Qualidade de vida relacionada à saúde dos usuários da atenção primária no Brasil

Objetivo: analisar a qualidade de vida relacionada à saúde dos usuários da atenção primária em saúde do Sistema Único de Saúde e fatores a ela associados. Métodos: estudo transversal com dados da Pesquisa Nacional sobre Acesso, Utilização e Promoção do Uso Racional de Medicamentos – Serviços, 2015. A coleta de dados foi por meio de questionário que incluiu o instrumento Euroqol 5 Dimensions. Foram entrevistados usuários das cinco regiões do Brasil. Regressão linear múltipla foi utilizada para analisar a qualidade de vida relacionada à saúde e fatores associados. Resultados: do total de 8.590 usuários, as dimensões com maior frequência foram dor/mal-estar (50,7%) e ansiedade/depressão (38,8%). Cerca de 10% dos usuários reportaram problemas extremos nessas dimensões. Os fatores significantemente associados à pior qualidade de vida foram: ser do sexo feminino; ter artrite, artrose ou reumatismo; acidente vascular encefálico; doenças do coração; depressão; relatar autopercepção de saúde ruim/muito ruim; usar bebida alcoólica uma vez ou mais por mês; fazer dietas para perder peso, evitar o consumo de sal e reduzir o consumo de gordura. Foi observada associação significante entre uma melhor qualidade de vida e: residir no Norte e Sudeste; praticar atividades físicas e nível educacional mais alto. Não foi observada associação com fatores relacionados aos serviços de saúde. Conclusões: a qualidade de vida relacionada à saúde dos usuários foi influenciada por fatores demográficos, socioeconômicos, relacionados às condições de saúde e ao estilo de vida, sendo útil para nortear ações específicas de promoção da saúde e cuidado integral à saúde dos usuários do Sistema Único de Saúde.Objective: to analyze the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) of patients of the primary health care of the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS) and its associated factors. Methods: this is a cross-sectional study with data from the Pesquisa Nacional sobre Acesso, Utilização e Promoção do Uso Racional de Medicamentos – Serviços, 2015 (PNAUM – National Survey on Access, Use and Promotion of Rational Use of Medicines – Services, 2015). Data were collected with a questionnaire that included the EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) instrument. Patients from the five regions of Brazil were interviewed. Multiple linear regression was used to analyze their Health-Related Quality of Life and its associated factors. Results: of the total of 8,590 patients, the most frequent dimensions were pain/discomfort (50.7%) and anxiety/depression (38.8%). About 10% of the patients reported extreme problems in these dimensions. The following factors were significantly associated with a worse quality of life: being female; having arthritis, osteoarthritis, or rheumatism; cerebrovascular accident; heart disease; depression; health self-assessment as poor or very poor; drinking alcoholic beverages once or more per month; dieting to lose weight, avoiding salt consumption, and reducing fat intake. Significant association was observed between a better quality of life and: living in the North and Southeast regions of Brazil; practicing physical activities; and having a higher educational level. No association was observed with factors related to the health services. Conclusions: the Health-Related Quality of Life of patients was influenced by demographic and socioeconomic factors that were related to health conditions and lifestyle, being useful to guide specific actions for promoting health and the integral care to patients of the Brazilian Unified Health System

Access to medicines by patients of the primary health care in the Brazilian Unified Health System

OBJETIVO: Avaliar o acesso aos medicamentos na Atenção Primária em Saúde do Sistema Único de Saúde na perspectiva do usuário. MÉTODOS: Estudo transversal que utilizou dados da Pesquisa Nacional sobre Acesso, Utilização e Promoção do Uso Racional no Brasil – Serviços, 2015, realizado por meio de entrevistas com 8.591 usuários em municípios das cinco regiões do Brasil. A avaliação do acesso aos medicamentos utilizou conceitos propostos por Penshansky e Thomas (1981), segundo as dimensões: disponibilidade, acessibilidade geográfica, adequação, aceitabilidade e capacidade aquisitiva. Cada uma das dimensões foi avaliada por meio de indicadores próprios. RESULTADOS: Para dimensão disponibilidade, 59,8% dos usuários declararam ter acesso total aos medicamentos, sem diferença significante entre regiões. Para acessibilidade geográfica, 60% dos usuários declararam que a unidade básica de saúde não ficava longe de sua residência, 83% afirmaram ser muito fácil/fácil chegar até a unidade e a maioria dos usuários relatou caminhar (64,5%). Para adequação, a unidade foi avaliada como muito bom/bom para os itens conforto (74,2%) e limpeza (90,9%), e 70,8% dos usuários relataram não ter de esperar para retirar seus medicamentos, embora o tempo médio de espera tenha sido 32,9 minutos. Para aceitabilidade: 93,1% dos usuários relataram ser atendidos com respeito e cortesia pelos funcionários das unidades dispensadoras e 90,5% declararam ser muito bom/bom o atendimento das unidades. Para capacidade aquisitiva 13% dos usuários relataram ter deixado de comprar algo importante para cobrir gastos com problemas de saúde, 41,8% dos participantes apontaram a despesa com medicamentos. CONCLUSÕES: Os resultados mostram 70%–90% de conformidade, compatível com países desenvolvidos. No entanto, o acesso aos medicamentos continua sendo um desafio pois ainda é fortemente comprometido pela baixa disponibilidade de medicamentos essenciais em unidades públicas de saúde, demonstrando que não ocorre de forma universal, equânime e resolutiva à populaçãoOBJECTIVE: To evaluate the access to medicines in primary health care of the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS), from the patients’ perspective. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study that used data from the Pesquisa Nacional sobre Acesso, Utilização e Promoção do Uso Racional de Medicamentos – Services, 2015 (PNAUM – National Survey on Access, Use and Promotion of Rational Use of Medicines), conducted by interviews with 8,591 patients in cities of the five regions of Brazil. Evaluation of access to medicines used concepts proposed by Penshansky and Thomas (1981), according to the dimensions: availability, accessibility, accommodation, acceptability, and affordability. Each dimension was evaluated by its own indicators. RESULTS: For the “availability” dimension, 59.8% of patients reported having full access to medicines, without significant difference between regions. For “accessibility,” 60% of patients declared that the basic health unit (UBS) was not far from their house, 83% said it was very easy/easy to get to the UBS, and most patients reported that they go walking (64.5%). For “accommodation,” UBS was evaluated as very good/good for the items “comfort” (74.2%) and “cleanliness” (90.9%), and 70.8% of patients reported that they do not wait to receive their medicines, although the average waiting time was 32.9 minutes. For “acceptability,” 93.1% of patients reported to be served with respect and courtesy by the staff of the dispensing units and 90.5% declared that the units’ service was very good/good. For “affordability,” 13% of patients reported not being able to buy something important to cover expenses with health problems, and 41.8% of participants pointed out the expense with medicines. CONCLUSIONS: Results show 70%–90% compliance, which is compatible with developed countries. However, access to medicines remains a challenge, because it is still heavily compromised by the low availability of essential medicines in public health units, showing that it does not occur universally, equally, and decisively to the populatio

Forecasting models for leprosy cases: a scoping review protocol

Introduction Leprosy is a neglected tropical disease caused by Mycobacterium leprae that mainly affects the skin, the peripheral nerves, the mucosa of the upper respiratory tract and the eyes. Mathematical models and statistical methodologies could play an important role in decision-making and help maintain the gains in elimination programmes. Various models for predicting leprosy cases have been reported in the literature, but they have different settings and distinct approaches to predicting the cases. This study describes the protocol for a scoping review to identify and synthesise information from studies using models to forecast leprosy cases.Methods and analysis A scoping review methodology will be applied following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and will be reported according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews. We will perform a systematic search from when each database started until April 2022 and we will include the following electronic databases: MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Literature Database. Data will be extracted and recorded on a calibrated predefined data form and will be presented in a tabular form accompanied by a descriptive summary. The Prediction Model Study Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) will be used.Ethics and dissemination No ethical approval is required for this study. This scoping review will identify and map the methodological and other characteristics of modelling studies predicting leprosy cases. We hope that the review will contribute to scientific knowledge in this area and act as a basis for researchers designing and conducting leprosy models. This information can also be used to enhance national surveillance systems and to target specific policies. The protocol and consequent publications of this scoping review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and policy briefs.Systematic review registration This scoping review was registered in the Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/W9375)

Impact of switching between reference biologics and biosimilars of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Abstract What is the impact of switching between biologics and biosimilars of adalimumab, etanercept, and infliximab on efficacy and safety for rheumatoid arthritis? A systematic review and network meta-analysis were performed to compare switching and non-switching groups of treatments. Pooled Risk Relative (RR) or standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs) were obtained. Seventeen randomized trials with a switching phase involving 6,562 patients were included. Results showed that a single switch from biologics to biosimilars compared to continuing biologics had comparable effects for primary and co-primary outcomes, the American College of Rheumatology criteria with 20% response (ACR20) (7 trials, 1,926 patients, RR 0.98, 95% CrIs 0.93 to 1.03) and the Health Assessment Questionnaire—Disability Index (HAQ-DI) (5 trials, 1,609 patients, SMD − 0.07, 95% CrIs − 0.23 to 0.1), and within the equivalence margins: ACR20 [RR 0.94, 1.06] and HAQ-DI [SMD − 0.22, 0.22]. The risk of treatment-emergent adverse events, discontinuation, and positive anti-drug antibodies were comparable after switching. Safety results were imprecise, and the follow-up period might not be sufficient to evaluate long-term effects, especially malignancies. Overall, the practice of single switching between approved biologics and biosimilars of Tumour Necrosis Factor inhibitors is efficacious and safe for rheumatoid arthritis

Methodological guidelines and publications of benefit–risk assessment for health technology assessment: a scoping review protocol

Background Benefit–risk assessment (BRA) is used in multiple phases along the health technology’s life-cycle to evaluate the balance between the benefits and risks, as it is fundamental to all stakeholders. BRA and its methodological approaches have been applied primarily in the context of regulatory agencies. However, BRA’s application and extent in the context of health technology assessment (HTA) bodies remain less clear. Our goal is to perform a scoping review to identify and map methodological guidelines and publications on methods of BRA. This will be done considering the different phases of the life-cycle of health technologies to underline both the depth and extent of research concerning BRA, especially in the context of HTA.Methods and analysis This scoping review protocol was developed following the framework proposed by Arksey and O’Malley, and the updated guidelines by the Joanna Briggs Institute. We will include methodological publications that provide recommendations or guidelines on methods for BRA. We will conduct electronic searches on Medline (PubMed) and EMBASE (Ovid) databases; manual searches on the main websites of HTA bodies and drug regulatory organisations; and contact experts in the field. Systematic extraction forms will be used to screen and assess the identified publications by independent assessors. We will provide a qualitative synthesis using descriptive statistics and visual tools. Results will be summarised in systematic evidence tables and comparative evidence scoping charts.Ethics and dissemination This review will use data publicly available and does not require ethics approval. The results of this scoping review will contribute to scientific knowledge and act as a basis for methodologists, guideline developers and researchers for the development of BRA to inform regulatory decisions, reimbursement and coverage decision making. The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed articles, conferences, policy briefs and workshops.Trial registration number Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/69T3V)

Acesso aos medicamentos pelos usuários da atenção primária no Sistema Único de Saúde

Objetivo: avaliar o acesso aos medicamentos na Atenção Primária em Saúde do Sistema Único de Saúde na perspectiva do usuário. Métodos: estudo transversal que utilizou dados da Pesquisa Nacional sobre Acesso, Utilização e Promoção do Uso Racional no Brasil – Serviços, 2015, realizado por meio de entrevistas com 8.591 usuários em municípios das cinco regiões do Brasil. A avaliação do acesso aos medicamentos utilizou conceitos propostos por Penshansky e Thomas (1981), segundo as dimensões: disponibilidade, acessibilidade geográfica, adequação, aceitabilidade e capacidade aquisitiva. Cada uma das dimensões foi avaliada por meio de indicadores próprios. Resultados: para dimensão disponibilidade, 59,8% dos usuários declararam ter acesso total aos medicamentos, sem diferença significante entre regiões. Para acessibilidade geográfica, 60% dos usuários declararam que a unidade básica de saúde não ficava longe de sua residência, 83% afirmaram ser muito fácil/fácil chegar até a unidade e a maioria dos usuários relatou caminhar (64,5%). Para adequação, a unidade foi avaliada como muito bom/bom para os itens conforto (74,2%) e limpeza (90,9%), e 70,8% dos usuários relataram não ter de esperar para retirar seus medicamentos, embora o tempo médio de espera tenha sido 32,9 minutos. Para aceitabilidade: 93,1% dos usuários relataram ser atendidos com respeito e cortesia pelos funcionários das unidades dispensadoras e 90,5% declararam ser muito bom/bom o atendimento das unidades. Para capacidade aquisitiva 13% dos usuários relataram ter deixado de comprar algo importante para cobrir gastos com problemas de saúde, 41,8% dos participantes apontaram a despesa com medicamentos. Conclusões: os resultados mostram 70%–90% de conformidade, compatível com países desenvolvidos. No entanto, o acesso aos medicamentos continua sendo um desafio pois ainda é fortemente comprometido pela baixa disponibilidade de medicamentos essenciais em unidades públicas de saúde, demonstrando que não ocorre de forma universal, equânime e resolutiva à população.Objetive: to evaluate the access to medicines in primary health care of the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS), from the patients’ perspective. Methods: this is a cross-sectional study that used data from the Pesquisa Nacional sobre Acesso, Utilização e Promoção do Uso Racional de Medicamentos – Services, 2015 (PNAUM – National Survey on Access, Use and Promotion of Rational Use of Medicines), conducted by interviews with 8,591 patients in cities of the five regions of Brazil. Evaluation of access to medicines used concepts proposed by Penshansky and Thomas (1981), according to the dimensions: availability, accessibility, accommodation, acceptability, and affordability. Each dimension was evaluated by its own indicators. Results: for the “availability” dimension, 59.8% of patients reported having full access to medicines, without significant difference between regions. For “accessibility,” 60% of patients declared that the basic health unit (UBS) was not far from their house, 83% said it was very easy/easy to get to the UBS, and most patients reported that they go walking (64.5%). For “accommodation,” UBS was evaluated as very good/good for the items “comfort” (74.2%) and “cleanliness” (90.9%), and 70.8% of patients reported that they do not wait to receive their medicines, although the average waiting time was 32.9 minutes. For “acceptability,” 93.1% of patients reported to be served with respect and courtesy by the staff of the dispensing units and 90.5% declared that the units’ service was very good/good. For “affordability,” 13% of patients reported not being able to buy something important to cover expenses with health problems, and 41.8% of participants pointed out the expense with medicines. Conclusions: results show 70%–90% compliance, which is compatible with developed countries. However, access to medicines remains a challenge, because it is still heavily compromised by the low availability of essential medicines in public health units, showing that it does not occur universally, equally, and decisively to the population

Health-related quality of life of patients of Brazilian primary health care

<div><p>ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To analyze the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) of patients of the primary health care of the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS) and its associated factors. METHODS This is a cross-sectional study with data from the Pesquisa Nacional sobre Acesso, Utilização e Promoção do Uso Racional de Medicamentos – Serviços, 2015 (PNAUM – National Survey on Access, Use and Promotion of Rational Use of Medicines – Services, 2015). Data were collected with a questionnaire that included the EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) instrument. Patients from the five regions of Brazil were interviewed. Multiple linear regression was used to analyze their Health-Related Quality of Life and its associated factors. RESULTS Of the total of 8,590 patients, the most frequent dimensions were pain/discomfort (50.7%) and anxiety/depression (38.8%). About 10% of the patients reported extreme problems in these dimensions. The following factors were significantly associated with a worse quality of life: being female; having arthritis, osteoarthritis, or rheumatism; cerebrovascular accident; heart disease; depression; health self-assessment as poor or very poor; drinking alcoholic beverages once or more per month; dieting to lose weight, avoiding salt consumption, and reducing fat intake. Significant association was observed between a better quality of life and: living in the North and Southeast regions of Brazil; practicing physical activities; and having a higher educational level. No association was observed with factors related to the health services. CONCLUSIONS The Health-Related Quality of Life of patients was influenced by demographic and socioeconomic factors that were related to health conditions and lifestyle, being useful to guide specific actions for promoting health and the integral care to patients of the Brazilian Unified Health System.</p></div