Acceso a pruebas complementarias para el diagnóstico de enfermedades infecciosas en las consultas de pediatría de atención primaria

Introducción En los procesos infecciosos la realización de pruebas complementarias puede aumentar la precisión diagnóstica, la adecuación de los tratamientos, así como dar a conocer la epidemiología y patrón de resistencias bacterianas de la comunidad. El Grupo de Patología Infecciosa de la Asociación Española de Pediatría de Atención Primaria (GPI-AEPap) diseñó este estudio para conocer la accesibilidad a pruebas complementarias (PC) y sus resultados que tienen los pediatras que trabajan en atención primaria en el ámbito de la salud pública. Material y métodos Estudio observacional transversal descriptivo de ámbito nacional, a través de una encuesta de cumplimentación voluntaria, distribuida on line a todos los socios de AEPap y a los suscriptores de la lista de distribución PEDIAP entre los meses de abril y mayo de 2017. Resultados Se obtienen 517 respuestas. Se analizan datos del entorno profesional, así como los referidos a la solicitud de pruebas complementarias básicas (hemograma, bioquímica, sistemático de orina), utilización de Test Rápido Detección de Antígeno para Streptococo grupo A (TRDA), sobre cultivos bacterianos, serologías, pruebas diagnósticas de tosferina y tuberculosis (Mantoux) y pruebas de imagen. Conclusiones Hay variabilidad entre CCAA y áreas asistenciales. Se detectan claras áreas de mejora en la accesibilidad a diferentes PC, tiempo de recogida y envío de muestras, demora en la recepción, en los resultados y en tiempos de espera para pruebas de imagen no urgentes. Esto interfiere en la capacidad de intervención y resolución del pediatra de atención primaria. Introduction: The performing of complementary tests in infectious processes can increase the diagnostic precision, the adequacy of treatments, as well as determining the epidemiology and pattern of bacterial resistance of the community. The Infectious Pathology Group of the Spanish Association of Primary Care Paediatrics (GPI-AEPap) has designed this study in order to determine the availability of complementary tests (CT) for paediatricians working in Primary Care of the public health system as well as their results. Material and methods: Observational cross-sectional descriptive national study was carried out using a voluntary self-report questionnaire distributed online to all AEPap members and to the subscribers of the PEDIAP distribution list between the months of April and May 2017. Results: A total of 517 responses were obtained. An analysis was made of the data from the professional environment, as well as those related to the request for basic supplementary tests (blood count, biochemistry, and routine urine analysis), the use of Rapid Antigen Detection Test for group A Streptococcus, bacterial cultures, serology, diagnostic tests for pertussis and tuberculosis (Mantoux), as well as imaging tests. Conclusions: There is variability between Autonomous Communities and healthcare areas. Areas for improvement were found in the accessibility to different CT, collection time and sending of samples, delay in receiving results, as well as waiting times for non-urgent imaging tests. These affect the intervention and resolution capacity of the primary care paediatrician

Social Cognition and Interaction Training (SCIT) versus Training in Affect Recognition (TAR) in patients with schizophrenia : A randomized controlled trial

Introduction Training in Affect Recognition (TAR) is a “targeted” and computer-aided program that has been shown to effectively attenuate facial affect recognition deficits and improve social functioning in patients with schizophrenia. Social Cognition and Interaction Training (SCIT) is a group “broad-based” intervention, that has also been shown to improve emotion recognition, theory of mind (ToM), and social functioning. To date, no study has compared the efficacy of two different social cognitive interventions. Objectives We aim to compare the efficacy of TAR and SCIT on schizophrenia patients’ performance on facial affect recognition, theory of mind, attributional style and social functioning before, after treatment, and three months thereafter. Methods One hundred outpatients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia were randomly assigned to the TAR or SCIT condition and completed pre- (T0) and posttreatment (T1) assessments and a 3-month follow up (T2) of emotion recognition (ER-40), theory of mind (Hinting Task), attributional style (AIHQ) and social functioning (PSP). Results The entire sample, receiving TAR or SCIT, showed improvements in theory of mind, attributional style, clinical symptoms and social functioning. This effect was maintained at three-months. The TAR intervention was more efficacious than the SCIT program in improving the recognition of facial emotions (ER-40). The TAR intervention also demonstrated a lower drop-out rate than the SCIT intervention. Conclusions There were improvements in social cognition, symptomatology and functioning of patients in the entire sample, receiving SCIT or TAR. Both TAR and SCIT appear as valuable treatments for people with schizophrenia and social cognitive deficits