Search

Expert recommendation; Patient-reported outcomes; Quality in healthcare Recomendación experta; Resultados informados por el paciente; Calidad en la asistencia sanitaria Recomanació experta; Resultats informats pel pacient; Qualitat en l'assistència sanitària Objectives Value-based healthcare (VBHC) aims at improving patient outcomes while optimizing the use of hospitals’ resources among medical personnel, administrations, and support services through an evidence-based, collaborative approach. In this article, we present a blueprint for the implementation of VBHC in hospitals, based on our experience as members of the European University Hospital Alliance. Methods The European University Hospital Alliance is a consortium of 9 large hospitals in Europe and aims at increasing the quality and efficiency of care to ultimately drive better outcomes for patients. Results The blueprint describes how to prepare hospitals for VBHC implementation; analyzes gaps, barriers, and facilitators; and explores the most effective ways to turn patient pathways into a process that results in high-value care. Using a patient-centric approach, we identified 4 core minimum components that must be established as cornerstones and 7 organizational enablers to waive the barriers to implementation and ensure sustainability. Conclusion The blueprint guides through pathway implementation and establishment of key performance indicators in 6 phases, which hospitals can tailor to their current status on their way to implement VBHC.

Resumen: Objetivo: Describir el proceso de traducción y adaptación transcultural de la escala Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25 (HSCL-25) al español, catalán y gallego. Diseño: Traducción, adaptación transcultural y análisis de la comprensibilidad mediante entrevistas cognitivas. Emplazamiento: Unidades de Investigación de Atención Primaria de Barcelona y Vigo. Participantes: Médicos de familia y pacientes de Atención Primaria. Mediciones principales: Siguiendo las guías de la International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR), se realizaron: 1) traducción directa; 2) estudio piloto basado en metodología Delphi con médicos de familia; 3) retrotraducción; 4) análisis de equivalencias; 5) análisis de comprensibilidad de las versiones obtenidas en español, catalán y gallego mediante entrevista cognitiva en una muestra de pacientes, y 6) armonización transcultural. Resultados: En el estudio Delphi participaron 73 médicos de familia. El consenso se estableció en la primera ronda para la traducción española y catalana, y en la segunda ronda para la gallega. Las retrotraducciones fueron similares en los 3 idiomas. Todas las versiones fueron equivalentes entre ellas y respecto a la versión original inglesa. En la entrevista cognitiva participaron 10 pacientes por cada idioma, sin que se modificara la redacción de los ítems. Conclusiones: Las traducciones de la escala HSCL-25 en español, catalán y gallego son equivalentes semántica y conceptualmente a la versión original. Las traducciones son comprensibles y bien aceptadas por los pacientes. Abstract: Aim: To describe the translation and cross-cultural adaptation process of the Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25 (HSCL-25) scale into Spanish, Catalan and Galician. Design: Translation, cross-cultural adaption and comprehensibility analysis through cognitive debriefing. Location: Research Units of Primary Care in Barcelona and Vigo. Participants: Family doctors and Primary Care patients. Main measurements: Following the guidelines of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR): 1) Direct translation. 2) Pilot study based on Delphi methodology with family doctors. 3) Back-translation. 4) Equivalence analysis. 5) Comprehension analysis of versions obtained in Spanish, Catalan and Galician through cognitive debriefing in a sample of patients. 6) Transcultural harmonization. Results: 73 family doctors participated in the Delphi study. The consensus was established in the first round for the Spanish and Catalan translations, and in the second round for the Galician. The back-translations were similar in all 3 languages. All versions were equivalent between them and compared to the original English version. In the cognitive interview, 10 patients participated for each language, without modifying the writing of the items. Conclusions: The translations of the HSCL-25 scale in Spanish, Catalan and Galician are semantically and conceptually equivalent to the original version. Translations are understandable and well accepted by patients.

Background Accurate risk adjustment is crucial for healthcare management and benchmarking. Purpose We aimed to compare the performance of classic comorbidity functions (Charlson's and Elixhauser's), of the All Patients Refined Diagnosis Related Groups (APR-DRG), and of the Queralt Indices, a family of novel, comprehensive comorbidity indices for the prediction of key clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients. Material and Methods We conducted an observational, retrospective cohort study using administrative healthcare data from 156,459 hospital discharges in Catalonia (Spain) during 2018. Study outcomes were in-hospital death, long hospital stay, and intensive care unit (ICU) stay. We evaluated the performance of the following indices: Charlson's and Elixhauser's functions, Queralt's Index for secondary hospital discharge diagnoses (Queralt DxS), the overall Queralt's Index, which includes pre-existing comorbidities, in-hospital complications, and principal discharge diagnosis (Queralt Dx), and the APR-DRG. Discriminative ability was evaluated using the area under the curve (AUC), and measures of goodness of fit were also computed. Subgroup analyses were conducted by principal discharge diagnosis, by age, and type of admission. Results Queralt DxS provided relevant risk adjustment information in a larger number of patients compared to Charlson's and Elixhauser's functions, and outperformed both for the prediction of the 3 study outcomes. Queralt Dx also outperformed Charlson's and Elixhauser's indices, and yielded superior predictive ability and goodness of fit compared to APR-DRG (AUC for in-hospital death 0.95 for Queralt Dx, 0.77-0.93 for all other indices; for ICU stay 0.84 for Queralt Dx, 0.73-0.83 for all other indices). The performance of Queralt DxS was at least as good as that of the APR-DRG in most principal discharge diagnosis subgroups. Conclusion Our findings suggest that risk adjustment should go beyond pre-existing comorbidities and include principal discharge diagnoses and in-hospital complications. Validation of comprehensive risk adjustment tools such as the Queralt indices in other settings is needed.

Background The 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) has caused an outbreak of the disease now officially named coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Since then, all hospitals have required a complete restructuring of their usual facilities and the treatments provided. Our goal was to detail the remodeling of a tertiary hospital during the COVID-19 outbreak and analyze pitfalls to avoid increasing surgical department burdens. Methods This was a retrospective analysis of data affecting patients during their admission in our institution during March 2020. Data from general admission, intensive care units, and elective and emergency surgeries were collected and analyzed. All patients who underwent a surgical procedure were reviewed to elucidate limitations in the deployment of the hospital transformation to a COVID-19 hospital. Results A total of 688 patients have been treated in our institution. Of those, 186 required intensive care. More than 120 new intensive care beds have been created during this period, and a decrease in elective surgeries of more than 75% was observed. Inadvertent COVID-19 patients accounted for 70%. Thirty percent of the patients who underwent surgery while infected with COVID-19 died in our institution. Conclusions The complete reorganization of surgical departments will be requested during the outbreak and adaptive solutions are needed in order to avoid increased mortality rates and infection among patients and to promote maximal optimization of surgical spaces. Timing, governmental decisions, and scientific society’s recommendations may be limitations in the efficient deployment of hospital transformations to COVID-19 facilities.

Background Severe aortic stenosis (AoS) is considered a primary cause of syncope. However, other mechanisms may be present in these patients and accurate diagnosis can have important clinical implications. The aim of this study is to assess the different etiologies of syncope in patients with severe AoS and the impact on prognosis of attaining a certain or highly probable diagnosis for the syncope. Methods Out of a cohort of 331 patients with AoS and syncope, 61 had severe AoS and were included in the study. Main cause of syncope and adverse cardiac events were assessed. Results In 40 patients (65.6%), we reached a certain or highly probable diagnosis of the main cause of the syncope. AoS was considered the primary cause of the syncope in only 7 patients (17.5% of the patients with known etiology). Atrioventricular block (14 patients, 35.0%) and vasovagal syncope (6 patients, 15.0%) were the most frequently diagnosed causes. The presence of a known cause for syncope during the admission was not associated with a lower incidence of recurrence during follow-up (hazard ratio [HR] 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-2.40). Syncope of unknown etiology was independently associated with greater mortality during 1-year follow-up (HR 5.4, 95% CI 1.3-21.6) and 3-year follow-up (HR 3.5, 95% CI 1.2-10.3). Conclusions In a high proportion of patients with severe AoS admitted for syncope, the valvulopathy was not the main cause of the syncope. Syncope in two-thirds of this population was caused by either bradyarrhythmia or reflex causes. Syncope of unknown cause was associated with increased short- and medium-term mortality, independently from treatment of the valve disease. An exhaustive work-up should be conducted to determine the main cause for syncope.

Objetivo Describir el proceso de traducción y adaptación transcultural de la escala Hopkins Symptom Checklist-25 (HSCL-25) al español, catalán y gallego. Diseño Traducción, adaptación transcultural y análisis de la comprensibilidad mediante entrevistas cognitivas. Emplazamiento Unidades de Investigación de Atención Primaria de Barcelona y Vigo. Participantes Médicos de familia y pacientes de Atención Primaria. Mediciones principales Siguiendo las guías de la International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR), se realizaron: 1) traducción directa; 2) estudio piloto basado en metodología Delphi con médicos de familia; 3) retrotraducción; 4) análisis de equivalencias; 5) análisis de comprensibilidad de las versiones obtenidas en español, catalán y gallego mediante entrevista cognitiva en una muestra de pacientes, y 6) armonización transcultural. Resultados En el estudio Delphi participaron 73 médicos de familia. El consenso se estableció en la primera ronda para la traducción española y catalana, y en la segunda ronda para la gallega. Las retrotraducciones fueron similares en los 3 idiomas. Todas las versiones fueron equivalentes entre ellas y respecto a la versión original inglesa. En la entrevista cognitiva participaron 10 pacientes por cada idioma, sin que se modificara la redacción de los ítems. Conclusiones Las traducciones de la escala HSCL-25 en español, catalán y gallego son equivalentes semántica y conceptualmente a la versión original. Las traducciones son comprensibles y bien aceptadas por los pacientes.

Background and Aim The vaccination against hepatitis B virus (HBV) is recommended in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, the response to this vaccine seems to be lower in IBD patients than in the general population. This study aims to evaluate the immunogenicity of the HBV vaccine in a cohort of patients with IBD, to associate factors with the response and to analyze the effects of a second schedule vaccination. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults with IBD, susceptible to HBV infection. All patients received a three-dose standard schedule of HBV vaccine. Non-responders were revaccinated with a second three-dose standard schedule. Adequate immunity to HBV was defined as antibodies against hepatitis B surface antigen (anti-HBs) ≥ 10 mIU/mL. Age, comorbidities, treatment, and other variables were collected. Results One hundred seventy-two patients were included and received the first HBV vaccine schedule. Eighty-seven developed anti-HBs ≥ 10 mIU/mL (50.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 42.9–58.3). From the non-responders, 53 were revaccinated and 28 showed an adequate serological response (52.8%; 95% CI: 38.6–66.7). Age older than 55 years (OR: 3.6; 95% CI: 1.3–10.2) and comorbidities (OR: 2.8; 95% CI: 1.1–7.1) were associated with suboptimal response. In the multivariate analysis, only age was a predictor of non-response (age higher than 55 years; OR: 3.9; 95% CI: 1.3–11.9) Conclusion The response rate to the HBV vaccine is lower in patients with IBD compared with the general population, especially in those older than 55 years. Revaccination improved response rate by 50%.

The vaccination against hepatitis B virus (HBV) is recommended in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, the response to this vaccine seems to be lower in IBD patients than in the general population. This study aims to evaluate the immunogenicity of the HBV vaccine in a cohort of patients with IBD, to associate factors with the response and to analyze the effects of a second schedule vaccination.We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults with IBD, susceptible to HBV infection. All patients received a three-dose standard schedule of HBV vaccine. Non-responders were revaccinated with a second three-dose standard schedule. Adequate immunity to HBV was defined as antibodies against hepatitis B surface antigen (anti-HBs) ≥ 10 mIU/mL. Age, comorbidities, treatment, and other variables were collected.One hundred seventy-two patients were included and received the first HBV vaccine schedule. Eighty-seven developed anti-HBs ≥ 10 mIU/mL (50.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 42.9-58.3). From the non-responders, 53 were revaccinated and 28 showed an adequate serological response (52.8%; 95% CI: 38.6-66.7). Age older than 55 years (OR: 3.6; 95% CI: 1.3-10.2) and comorbidities (OR: 2.8; 95% CI: 1.1-7.1) were associated with suboptimal response. In the multivariate analysis, only age was a predictor of non-response (age higher than 55 years; OR: 3.9; 95% CI: 1.3-11.9) CONCLUSION: The response rate to the HBV vaccine is lower in patients with IBD compared with the general population, especially in those older than 55 years. Revaccination improved response rate by 50%.