Search

Puntos para una lectura rapida • Los pacientes en tratamiento con IECA o ARAII no tienen mayor riesgo de infeccion por SARS-COVID, ni mayor riesgo de COVID-19 grave ni de mortalidad. Por ello, deben continuar con el tratamiento, y solo estaria justificada su retirada por motivos clinicos. • Los pacientes con COVID-19 en tratamiento con hipolipemiantes deben continuar con ellos, especialmente aquellos con alto riesgo de enfermedad cardiovascular. Se suspenderan si hay riesgo hepatico o renal o si esta impedida la via oral. Se valorara el cambio de estatina si hay interaccion con el tratamiento para la infeccion. • En pacientes diabeticos con COVID-19 se recomienda suspender los iSGLT-2 (gliflozinas o uricosuricos) en caso de fiebre o diarrea, y vigilar funcion renal y glucemia por si es necesario ajustar el resto de los antidiabeticos. La insulina es el tratamiento de eleccion en caso de retirada del resto de farmacos. • Los medicamentos psicotropicos pueden interactuar con los farmacos utilizados para la COVID-19 y algunos de sus efectos adversos, especialmente los relacionados con la depresion respiratoria, pueden empeorar la evolucion de la infeccion. • No se ha encontrado asociacion entre el uso de inhibidores de la bomba de protones o anti-H2 y la aparicion de COVID-19. La evidencia actual no indica la necesidad de retirar el omeprazol en los casos con clara indicacion. • No hay evidencia cientifica que relacione el uso de antiinflamatorios no esteroideos (AINE) con el empeoramiento de la COVID-19, por lo que pueden usarse en el tratamiento sintomatico de la infeccion y/u otras comorbilidades asociadas. • No se deben interrumpir los tratamientos cronicos con AINE u opiaceos que estan bien indicados. Se recomienda elegir opioides con menos efecto inmunosupresor. • Durante la COVID-19 se recomienda suspender temporalmente los anticonceptivos y continuar con los anticoagulantes o antiagregantes que tomase previamente.

Background and Aim: Consensus has been reached on the need to integrate palliative care in the follow-up examinations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. We analyzed the survival from the initiation of follow-up by a palliative home care team (PHCT) and described the needs and end-of-life process. Setting and Design: This study was a prospective observational cohort study of advanced COPD patients referred to a PHCT. Sociodemographic variables, survival from the start date of follow-up using the Kaplan–Meier model, health resource consumption, perceived quality of life, main symptomatology, opioid use, and advanced care planning (ACP) were analyzed. Results: Sixty patients were included. The median survival was 8.3 months. Forty-two patients died at the end of the study (85% at home or in palliative care units). The most frequent cause of death was respiratory failure in 39 patients (93%), with 29 of these patients requiring sedation (69%). Dyspnea at rest, with an average of 5 (standard deviation [SD] 2) points, was the main symptom. Fifty-five patients (91%) required opioids for symptom control. The median score in the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire was 72 (SD 13). The mean number of visits by the home team was 7 (SD 6.5). The mean number of admissions during the monitoring period was 1.5 (SD 0.15). Conclusions: The characteristics of the cohort appear suitable for a PHCT. The follow-up care provided by our multidisciplinary unit decreased the number of hospitalizations, favored the development of ACP, and enabled death at home or in palliative care units.

Objective: To analyze trends in urinary tract infection hospitalization (cystitis, pyelonephritis, prostatitis and non-specified UTI) among patients over 65 years in Spain from 2000-2015. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study using the Spanish Hospitalization Minimum Data Set (CMBD), with codifications by the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9). We collected data on sex, age, type of discharge, main diagnosis, comorbid diagnosis, length of stay, and global cost. All the hospitalizations were grouped by age into three categories: 65-74 years old, 75-84 years old, and 85 years old and above. In the descriptive statistical analysis, crude rates were defined as hospitalizations per 1,000 inhabitants aged ≥65. To identify trends over time, we performed a Joinpoint regression. Results: From 2000-2015, we found 387,010 hospitalizations coded as UTIs (54,427 pyelonephritis, 15,869 prostatitis, 2643 cystitis and 314,071 non-specified UTI). The crude rate of hospitalization for UTIs between 2000 and 2015 ranged from 2.09 in 2000 to 4.33 in 2015 Rates of hospitalization were higher in men than in women, except with pyelonephritis. By age group, higher rates were observed in patients aged 85 years or older, barring prostatitis-related hospitalizations. Joinpoint analyses showed an average annual percentage increase (AAPC) in incidence rates of 4.9% (95% CI 3.2;6.1) in UTI hospitalizations. We observed two joinpoints, in 2010 and 2013, that found trends of 5.5% between 2000 and 2010 (95% CI 4.7;6.4), 1.5% between 2010 and 2013 (95% CI -6.0;9.6) and 6.8% between 2013 and 2015 (95% CI -0.3;14.4). Conclusions: The urinary infection-related hospitalization rate in Spain doubled during the period 2000-2015. The highest hospitalization rates occurred in men, in the ≥85 years old age group, and in non-specified UTIs. There were increases in all types of urinary tract infection, with non-specified UTIs having the greatest growth. Understanding these changing trends can be useful for health planning. This study has been funded by Instituto de Salud Carlos III through the project “PI19/01700”, as part of the Plan Estatal de I+D+I 2017-2020 co-funded by European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) “A way of shaping Europe”. In addition, the principal investigator JRS received support to increase his research activities and to publish this manuscript from the 2020 funding program of the Fundación de Investigación e Innovación Biosanitaria en Atención Primaria (FIIBAP), Community of Madrid. Sí

The trial was financed by Ministerio de Sanidad y Consumo Español through their call for independent clinical research, Orden Ministerial SAS/2377, 2010 (EC10-115, EC10-116, EC10-117, EC10-119, EC10-122); CAIBER—Spanish Clinical Research Network, Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII) (CAI08/010044); and Gerencia Asistencial de Atención Primaria de Madrid. This study is also supported by the Spanish Clinical Research Network (SCReN), funded by ISCIII-Subdirección General de Evaluación y Fomento de la Investigación, project number PT13/0002/0007, within the National Research Program I+D+I 2013-2016 and co-funded with European Union ERDF funds (European Regional Development Fund). This project received a grant for the translation and publication of this article from the Foundation for Biomedical Research and Innovation in Primary Care (FIIBAP) Call 2017 for grants to promote research programs. Objectives To compare the effectiveness of oral versus intramuscular (IM) vitamin B12 (VB12) in patients aged ≥65 years with VB12 deficiency. Design Pragmatic, randomised, non-inferiority, multicentre trial in 22 primary healthcare centres in Madrid (Spain). Participants 283 patients ≥65 years with VB12 deficiency were randomly assigned to oral (n=140) or IM (n=143) treatment arm. Interventions The IM arm received 1 mg VB12 on alternate days in weeks 1–2, 1 mg/week in weeks 3–8 and 1 mg/month in weeks 9–52. The oral arm received 1 mg/day in weeks 1–8 and 1 mg/week in weeks 9–52. Main outcomes Serum VB12 concentration normalisation (≥211 pg/mL) at 8, 26 and 52 weeks. Non-inferiority would be declared if the difference between arms is 10% or less. Secondary outcomes included symptoms, adverse events, adherence to treatment, quality of life, patient preferences and satisfaction. Results The follow-up period (52 weeks) was completed by 229 patients (80.9%). At week 8, the percentage of patients in each arm who achieved normal B12 levels was well above 90%; the differences in this percentage between the oral and IM arm were −0.7% (133 out of 135 vs 129 out of 130; 95% CI: −3.2 to 1.8; p>0.999) by per-protocol (PPT) analysis and 4.8% (133 out of 140 vs 129 out of 143; 95% CI: −1.3 to 10.9; p=0.124) by intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. At week 52, the percentage of patients who achieved normal B12 levels was 73.6% in the oral arm and 80.4% in the IM arm; these differences were −6.3% (103 out of 112 vs 115 out of 117; 95% CI: −11.9 to −0.1; p=0.025) and −6.8% (103 out of 140 vs 115 out of 143; 95% CI: −16.6 to 2.9; p=0.171), respectively. Factors affecting the success rate at week 52 were age, OR=0.95 (95% CI: 0.91 to 0.99) and having reached VB12 levels ≥281 pg/mL at week 8, OR=8.1 (95% CI: 2.4 to 27.3). Under a Bayesian framework, non-inferiority probabilities (Δ>−10%) at week 52 were 0.036 (PPT) and 0.060 (ITT). Quality of life and adverse effects were comparable across groups. 83.4% of patients preferred the oral route. Conclusions Oral administration was no less effective than IM administration at 8 weeks. Although differences were found between administration routes at week 52, the probability that the differences were below the non-inferiority threshold was very low. Publisher PDF

PURPOSE: Uncertainty exists regarding the best way to communicate cardiovascular risk (CVR) to patients, and it is unclear whether the comprehension and perception of CVR varies according to the format used. The aim of the present work was to determine whether a strategy designed for communicating CVR information to patients with poorly controlled high blood pressure (HBP), but with no background of cardiovascular disease, was more effective than usual care in the control of blood pressure (BP) over the course of a year. METHODS: A pragmatic, two-arm, cluster-randomized controlled trial was performed. Consecutive patients aged 40-65 years, all diagnosed with HBP in the last 12 months, and all of whom showed poor control of their condition (systolic BP ≥140 mmHg and/or diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg), were recruited at 22 primary healthcare centres. Eleven centres were randomly assigned to the usual care arm, and 11 to the informative intervention arm (Educore arm). At the start of the study, the Educore arm subjects were shown the "low risk SCORE table", along with impacting images and information pamphlets encouraging the maintenance of good cardiovascular health. The main outcome variable measured was the control of HBP; the secondary outcome variables were SCORE table score, total plasma cholesterol concentration, use of tobacco, adherence to prescribed treatment, and quality of life. RESULTS: The study participants were 411 patients (185 in the Educore arm and 226 in the usual care arm). Multilevel logistic regression showed that, at 12 months, the Educore intervention achieved better control of HBP (OR = 1.57; 1.02 to 2.41). No statistically significant differences were seen between the two arms at 12 months with respect to the secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to usual care, the Educore intervention was associated with better control of HBP after adjusting for age, baseline SBP and plasma cholesterol, at 12 months. This study was funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation via the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Subprograma de Proyectos de Investigación en Evaluación de Tecnologías Sanitarias y Servicios de Salud (PI 09/90354), and the Fundación de Investigación e Innovación Biomédica en Atención Primaria (FIIBAP). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript Sí

Background Perineal trauma pain is associated with perineal repair and its subsequent healing. New evidence is required concerning perineal repair techniques that cause less pain and favour healing. Objective To compare three perineal repair suturing techniques after episiotomy or second degree tearing during a normal birth with respect to reducing pain and improving the perineal healing process. Design A randomised controlled trial. Setting A large public university hospital in Madrid, Spain. Participants Full term pregnant women older than 18 years-of-age, who required perineal repair after episiotomy or second degree tearing and were attended for normal birth by midwives. Methods One hundred and eighty-three women were randomly assigned to three groups: the Continuous Suture Group (n = 58), Interrupted Cutaneous Suture Group (n = 53), or the Interrupted Subcutaneous Suture Group (n = 57). The study participants and data collectors were blinded to group allocations. Principal outcome: perineal pain 10 days after birth. Other outcomes: short (2 and 48 h) and long term (3 and 6 months) perineal pain after birth; short term healing; suture time. Results At 10 days postpartum, the presence of spontaneous pain, pain when walking or moving in bed, was almost nonexistent in the 3 suture groups. The median (P25-P75) perineal pain on palpation was similar in the 3 groups, with values of 2 (1–4) in the Continuous Suture Group, 3 (2–5) in the Interrupted Cutaneous Suture Group and 2 (1–4) in the Interrupted Subcutaneous Suture Group; also were similar the perineal pain on sitting: 1 (0–3) in the Continuous Suture Group, 1 (0–2) in the Interrupted Cutaneous Suture Group and 1 (0–3) in the Interrupted Subcutaneous Suture Group. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups. Pain measurements throughout the follow-up period only showed statistically significant differences in 2 out of 22 evaluations: pain when sitting 48 h after birth and spontaneous pain at 3 months. The mean times (standard deviation) to carry out suturing were 12.86 (4.9) minutes in the Continuous Suture Group, 13.54 (5.6) in the Interrupted Cutaneous Suture Group, and 15.59 (6.9) minutes in the Interrupted Subcutaneous Suture Group (p Conclusions The three suturing methods described for perineal repair after episiotomy or second degree tearing after normal birth are comparable with respect to short, medium and long term perineal pain and the healing process. Use of the continuous suturing technique involved less time than interrupted suture methods. Tweetable abstract: proper the suturing methods for perineal repair after episiotomy or second degree tearing prevent postpartum perineal pain.

Background Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a lung infection that can be acquired during day-to-day activities in the community (not while receiving care in a hospital). Community-acquired pneumonia poses a significant public health burden in terms of mortality, morbidity, and costs. Shorter antibiotic courses for CAP may limit treatment costs and adverse effects, but the optimal duration of antibiotic treatment is uncertain. Objectives To evaluate the efficacy and safety of short-course versus longer-course treatment with the same antibiotic at the same daily dosage for CAP in non-hospitalised adolescents and adults (outpatients). We planned to investigate non-inferiority of short-course versus longer-term course treatment for efficacy outcomes, and superiority of short-course treatment for safety outcomes. Search methods We searched CENTRAL, which contains the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases, and three trials registers on 28 September 2017 together with conference proceedings, reference checking, and contact with experts and pharmaceutical companies. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing short- and long-courses of the same antibiotic for CAP in adolescent and adult outpatients. Data collection and analysis We planned to use standard Cochrane methods. Main results Our searches identified 5260 records. We did not identify any RCTs that compared short- and longer-courses of the same antibiotic for the treatment of adolescents and adult outpatients with CAP.We excluded two RCTs that compared short courses (five compared to seven days) of the same antibiotic at the same daily dose because they evaluated antibiotics (gemifloxacin and telithromycin) not commonly used in practice for the treatment of CAP. In particular, gemifloxacin is no longer approved for the treatment of mild-to-moderate CAP due to its questionable risk-benefit balance, and reported adverse effects. Moreover, the safety profile of telithromycin is also cause for concern.We found one ongoing study that we will assess for inclusion in future updates of the review. Authors' conclusions We found no eligible RCTs that studied a short-course of antibiotic compared to a longer-course (with the same antibiotic at the same daily dosage) for CAP in adolescent and adult outpatients. The effects of antibiotic therapy duration for CAP in adolescent and adult outpatients remains unclear.

Objectives To determine quality control of patients with oral anticoagulant treatment recruited in Primary Care (PC) using the Rosendaal method to estimate time in therapeutic range (TTR) and comparing it with fraction of international normalized ratio (INR) in range and cross-sectional analysis (last INR registred). Material and method A retrospective observational study based on electronic medical record in routine clinical practice. Setting: PC centers (262) in Madrid. We included all patients with acenocumarol treatment, with an INR therapeutic range established between 2 and 3. We excluded patients with valvular pathology and disrupted clinical follow up in PC ( 90 days or ≥3 periods of >60 days between 2 determinations). The final population was 49,312 patients. The variables considered were all INR values and their respective dates. TTR was calculated by the 3 methods above mentioned. We considered “therapeutic range” INR between 2 and 3 and “adjusted range” INR between 1.8 and 3.2. Optimal control for each patient was considered TTR > 60%. Results By using Rosendaal method, TTR was 66.8% (81.7% adjusted), with a percentage of total INR in range was 58.8% (66.5% adjusted), and, with the cross-sectional analysis, it was 70.5% (76.8% adjusted). Mean TTR was 65% (standard deviation 20.3), and the percentage of patients with TTR > 60% was 63.3% (88.1% adjusted). Conclusion The quality control of patients with oral anticoagulants in PC in Madrid is acceptable, similar or higher to other studies and pivotal trials of new anticoagulants. Compared to the Rosendaal method, total fraction of INR underestimates quality control, and cross-sectional analysis slightly overestimates it.

Resumen Objetivos Conocer el grado de control de los pacientes en tratamiento con anticoagulantes orales atendidos en Atencion Primaria (AP) estimando el tiempo en rango terapeutico (TRT) segun el metodo de Rosendaal, y compararlo con el porcentaje de international normalized ratio (INR, «razon normalizada internacional») en rango y el analisis transversal (ultima INR). Material y metodo Estudio observacional retrospectivo con datos de la historia clinica electronica de todos los centros de AP (n = 262) de la Comunidad de Madrid. Se incluyeron todos los pacientes en tratamiento con acenocumarol con rango terapeutico de INR entre 2 y 3. Se excluyeron los pacientes con valvulopatias y aquellos con seguimiento discontinuo ( 90 dias o ≥ 3 periodos de > 60 dias entre 2 determinaciones). La poblacion final fue de 49.312. Las variables consideradas fueron todos los valores de INR y sus fechas respectivas. Se calculo el TRT por los 3 metodos referidos, considerando «rango terapeutico» valores de INR entre 2-3, y rango «ajustado» valores de INR entre 1,8-3,2. Consideramos «control optimo» en cada paciente si el TRT > 60%. Resultados El TRT por el metodo de Rosendaal fue del 66,8% (81,7% ajustado), el porcentaje de INR en rango, del 58,8% (66,5% ajustado), y el analisis transversal, del 70,5% (76,8% ajustado). La media (desviacion estandar) de los TRT por paciente fue del 65% (20,3), y el porcentaje de pacientes con un TRT > 60% fue del 63,3% (88,1% ajustado). Conclusion El grado de control de los pacientes anticoagulados en AP es aceptable, similar o superior respecto a otros estudios y a los ensayos pivotales de nuevos anticoagulantes. Comparados con el metodo de Rosendaal, el porcentaje total de INR infraestima el grado de control, y el analisis transversal lo sobrestima ligeramente.

ResumenObjetivoDeterminar la validez y utilidad del BNP en atención primaria para detectar la disfunción ventricular en pacientes asintomáticos con alto riesgo de insuficiencia cardiaca (IC).DiseñoEstudio descriptivo prospectivo y multicéntrico de validación de prueba diagnóstica.EmplazamientoConsultas de atención primaria de 7 centros de salud de la comunidad de Madrid.ParticipantesMuestra consecutiva de 204 pacientes asintomáticos con riesgo elevado de presentar IC (estadios A y B de la American Heart Association).Mediciones principalesSe recogieron datos de la anamnesis, exploración física, electrocardiograma, factores de riesgo de IC y tratamiento actual. Se determinó el BNP en sangre venosa en la propia consulta mediante Triage BNP Test® (Biosite®) realizándose en las siguientes 72h un ecocardiograma (prueba de referencia). Comparamos los niveles de BNP según presencia o ausencia de disfunción ventricular, tipo (sistólica/diastólica) y grado. Se calcularon la sensibilidad, especificidad y los valores predictivos para el mejor punto de corte en la curva ROC.ResultadosLos valores de BNP fueron más altos (p 96%).AbstractObjectiveThe aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of BNP test for early diagnosis of left ventricular dysfunction in patients at high-risk for heart failure.DesignCross-sectional descriptive study.Setting7 Primary Care Centres in Madrid (Spain).ParticipantsA consecutive sample of 204 consecutive asymptomatic patients with high risk for heart failure (Stages A-B, AHA/ACC Classification).Main measurementsBNP plasma levels were measured in the clinical setting using Triage BNP Test® (Biosite®) and an echocardiography was performed in the following 3 days in a single hospital unit as a reference standard. Plasma BNP levels were compared depending on the presence/absence of left ventricular dysfunction (LVD), type and severity degree. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and Área under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) for BNP assay were calculated.ResultsBNP values were significantly higher (P

Rifampicin is an essential drug in the present treatment of tuberculosis. On some occasions, it cannot be used due to severe adverse effects. Rifabutin is a drug of the same family, with a similar activity and difference adverse effects. This study describes the beneficial results of the substitution of rifampicin with rifabutin in patients with severe toxicity.

Background The oral administration of vitamin B12 offers a potentially simpler and cheaper alternative to parenteral administration, but its effectiveness has not been definitively demonstrated. The following protocol was designed to compare the effectiveness of orally and intramuscularly administered vitamin B12 in the treatment of patients ≥65 years of age with vitamin B12 deficiency. Methods/design The proposed study involves a controlled, randomised, multicentre, parallel, non-inferiority clinical trial lasting one year, involving 23 primary healthcare centres in the Madrid region (Spain), and patients ≥65 years of age. The minimum number of patients required for the study was calculated as 320 (160 in each arm). Bearing in mind an estimated 8-10% prevalence of vitamin B12 deficiency among the population of this age group, an initial sample of 3556 patients will need to be recruited. Eligible patients will be randomly assigned to one of the two treatment arms. In the intramuscular treatment arm, vitamin B12 will be administered as follows: 1 mg on alternate days in weeks 1 and 2, 1 mg/week in weeks 3–8,and 1 mg/month in weeks 9–52. In the oral arm, the vitamin will be administered as: 1 mg/day in weeks 1–8 and 1 mg/week in weeks 9–52. The main outcome variable to be monitored in both treatment arms is the normalisation of the serum vitamin B12 concentration at weeks 8, 26 and 52; the secondary outcome variables include the serum concentration of vitamin B12 (in pg/ml), adherence to treatment, quality of life (EuroQoL-5D questionnaire), patient 3satisfaction and patient preferences. All statistical tests will be performed with intention to treat and per protocol. Logistic regression with random effects will be used to adjust for prognostic factors. Confounding factors or factors that might alter the effect recorded will be taken into account in analyses. Discussion The results of this study should help establish, taking quality of life into account, whether the oral administration of vitamin B12 is an effective alternative to its intramuscular administration. If this administration route is effective, it should provide a cheaper means of treating vitamin B12 deficiency while inducing fewer adverse effects. Having such an alternative would also allow patient preferences to be taken into consideration at the time of prescribing treatment. Trial registration This trial has been registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT 01476007, and under EUDRACT number 2010-024129-20.

Background High blood pressure (HBP) is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). European hypertension and cardiology societies as well as expert committees on CVD prevention recommend stratifying cardiovascular risk using the SCORE method, the modification of lifestyles to prevent CVD, and achieving good control over risk factors. The EDUCORE (Education and Coronary Risk Evaluation) project aims to determine whether the use of a cardiovascular risk visual learning method - the EDUCORE method - is more effective than normal clinical practice in improving the control of blood pressure within one year in patients with poorly controlled hypertension but no background of CVD; Methods/Design This work describes a protocol for a clinical trial, randomised by clusters and involving 22 primary healthcare clinics, to test the effectiveness of the EDUCORE method. The number of patients required was 736, all between 40 and 65 years of age (n = 368 in the EDUCORE and control groups), all of whom had been diagnosed with HBP at least one year ago, and all of whom had poorly controlled hypertension (systolic blood pressure ≥ 140 mmHg and/or diastolic ≥ 90 mmHg). All personnel taking part were explained the trial and trained in its methodology. The EDUCORE method contemplates the visualisation of low risk SCORE scores using images embodying different stages of a high risk action, plus the receipt of a pamphlet explaining how to better maintain cardiac health. The main outcome variable was the control of blood pressure; secondary outcome variables included the SCORE score, therapeutic compliance, quality of life, and total cholesterol level. All outcome variables were measured at the beginning of the experimental period and again at 6 and 12 months. Information on sex, age, educational level, physical activity, body mass index, consumption of medications, change of treatment and blood analysis results was also recorded; Discussion The EDUCORE method could provide a simple, inexpensive means of improving blood pressure control, and perhaps other health problems, in the primary healthcare setting; Trial registration The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01155973 [http://ClinicalTrials.gov].

Using a decision-making and treatment checklist developed to facilitate the at-home palliative sedation process, we assessed the incidence and efficacy of palliative sedation for end-of-life cancer patients with intractable symptoms who died at home. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 370 patients who were followed by a palliative home care team. Twenty-nine of 245 patients (12%) who died at home had received palliative sedation. The mean age of the patients who received palliative sedation was 58 ± 17 years, and the mean age of the patients who did not receive palliative sedation was 69 ± 15 years (p = 0.002). No other differences were detected between patients who did or did not receive palliative sedation. The most common indications for palliative sedation were delirium (62%) and dyspnea (14%). Twenty-seven patients (93%) received midazolam for palliative sedation (final mean dose of 74 mg), and two (7%) received levomepromazine (final mean dose of 125 mg). The mean time between palliative sedation initiation and time of death was 2.6 days. In 13 of the cases (45%), the palliative sedation decision was made with the patient and his or her family members, and in another 13 patients (45%), the palliative sedation decision was made only with the patient’s family members. We concluded that palliative sedation may be used safely and efficaciously to treat dying cancer patients with refractory symptoms at home.

Background Different studies have investigated the effects that changes in drug appearance have on the control of chronic diseases and drug safety. The main objective of the proposed study is to evaluate if changes in the appearance of the packaging and presentation of drugs having the same active ingredient are related to a decrease in adherence and an increase in usage errors for chronic treatment using antihypertensive (enalapril and amlodipine) and hypolipidemic agents (simvastatin) in patients ≥65 years old, over a one-year follow-up period. Methods/Design We propose a multicentric observational longitudinal cohort study with a one-year follow-up period in 8 primary health care centers (PHCC) in the Community of Madrid. 259 patients who are ≥65 years old, hypertensive and/or dyslipidemic, undergoing treatment with enalapril and/or amlodipine and/or simvastatin, and under formal follow-up of chronic patients in primary health care will be selected by simple random sampling. The main outcome variable will be a final combined variable (adherence and medication usage errors). Other included variables will be: sociodemographic and clinical variables of the patient, degree of disease control, drug taken, number of changes in the appearance of each drug by the pharmacy, and the type and frequency of both avoidable and non-avoidable adverse effects during the follow-up period. A descriptive and a multivariate analysis of the variables will be carried out by means of a logistic regression model, using the final combined variable as the dependent variable (error and/or inadequate usage of the drug), and variables shown to be related to it during the bivariate analysis as the independent variables. Discussion For drugs of the same active ingredient, the effect that different package appearances and presentation may have on the safety of patients undergoing chronic treatments is unknown under the new legislative framework. There are various initiatives that promote the iso-appearance of drugs: “If they are the same, make them look the same”. It is to be expected that older, multi-medicated patients with chronic pathologies will be the ones under a greater risk of suffering from this problem.

Introduction: The acid-suppressive medications are used frequently in hospitalized patients, but some studies suggests that their are overused, especially in the treatment of stress ulcer prophylaxis in low-risk patients. This research determine the frequency of use and indications of acid-suppressive medications in hospitalized patients in a internal medical service. Materials and methods: A at random and retrospective revision of 209 medical records of 661 hospitalized patients during the year 2000 in the V Internal Medical Service of the General University Hospital of Gregorio Maranon (Cantoblanco). Definitions: Use: any prescription of an acid-suppressive medication, regardless of dosage regimen, in which the patient received at least one dose. Appropriated indication: endoscopical criteria: treatment of active ulcer disease, esophagitis or gastritis. Medical criteria: symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux, dyspepsia, prolonging of previous treatment, as a part of a treatment regimen for H. pylori, relief of dyspepsia caused by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, stress ulcer prophylaxis in high risk patients. Inappropriate indication: any other uses were considered not indicated. Results: Of the 209 patients, a total of 157 (75,1%) received acidsuppressive therapy, average age 76 years old, 89 women (56,7%) and 68 men (43,3%). The admitting diagnoses for the admission were: CHF 34 (21,7%), Pneumonia ( 16,6%), UTI (15,3%) y COPD 18 (11,5%). The use in hospital ward was 84,7% (133), with inappropriate use 72,2% (96), the cause of prescription “no reason” 52,1% (50), and received proton pump inhibitors 46, 9% (45). Conclusions: This study show a high frequency of incorrect use of acid-suppressive medications in hospitalized patients.

Background Vaginitis is a common complaint in primary care. In uncomplicated candidal vaginitis, there are no differences in effectiveness between oral or vaginal treatment. Some studies describe that the preferred treatment is the oral one, but a Cochrane's review points out inconsistencies associated with the report of the preferred way that limit the use of such data. Risk factors associated with recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis still remain controversial. Methods/Design This work describes a protocol of a multicentric prospective observational study with one year follow up, to describe the women's reasons and preferences to choose the way of administration (oral vs topical) in the treatment of not complicated candidal vaginitis. The number of women required is 765, they are chosen by consecutive sampling. All of whom are aged 16 and over with vaginal discharge and/or vaginal pruritus, diagnosed with not complicated vulvovaginitis in Primary Care in Madrid. The main outcome variable is the preferences of the patients in treatment choice; secondary outcome variables are time to symptoms relief and adverse reactions and the frequency of recurrent vulvovaginitis and the risk factors. In the statistical analysis, for the main objective will be descriptive for each of the variables, bivariant analysis and multivariate analysis (logistic regression).. The dependent variable being the type of treatment chosen (oral or topical) and the independent, the variables that after bivariant analysis, have been associated to the treatment preference. Discussion Clinical decisions, recommendations, and practice guidelines must not only attend to the best available evidence, but also to the values and preferences of the informed patient.