Vitamin D receptor gene, biochemical bone markers and bone mineral density in Mexican women on dialysis.

BACKGROUND: The influence of the Bsm1 polymorphism of the vitamin D receptor (VDR) gene on mineral and bone disorders in chronic kidney disease (CKD) is still under discussion. The aim of this study was to analyse the relationship between VDR polymorphism, bone mineral density (BMD), biochemical bone markers and clinical factors in women on peritoneal dialysis (PD) and haemodialysis (HD). METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, 197 women (42 +/- 10 years; 25% with diabetes mellitus (DM); body mass index (BMI) 25.26 +/- 4.77 kg/m(2)) treated by PD (72%) or HD (28%) underwent measurements of BMD (measured at the calcaneus by quantitative ultrasound; expressed as T- and Z-scores) and plasma total calcium (tCa), intact parathyroid hormone 1-84 (iPTH), phosphorus, albumin, glucose, osteoprotegerin (OPG), fetuin-A, intact osteocalcin-49 and N-MID fragment 1-43 aa (N-MID osteocalcin) N-terminal propeptide of type 1 procollagen (PINP) and C-terminal telopeptide-beta aspartic acid (BCL). DNA was extracted from peripheral blood. PCR products were digested with Bsm1 to analyse VDR polymorphism. RESULTS: The Z-score of BMD was -1.1 +/- 1.03. According to the values of osteopenia (T-score = -1.0), patients with higher BMD were younger, had lower frequency of amenorrhoea and diabetes and had higher serum creatinine and fetuin levels as well as lower levels of PINP. In a stepwise multivariate logistics analysis, osteopenia was associated with presence of genotype BB+Bb (OR = 3.26, P < or = 0.003) and age (OR = 0.95, P = 0.050). According to the B allele, bb: n = 126 (64%) and BB+Bb: n = 71(36%), group bb had significantly higher mean Z-scores (-0.97 +/- 1.0 vs -1.3+/-0.92; P < or = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: The high frequency of osteopenia observed in female CKD patients on dialysis is associated with age and genetic predisposition as revealed by its association to the Bsm1 VDR polymorphism.

Impacto de retroalimentación integral (debriefing) frente al modelo de enseñanza tradicional en la mejora de la calidad en estudios de ultrasonido obstétrico / Impact of comprehensive feedback (debriefing) vs traditional teaching model on quality improvement in obstetric ultrasound studies

Introducción: El debriefing es una técnica que permite mejorar los resultados en el proceso de aprendizaje a través de un proceso de reflexión y retroalimentación. El objetivo del estudio es comparar la efectividad del debriefing frente al modelo tradicional de enseñanza para mejorar el cumplimiento de calidad en ultrasonido obstétrico. Sujetos y métodos: Se evaluaron los resultados del control de calidad de 45 médicos recién egresados de diplomados de ultrasonido durante tres meses. Los médicos fueron divididos en dos grupos para llevar a cabo la retroalimentación de áreas de oportunidad: el grupo de control sólo recibió educación a través del modelo tradicional y el grupo de intervención recibió retroalimentación con metodología de debriefing. Resultados: Al comparar, ambos métodos mostraron ser efectivos para la mejora global del cumplimiento de calidad (42,9% el tradicional; p = 0,0083; 75% el de debriefing; p = 0,0002). El grupo de debriefing fue significativamente mejor en los rubros de calidad global (el 56,7 frente al 38,1%; p = 0,009 frente a p = 0,0432) y error de medición (el 88,1 frente al 68,7%, con significancia estadística; p = 0,349). Conclusión: Ambas técnicas de retroalimentación tuvieron un impacto positivo para la mejora del cumplimiento de la calidad en estudios de ultrasonido obstétrico, y la técnica de debriefing mostró ventajas significativas sobre el modelo deenseñanza tradicional en la retroalimentación de las áreas de oportunidad detectadas.(AU)

Introduction: Debriefing is a technique to improve learning outcomes through a process of reflection and feedback. The aim of the study is to compare the effectiveness of debriefing vs. the traditional teaching model to improve quality compliance in obstetric ultrasound. Subjects and methods: Forty-five recent graduates of ultrasound diploma courses were evaluated during three months of quality control. The physicians were divided into two groups to carry out feedback on areas of opportunity: the control group only received education through the traditional model and the intervention group, which received feedback with debriefing methodology. Results: When compared, both methods were shown to be effective for the overall improvement of quality compliance (42.9% traditional, p = 0.0083, 75% debriefing, p = 0.0002). The debriefing group was significantly better in the areas of overall quality (56.7% vs. 38.1%, p = 0.0090 vs. p = 0.0432), measurement error (88.1% vs. 68.7%, with statistical significance p = 0.349). Conclusion: Both feedback techniques offered positive results for the improvement of quality compliance in obstetric ultrasound studies, with the debriefing technique showing significant advantages over the traditional teaching model in the feedback of detected areas of opportunity.(AU)