Search

Aging, multimorbidity, and polypharmacy are associated with medication-related problems (MRPs). This study aimed to assess the association that multimorbidity and mortality have with MRPs in older people over time. We followed multimorbid, older (65–99 years) people in Catalonia from 2012 to 2016, using longitudinal data and Cox models to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HR). We reviewed electronic health records to collect explanatory variables and MRPs (duplicate therapy, drug–drug interactions, potentially inappropriate medications (PIM), and contraindicated drugs in chronic kidney disease (CKD) or liver disease). There were 723,016 people (median age: 74 years, 58.9% women) who completed follow-up. We observed a significant (p &lt, 0.001) increase in the proportion with at least one MRP (2012: 66.9% to 2016: 75.5%), contraindicated drugs in CKD (11.1 to 18.5%) and liver disease (3.9 to 5.3%), and PIMs (62.5 to 71.1%), especially drugs increasing fall risk (67.5%). People with ≥10 diseases had more MRPs (in 2016: PIMs, 89.6%, contraindicated drugs in CKD, 34.4%, and in liver disease, 9.3%). All MRPs were independently associated with mortality, from duplicate therapy (HR 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04–1.08) to interactions (HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.54–1.66). Ensuring safe pharmacological treatment in elderly, multimorbid patient remains a challenge for healthcare systems.

Altres ajuts: Department of Health of the Catalan Government/SLT002/16/00058 The aim of this study was to determine medication-related problems (MRPs) in primary care patients over 65 years of age. Cross-sectional study based on the electronic health records of patients (65-99 years of age) visited in 284 primary health care centers during 2012 in Catalonia. Variables: age, sex, sociodemographic variables, number of drugs, kidney and liver function and MRPs (duplicate therapy, drug-drug interactions, potentially inappropriate medications [PIMs] and drugs contraindicated in chronic kidney disease and in liver diseases). Unconditional logistic regression models were used to identify the factors associated with MRPs in patients with multimorbidity. 916 619 older people were included and 853 085 of them met the criteria for multimorbidity. Median age was 75 years and 57.7% of them were women. High percentages of MRPs were observed: PIMs (62.8%), contraindicated drugs in chronic kidney disease (12.1%), duplicate therapy (11.1%), contraindicated drugs in liver diseases (4.2%), and drug-drug interactions (1.0%). These numbers were higher in the subgroup of patients with ≥10 diseases. The most common PIMs were connected to drugs that increase the risk of fall (66.8%), antiulcer agents without criteria for gastroprotection (40.6%), and the combination of drugs with anticholinergic effects (39.7%). In the multivariate analysis, the variables associated with all MRPs among the patients with multimorbidity were the number of drugs and the number of visits. The coexistence of multimorbidity and polypharmacy is associated with an elevated risk of MRPs in older people. Medication safety for older patients constitutes a pressing concern for health services.

Los instrumentos de ayuda a la toma de decisiones tienen como objetivo presentar las diferentes opciones terapeuticas disponibles, sus resultados y favorecer la discusion sobre estos para que los pacientes puedan tomar una decision informada sobre su tratamiento. Este articulo revisa que son los instrumentos de ayuda a la toma de decisiones, cual es su papel, que han demostrado y las dificultades para su implementacion en la practica clinica.

ResumenObjetivoObtener versiones adaptadas para la población española de una versión específica del Illness Perception Questionnaire Revised (IPQ-Re) y el Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (BIPQ), conceptual y lingüísticamente equivalentes a los originales.DiseñoAdaptación cultural de cuestionarios: validación lingüística.EmplazamientoCinco equipos de atención primaria y un hospital de tercer nivel.ParticipantesSe seleccionó un equipo investigador multidisciplinario. Se realizó un estudio piloto en 30 pacientes con enfermedades crónicas (hipertensión, diabetes mellitus tipo 2, cardiopatía isquémica estable, asma, enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica o artrosis).MétodoSe procedió en 3 fases: I) doble traducción, II) estudio piloto y III) doble retrotraducción. Se realizaron 3 reuniones de consenso, una en cada fase y otra con uno de los autores del cuestionario original. En esta última se conoció el BIPQ, una versión reducida del IPQ-R. Se decidió incluir su validación realizando una doble traducción, doble retrotraducción y consenso en ambas etapas.ResultadosFase I) La mayoría de ítems del IPQ-Re no planteó problemas de traducción. Fase II) En el estudio piloto se detectaron algunas dificultades para la autoadministración y la comprensión de algunos ítems. Se decidió disponer de entrevistadores entrenados, introducir cambios en el vocabulario y formato del cuestionario y adaptar una versión específica con menor cantidad de ítems, que solventaba gran parte de las dificultades encontradas. Fase III) Las retrotraducciones fueron muy similares al cuestionario original. El proceso de traducción-retrotraducción del BIPQ no presentó dificultades.ConclusionesTras la validación lingüística del IPQ-Re y del BIPQ, se obtuvieron versiones conceptual y lingüísticamente equivalentes a los cuestionarios originales.AbstractObjectiveTo obtain adapted versions for the Spanish population of a specific version of the Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire Revised (IPQ-Re) and the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (BIPQ), conceptually and linguistically equivalent to the original questionnaires.DesignCultural adaptation of questionnaires: linguistic validation.SettingFive primary care centres and a tertiary hospital.ParticipantsA multidisciplinary team was selected. A pilot study was performed on 30 people with chronic diseases (hypertension, diabetes mellitus, stable ischaemic heart disease, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or osteoarthritis)MethodThe project proceeded in 3 phases: I) Double forward-translation, II) Pilot study and III) Double back-translation. Three consensus meetings were held, one in each phase. Another meeting was held with one of the authors of the original questionnaire, where we knew about a short version, the BIPQ. It was also included in the study. Double forward and back-translations were performed and consensus was reached in both stages.ResultsPhase I) The majority of IPQ-Re items did not raise problems of translation. Phase II) In the pilot study we detected that patients found some difficulties in connection with the comprehension and self administration of some items. Therefore it was decided to employ trained interviewers, to introduce changes in the IPQ-Re format and vocabulary and to adapt a specific version with fewer items that solved most of these difficulties Phase III) Back-translations were very similar to the original version. The BIPQ forward and back-translation process caused no difficulties.ConclusionsAfter lingüistic validation, IPQ-Re and BIPQ versions conceptually and lingüistically equivalent to original instruments were obtained.

ObjetivoValorar la adecuación de la prescripción de antiinflamatorios no esteroideos (AINE) y la gastroprotección asociada a su uso.DiseñoEstudio descriptivo, transversal.EmplazamientoCentro de Atención Primaria de La Mina (Barcelona).ParticipantesDe las 4.054 personas con prescripción de AINE, se seleccionó una muestra aleatoria estratificada por facultative de 500 pacientes.Mediciones principalesLas variables dependientes fueron la adecuación de la prescripción de AINE y gastroprotección. Las variables independientes fueron: edad, sexo, enfermedades previas, tratamientos concomitantes, tipo y número de AINE, motivo y tipo de prescripción del AINE. Las variables se recogieron de la historia clínica.ResultadosSe incluyó a 476 pacientes con prescripción de AINE. El 63,4% eran mujeres y la media ± desviación estándar de edad fue 47,9 ± 18,1 años. Los AINE más prescritos fueron ibuprofeno (60,3%), diclofenaco (23,1%) y naproxeno (4%). El motivo de prescripción más frecuente fue la afección del aparato locomotor (45,4%). Las prescripciones fueron adecuadas en el 44,7% (intervalo de confianza [IC] del 95%, 40,2- 49,3) e inadecuadas en el 23,5% (IC del 95%, 19,8-27,6). La inadecuación en mayores de 65 años fue del 49,5%, mientras que en menores de 65 años fue del 15,6%. La gastroprotección fue inadecuada en el 28,2% (IC del 95%, 22,7-35,7); el 12,8% por exceso y el 16% por defecto. En el análisis multivariable, la probabilidad de inadecuación de los AINE es 5,45 veces mayor en los pacientes de 65 años o más que en los menores.ConclusionesLa prescripción de AINE y la gastroprotección pueden considerarse inadecuadas en una cuarta parte de los pacientes. La edad avanzada es el principal factor de riesgo de prescripción inadecuada.ObjectiveTo assess whether prescribing non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is adequate for gastrointestinal protection associated with NSAID use.DesignCross-sectional descriptive study.SettingPrimary Care Centre in La Mina, Barcelona, Spain.ParticipantsA random sample of 500 patients, stratified by doctor was selected from a total of 4504 patients with an NSAID prescription.Main measurementsThe dependent variables were the adequacy of NSAID prescription and gastrointestinal protection. The independent variables were: age, sex, concomitant treatments, type and number of NSAIDs. The variables were collected from the clinical history.ResultsThe 476 patients included with an NSAID prescription had a mean age of 47.9 (18.1) years, and 63.4% were women. The NSAIDs most prescribed were, ibuprofen (60.3%), diclofenac (23.1%), and naproxen (4.0%). The most common reason for prescribing the NSAID was locomotor system pathology; 45.4%. The prescription was adequate in 44.7% (95% CI, 40.2-49.3), and inadequate in 23.5% (95% CI, 19.8- 27.6). It was inadequate in 49.5% of patients over 65 years, while in under 65 year-olds 16.5% were inadequate. Gastrointestinal protection was inadequate in 28.2% (95% CI, 22.7-35.7); 12.8% excessive and 16% insufficient. In the multivariate analysis, the inadequacy probability of NSAIDs is 5.45 times greater in patients of 65 or more years than in younger patients.ConclusionsNSAID prescribing and gastrointestinal protection can be considered to be inadequate in 25% of patients. Advanced age is a major risk factor in inadequate prescribing.

BACKGROUND Although there is a great concern regarding rational use of drugs, the available evidence for the most appropriate strategies to improve prescribing is scarce. GOAL The goal of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the combination of feedback of individualized prescribing data and educational recommendations for improving the quality of prescribing in general practice. METHOD A quasiexperimental intervention study was conducted in which prescribing rates of 282 family physicians before and after the intervention were compared. Physicians assigned to the individualized feedback group (n = 195) received individual instruction with specific recommendations for improvement according to their baseline prescribing quality levels, whereas physicians in the minimal intervention group (n = 87) only received standard nonindividualized prescribing data for the practice group as a whole. RESULTS A trend toward increasing high pharmacologic intrinsic value in both groups was observed. Overprescription of antibiotics showed a decrease in the individualized feedback group (P = 0.006) and it did not change in the minimal intervention group. A different trend in the values in each group was observed with nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, although it was not statistically significant. Overprescription of antiulcerative agents decreased among physicians in the individualized feedback group (P = 0.003); however, there were not statistically significant differences as compared with the minimal intervention group. Changes in indicators of drug selection were more favorable for the group with individualized feedback, although no statistically significant differences were observed. Pharmaceutical expenditure increased significantly in the minimal intervention group as compared with the individualized feedback group, with an approximate difference of dollars 7.87 per inhabitant and trimester (P = 0.003). CONCLUSION The intervention showed that improving the quality of prescribing was feasible, particularly in overprescribing, and was associated with considerable savings in pharmaceutical costs.

To compare the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) and vascular events, between patients treated and untreated with antipsychotic drugs.A cross-sectional study was done in Barcelona. We compared patients attended in Primary Health Care Centres, treated with or without antipsychotics between 2008 and 2010. Anthropometric measurements, clinical variables, and CVRF were assessed. Adult and elderly patients, typical and atypical antipsychotics, were studied separately.14,087 patients had been prescribed antipsychotics (63.4% atypical), the most common being risperidone. We selected 13,724 patients with the same age and gender but not treated (total of 27,811 patients). Patients receiving antipsychotic had higher prevalence of obesity (16.9% vs. 11.9%), smoking (22.2% vs. 11.1%), diabetes mellitus (16% vs. 11.9%), and dyslipidemia (32.8% vs. 25.8%) (p0.001). The prevalence of stroke was significantly higher in the treated patients, both in adults (odds ratio = 2.33) and the elderly (odds ratio = 1.64). The prevalence of coronary heart disease was similar in both groups (odds ratio = 0.97). Among patients treated with antipsychotic, differences were not observed depending typical or atypical ones.Patients treated with antipsychotic drugs had a greater prevalence of several CVRF (diabetes mellitus, obesity, and smoking). The presence of stroke was higher in those treated with antipsychotics. No relevant differences were observed between patients receiving typical or atypical antipsychotics.Factores de riesgo cardiovascular en el tratamiento cronico con antipsicoticos en atencion primaria.Objetivo. Comparar la prevalencia de factores de riesgo cardiovascular (FRCV) y eventos vasculares en pacientes tratados con antipsicoticos, comparandolos con los no tratados. Sujetos y metodos. Estudio descriptivo transversal de pacientes atendidos en atencion primaria de la ciudad de Barcelona y tratados con antipsicoticos entre el 2008 y el 2010, comparandolos con una poblacion no tratada. Se registraron las variables antropometricas y clinicas y los FRCV. Se estudio por separado a pacientes adultos y ancianos, y a los tratados con antipsicoticos tipicos y atipicos. Resultados. Un total de 14.087 pacientes habian sido tratados con antipsicoticos (63,4% atipicos). El mas prescrito fue la risperidona. Se aparejaron 13.724 pacientes de la misma edad y genero, pero no tratados (n total = 27.811). Los tratados con antipsicoticos presentaron una prevalencia superior de obesidad (16,9% frente a 10,6%), tabaquismo (22,2% frente a 11,1%), diabetes mellitus (16% frente a 11,9%) y dislipemia (32,8% frente a 25,8%) (p0,001). La prevalencia de accidente vascular cerebral fue significativamente superior entre los tratados, tanto en los adultos (odds ratio = 2,33) como en los ancianos (odds ratio = 1,64). La prevalencia de cardiopatia isquemica fue similar en ambos grupos (odds ratio = 0,97). No se observaron diferencias significativas entre los tratados con un antipsicotico tipico o atipico. Conclusiones. Los pacientes tratados con antipsicoticos presentaron una mayor prevalencia de FRCV (diabetes, obesidad y tabaquismo). La presencia de ictus fue superior entre los tratados con antipsicoticos. No se detectaron diferencias importantes entre los pacientes tratados con antipsicoticos tipicos y atipicos.

El diseño de las políticas farmacéuticas busca un equilibrio entre proporcionar el mayor grado de acceso a los medicamentos a aquellas personas que los necesiten, promover la innovación terapéutica y al mismo tiempo limitar el crecimiento del gasto público. En el marco de las políticas sanitarias promovidas por la Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico (OCDE), la orientación general de la revisión de la oferta de servicios públicos está dirigida a promover aquellas políticas que aporten valor en relación con el coste que suponen para la sociedad1. Por ello, el contexto actual de crisis económica obliga a reflexionar acerca de la «desinversión en tecnologías sanitarias», es decir, sobre la posible exclusión, parcial o total, de la financiación pública de aquellas tecnologías de escaso valor clínico con el objetivo de maximizar la eficiencia de los servicios sanitarios.

OBJECTIVE: To obtain adapted versions for the Spanish population of a specific version of the Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire Revised (IPQ-R(e)) and the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (BIPQ), conceptually and linguistically equivalent to the original questionnaires. DESIGN: Cultural adaptation of questionnaires: linguistic validation. SETTING: Five primary care centres and a tertiary hospital. PARTICIPANTS: A multidisciplinary team was selected. A pilot study was performed on 30 people with chronic diseases (hypertension, diabetes mellitus, stable ischaemic heart disease, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or osteoarthritis) METHOD: The project proceeded in 3 phases: I) Double forward-translation, II) Pilot study and III) Double back-translation. Three consensus meetings were held, one in each phase. Another meeting was held with one of the authors of the original questionnaire, where we knew about a short version, the BIPQ. It was also included in the study. Double forward and back-translations were performed and consensus was reached in both stages. RESULTS: Phase I) The majority of IPQ-R(e) items did not raise problems of translation. Phase II) In the pilot study we detected that patients found some difficulties in connection with the comprehension and self administration of some items. Therefore it was decided to employ trained interviewers, to introduce changes in the IPQ-R(e) format and vocabulary and to adapt a specific version with fewer items that solved most of these difficulties Phase III) Back-translations were very similar to the original version. The BIPQ forward and back-translation process caused no difficulties. CONCLUSIONS: After lingüistic validation, IPQ-R(e) and BIPQ versions conceptually and lingüistically equivalent to original instruments were obtained.

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of a healthcare education program for patients with hypertension. Methods: A multicenter, prospective, cluster-randomized trial was conducted. Randomization was by primary care center; 18 of 36 urban primary care centers in Barcelona and its metropolitan area were randomized to the intervention group (IG) and 18 to the control group (CG). The study sample consisted of patients with hypertension (n = 996; 515 in the IG and 481 in the CG) receiving outpatient treatment with antihypertensive drugs. The intervention consisted of personalized information by a trained nurse and written leaflets. Questionnaires on knowledge and awareness of hypertension and its medication, treatment adherence, healthy lifestyle habits, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and body mass index were assessed at each visit, with a 12-month follow-up. An intention-to-treat analysis was applied. Results: Knowledge of hypertension increased by 27.8% in the IG and by 18.5% in the CG, while that of medication increased by 10.1% in the IG and 5.5% in the CG. Treatment adherence measured by the Morisky-Green test increased by 9.6% (95% CI: 5.5–13.6) in the IG and 8.8% (95% CI: 4.9-12.6) in the CG. There were no differences in adherence on the other tests used. No differences were observed between the IG and CG in clinical variables such as blood pressure or BMI at the end of the trial. Conclusions: The educational intervention had no significant impact on patients’ adherence to the medication.

l m m n e n d d p d i t p t e n a c r a n Dificilmente podemos analizar los avances observados en los sistemas sanitarios en las ultimas decadas sin tener en cuenta el impacto de las innovaciones en medicamentos. Sin embargo, en los ultimos anos se ha observado un descenso significativo en el numero de nuevos medicamentos aprobados. Por ejemplo, la FDA ha pasado de aprobar una media de 37,2 nuevos medicamentos anuales entre 1995 y 1999, a 22,6 durante el periodo 2005-20091. Por otro lado, el coste del desarrollo de nuevos farmacos es muy elevado, con estimaciones que varian entre 800 y 1.350 millones de dolares, aunque podria ser incluso superior2. Obviamente, estos datos plantean una discusion sobre las tendencias de desarrollo de la innovacion en medicamentos, su eficacia y su viabilidad, pero tambien obligan a discutir el sentido de la innovacion y, en este sentido, desde la perspectiva de atencion primaria, se pueden realizar 2 tipos de reflexiones. La primera es que no toda innovacion tiene el mismo valor, y muchos de los farmacos introducidos no suponen un avance sustancial respecto a los medicamentos ya disponibles. Por ejemplo, solo 3 entre las 104 novedades terapeuticas evaluadas durante el ano 2009 fueron consideradas verdaderas innovaciones por el equipo de la Revue Prescrire3. En este sentido, muchas de las denominadas «innovaciones terapeuticas» son el resultado de