the main cause of primary kidney disease (21,5%). IgA nephropathy was the most frequent histologically confirmed form of PGN. Compared with the rest of the sample, patients with PGN were more often men (65% vs 58%, P =. 004), and they were on average younger (48 years vs 55 years, P < .001). They also had fewer comorbidities and a higher rate of inclusion on the waitlist for a kidney transplant (87 vs 63%, P < .001). Patients with PGN also had more transplants (48,9%, P < .001), and this was the most frequent reason for stopping PD; beyond that, their peritonitis mean rate was lower (0,34 vs 0,45 episodes/patient-year, P < .001). Technique survival was 90,6% at one year, 71,7% at 3 years, and 59,0% at 5 years (median 76,8 months); there were no differences between groups. Survival was 94,9% at one year, 80,1% at 3 years, and 63,7% at 5 years (median 90,7 months). Patients with PGN showed better mean survival than patients with other kidney pathologies (153,5 months [95% IC: 137,0 to 169,9] vs 110,3 months [95% CI: 100,8 to 119,7], P < .001). In the multivariable analysis, the main negative risk factor influencing technique survival was a higher peritoneal transport (P = .018). Factors with a negative influence on mortality were being older (P < .001) and having any comorbidity, mainly diabetes and liver disease (P < .001). By contrast, protective survival factors were inclusion on the transplant waitlist and a higher baseline residual renal function (P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: PD has several advantages as a first dialytic treatment, and our results suggest that it is an excellent technique to manage patients with PGN while they await a kidney transplant

Peritoneal dialysis in incident patients with primary glomerulonephritis. Results of a 20-year multicenter registry study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Glomerulonephritis (GN) is one of the main causes of chronic terminal kidney disease; however, few studies assess its prognosis in dialysis. We analyze the survival and characteristics of patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD) with primary GN (PGN), and compare their results with other kidney patients. METHODS: This prospective observational study took place from 1995 to 2014. We included all incident patients who were initiated on the technique in the Levante registry. Data were transferred to an anonymized database in Access. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software (version 19.0). RESULTS: The study included 2243 patients, with GN representing the main cause of primary kidney disease (21,5%). IgA nephropathy was the most frequent histologically confirmed form of PGN. Compared with the rest of the sample, patients with PGN were more often men (65% vs 58%, p = .004), and they were on average younger (48 years vs 55 years, p < .001). They also had fewer comorbidities and a higher rate of inclusion on the waitlist for a kidney transplant (87 vs 63%, p < .001). Patients with PGN also had more transplants (48,9%, p < .001), and this was the most frequent reason for stopping PD; beyond that, their peritonitis mean rate was lower (0,34 vs 0,45 episodes/patient-year, p < .001). Technique survival was 90,6% at one year, 71,7% at 3 years, and 59,0% at 5 years (median 76,8 months); there were no differences between groups. Survival was 94,9% at one year, 80,1% at 3 years, and 63,7% at 5 years (median 90,7 months). Patients with PGN showed better mean survival than patients with other kidney pathologies (153,5 months [95% IC: 137,0-169,9] vs 110,3 months [95% CI: 100,8-119,7], p < .001). In the multivariable analysis, the main negative risk factor influencing technique survival was a higher peritoneal transport (p = .018). Factors with a negative influence on mortality were being older (p < .001) and having any comorbidity, mainly diabetes and liver disease (p < .001). By contrast, protective survival factors were inclusion on the transplant waitlist and a higher baseline residual renal function (p = .001). CONCLUSIONS: PD has several advantages as a first dialytic treatment, and our results suggest that it is an excellent technique to manage patients with PGN while they await a kidney transplant.

Peritoneal dialysis in incident patients with primary glomerulonephritis. Results of a 20-year multicenter registry study. / Diálisis peritoneal en pacientes incidentes con glomerulonefritis primaria. Resultados de un registro multicéntrico durante 20 años de seguimiento.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Glomerulonephritis (GN) is one of the main causes of chronic terminal kidney disease; however, few studies assess its prognosis in dialysis. We analyze the survival and characteristics of patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD) with primary GN (PGN), and compare their results with other kidney patients. METHODS: This prospective observational study took place from 1995 to 2014. We included all incident patients who were initiated on the technique in the Levante registry. Data were transferred to an anonymized database in Access. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software (version 19.0). RESULTS: The study included 2,243 patients, with GN representing the main cause of primary kidney disease (21,5%). IgA nephropathy was the most frequent histologically confirmed form of PGN. Compared with the rest of the sample, patients with PGN were more often men (65% vs 58%, P=.004), and they were on average younger (48 years vs 55 years, P<.001). They also had fewer comorbidities and a higher rate of inclusion on the waitlist for a kidney transplant (87 vs 63%, P<.001). Patients with PGN also had more transplants (48,9%, P<.001), and this was the most frequent reason for stopping PD; beyond that, their peritonitis mean rate was lower (0,34 vs 0,45 episodes/patient-year, P<.001). Technique survival was 90,6% at one year, 71,7% at 3 years, and 59,0% at 5 years (median 76,8 months); there were no differences between groups. Survival was 94,9% at one year, 80,1% at 3 years, and 63,7% at 5 years (median 90,7 months). Patients with PGN showed better mean survival than patients with other kidney pathologies (153,5 months [95% IC: 137,0 to 169,9] vs 110,3 months [95% CI: 100,8 to 119,7], P<.001). In the multivariable analysis, the main negative risk factor influencing technique survival was a higher peritoneal transport (P=.018). Factors with a negative influence on mortality were being older (P <.001) and having any comorbidity, mainly diabetes and liver disease (P <.001). By contrast, protective survival factors were inclusion on the transplant waitlist and a higher baseline residual renal function (P=.001). CONCLUSIONS: PD has several advantages as a first dialytic treatment, and our results suggest that it is an excellent technique to manage patients with PGN while they await a kidney transplant.

Comparison of two methods to estimate adverse events in the IBEAS Study (Ibero-American study of adverse events): cross-sectional versus retrospective cohort design.

BACKGROUND: Adverse events (AEs) epidemiology is the first step to improve practice in the healthcare system. Usually, the preferred method used to estimate the magnitude of the problem is the retrospective cohort study design, with retrospective reviews of the medical records. However this data collection involves a sophisticated sampling plan, and a process of intensive review of sometimes very heavy and complex medical records. Cross-sectional survey is also a valid and feasible methodology to study AEs. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to compare AEs detection using two different methodologies: cross-sectional versus retrospective cohort design. SETTING: Secondary and tertiary hospitals in five countries: Argentina, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico and Peru. PARTICIPANTS: The IBEAS Study is a cross-sectional survey with a sample size of 11 379 patients. The retrospective cohort study was obtained from a 10% random sample proportional to hospital size from the entire IBEAS Study population. METHODS: This study compares the 1-day prevalence of the AEs obtained in the IBEAS Study with the incidence obtained through the retrospective cohort study. RESULTS: The prevalence of patients with AEs was 10.47% (95% CI 9.90 to 11.03) (1191/11 379), while the cumulative incidence of the retrospective cohort study was 19.76% (95% CI 17.35% to 22.17%) (215/1088). In both studies the highest risk of suffering AEs was seen in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients. Comorbid patients and patients with medical devices showed higher risk. CONCLUSION: The retrospective cohort design, although requires more resources, allows to detect more AEs than the cross-sectional design.

Influenza vaccine effectiveness in preventing influenza A(H3N2)-related hospitalizations in adults targeted for vaccination by type of vaccine: a hospital-based test-negative study, 2011-2012 A(H3N2) predominant influenza season, Valencia, Spain.

BACKGROUND: Most evidence of the effectiveness of influenza vaccines comes from studies conducted in primary care, but less is known about their effectiveness in preventing serious complications. Here, we examined the influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against hospitalization with PCR-confirmed influenza in the predominant A(H3N2) 2011-2012 influenza season. METHODS: A hospital-based, test-negative study was conducted in nine hospitals in Valencia, Spain. All emergency admissions with a predefined subset of symptoms were eligible. We enrolled consenting adults age 18 and over, targeted for influenza vaccination because of comorbidity, with symptoms of influenza-like-illness within seven days of admission. We estimated IVE as (1-adjusted vaccination odds ratio)*100 after accounting for major confounders, calendar time and recruitment hospital. RESULTS: The subjects included 544 positive for influenza A(H3N2) and 1,370 negative for influenza admissions. Age was an IVE modifying factor. Regardless of vaccine administration, IVE was 72% (38 to 88%) in subjects aged under 65 and 21% (-5% to 40%) in subjects aged 65 and over. By type of vaccine, the IVE of classical intramuscular split-influenza vaccine, used in subjects 18 to 64, was 68% (12% to 88%). The IVE for intradermal and virosomal influenza vaccines, used in subjects aged 65 and over, was 39% (11% to 58%) and 16% (-39% to 49%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The split-influenza vaccine was effective in preventing influenza-associated hospitalizations in adults aged under 65. The intradermal vaccine was moderately effective in those aged 65 and over.

Diseño de una estrategia multimodal incluyendo marketing sanitario para la mejora del cumplimiento de la higiene de manos / Design of a multimodal strategy including health marketing for the improvement of hand hygiene fulfillment

No disponible

[Lights and shadows in patient safety: study and development of strategies. 2008 SESPAS Report]. / Luces y sombras en la seguridad de los pacientes: estudio y desarrollo de estrategias. Informe SESPAS 2008.

Study of the frequency of healthcare-related adverse events (AE) and of their effect on patients and impact on healthcare systems has markedly increased in recent years. Indepth individual analysis of the factors contributing to these events has allowed strategies to prevent or minimize the impact of AE to be developed. However, an epidemiologic perspective is needed to explore possible associations and generalize the recommendations that can be drawn from this type of analysis. Some aspects that should been considered while developing future strategies are discussed. These aspects include the importance of patient age and comorbidities on producing AE and the use of highly technological medicine, which is sometimes unnecessary. A culture of trust and confidentiality and a spirit of collaboration among organizations are indispensable to share and learn about the initiatives prompted by the study of AE and thereby improve patient safety in the national health service.

Luces y sombras en la seguridad de los pacientes: estudio y desarrollo de estrategias. Informe SESPAS 2008 / Lights and shadows in patient safety: study and development of strategies. 2008 SESPAS Report

El estudio sobre la frecuencia de los efectos adversos (EA) ligadosa la asistencia, su efecto en los pacientes y el impactoen los sistemas de salud ha experimentado un intenso impulsoen los últimos años. El análisis individual profundo de susfactores contribuyentes ha permitido el desarrollo de múltiplesestrategias para prevenirlos o minimizar su impacto, pero es necesariauna perspectiva epidemiológica para explorar estas posiblesasociaciones y generalizar las recomendaciones que sederiven de este análisis.Se comentan algunos de los aspectos que se deberían teneren cuenta para el desarrollo de estrategias futuras, como la importanciade la edad o las comorbilidades del paciente en la génesisde los EA y el alto grado de la instrumentalización de laasistencia (a veces innecesaria). Son imprescindibles una culturade confianza y confidencialidad y un espíritu de colaboraciónentre las organizaciones para poder compartir y aprenderde las iniciativas derivadas del estudio de los EA, y así mejorarla seguridad de los pacientes en el Sistema Nacional de Salud(AU)

Study of the frequency of healthcare-related adverseevents (AE) and of their effect on patients and impact on healthcaresystems has markedly increased in recent years. Indepthindividual analysis of the factors contributing to theseevents has allowed strategies to prevent or minimize the impactof AE to be developed. However, an epidemiologic perspectiveis needed to explore possible associations and generalizethe recommendations that can be drawn from thistype of analysis.Some aspects that should been considered while developingfuture strategies are discussed. These aspects include the importanceof patient age and comorbidities on producing AEand the use of highly technological medicine, which is sometimesunnecessary. A culture of trust and confidentiality anda spirit of collaboration among organizations are indispensableto share and learn about the initiatives prompted by thestudy of AE and thereby improve patient safety in the nationalhealth service(AU)

[Adverse events in general and digestive surgery departments in Spanish hospitals]. / Sucesos adversos en cirugía general y de aparato digestivo en los hospitales españoles.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of patients with adverse events (AE) in Spanish general surgery units, describe the immediate causes of AE, identify avoidable AE, and determine the impact of these events. MATERIAL AND METHOD: We performed a retrospective cohort study of a randomized stratified sample of 24 hospitals. Six of the hospitals were small (fewer than 200 beds), 13 were medium-sized (between 200 and 499 beds) and five were large (500 or more beds). Patients admitted for more than 24 hours to the selected hospitals and who were discharged between the 4th and 10th of June 2005 were included. AE detected during hospitalization and those occurring as a consequence of previous admissions in the same hospital were analyzed. RESULTS: The incidence of patients with AE associated with medical care was 10.5% (76/735; 95%CI: 8.1%-12.5%). The presence of intrinsic risk factors increased the risk of AE (14.8% vs 7.2%; P=.001). Likewise, 16.2% of patients with an extrinsic risk factor had an AE compared with 7.0% of those without these risk factors (P< .001). Comorbidity influenced the occurrence of AE (33.7% of AE vs. 2.2% without comorbidity; P< .001). The severity of the AE was related to ASA risk (P=.036). AE were related to nosocomial infection (41.7%), procedures (27.1%) and medication (24%). A total of 31.3% of the AE were mild, 39.6% were moderate, and 29.2% were severe. Preventable AE accounted for 36.5%. AE caused an additional 527 days of stay (6.3 additional days of stay per patient), of which 216 were due to preventable AE. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in general and digestive surgery units have an increased risk of AE. Risk factors for these events are age, comorbidity, and the use of external devices. A substantial number of AE are related to nosocomial infection (especially surgical wound infection) and to surgical procedures. AE have an important impact on patients and a considerable proportion of these events are preventable. AE have strong health, social and economic repercussions and until recently have constituted a silent epidemic in Spain. Consequently, study of these events should be a public health priority.