Grupos de Expertos de Cáncer del PAPPS. Recomendaciones de Prevención del Cáncer. Actualización PAPPS 2020

Cancer is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Tobacco use, unhealthy diet, and physical inactivity are some of the lifestyle risk factors that have led to an increase in cancer. This article updates the evidence, and includes recommendations for prevention strategies for each of the cancers with the highest incidence. These are based on the reduction of risk factors (primary prevention) and early diagnosis of cancer through screening and early detection of signs and symptoms, in medium-risk and high-risk populations

Recomendaciones de prevención del cáncer. Actualización PAPPS 2018

La comisión del Lancet Oncology, integrada por médicos e investigadores de atención primaria (AP), sobre la base de la evidencia científica y argumentos amplios y exhaustivos, ha elaborado un informe sobre la importancia cada vez mayor de la AP en el control del cáncer, desde la prevención hasta el seguimiento después del tratamiento, o en la atención de final de vida1. El informe de la comisión señala la necesidad de modelos de atención integrados, coordinados y acordados entre niveles asistenciales1. En la figura 1 se presenta, a modo de ejemplo, el modelo compartido propuesto por el Cancer Care Manitoba de Canadá2. Destaca la influencia de los profesionales de AP en facilitar estrategias de prevención dirigidas a modificar los estilos de vida y factores de riesgo de cáncer conocidos1. También señala que, cuando los médicos de familia se involucran en los programas de cribado, las tasas de participación aumentan1. Otro elemento en el que incide el informe es en que, para conseguir un diagnóstico de cáncer más precoz, el médico de familia debe tener un mejor acceso a las pruebas diagnósticas y disponer de herramientas de apoyo a las decisiones clínicas a través de la historia clínica informatizada1. Asimismo, apunta la necesidad de ofrecer una atención holística integral que cubra las consecuencias físicas y psicológicas de las personas que han sobrevivido al cáncer. En este artículo, el grupo de Prevención del Cáncer del Programa de Prevención y Promoción de la Salud (PAPPS) de la Sociedad Española de Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria (semFYC)3 actualiza las evidencias y recomendaciones sobre prevención y detección precoz del cáncer en población de riesgo medio y de riesgo elevado. Para clasificar la calidad de la evidencia y la fuerza de las recomendaciones, se ha utilizado el sistema GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation

Recomendaciones de prevención del cáncer. Actualización 2016

En este artículo presentamos una nueva actualización de las recomendaciones sobre prevención y cribados del cáncer del Grupo de Prevención del Cáncer del Programa de Prevención y Promoción de la Salud (PAPPS) de la Sociedad Española de Medicina Familiar y Comunitaria (semFYC). Para la síntesis de la evidencia y la formulación de las recomendaciones hemos utilizado el sistema GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). GRADE define la fuerza de una recomendación en términos de la confianza que tenemos en que los desenlaces deseados de una intervención (p. ej., los beneficios) sean superiores a los indeseados (p. ej., los inconvenientes y los efectos adversos). En una recomendación a favor, los efectos deseados de una intervención frente a otra superan a los no deseados. En una recomendación en contra, los efectos no deseados superan a los efectos deseados. Ambas recomendaciones pueden ser a su vez fuertes, cuando podemos confiar en que habrá un balance favorable entre efectos deseados y no deseados de una intervención frente a otra, o, por el contrario, débiles, si hay incertidumbre sobre ese balance. Para elaborar las recomendaciones se ha tenido en cuenta la calidad de la evidencia científica, el balance entre beneficios y riesgos, el riesgo basal, los valores y preferencias de las personas y los costes. Las recomendaciones se han valorado desde la perspectiva individual y poblacional. Las personas deben estar informadas de los beneficios y riesgos del cribado. Los valores y preferencias personales son clave a la hora de tomar una decisión: algunas personas le darán mucho valor a los posibles beneficios (p. ej., reducción de la mortalidad), pero otras querrán evitar los riesgos del sobrediagnóstico y sobretratamiento y los posibles perjuicios sobre su calidad de vida. Las recomendaciones propuestas tienen como referencia las revisiones de la US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) y la Canadian Task Force (CTF) instituciones de referencia en la elaboración de recomendaciones de prevención en el contexto de la atención primaria (AP), y el National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Las recomendaciones sobre cribados de cáncer de la USPSTF se pueden consultar en el monográfico de 2014. La USPSTF actualmente está revisando las recomendaciones de cáncer de mama, cuello uterino, próstata y cáncer de piel5. Todas estas instituciones siguen o han adaptado la metodología propuesta por GRADE. Asimismo, se ha tenido en cuenta las directrices de la Estrategia de Cáncer del Sistema Nacional de Salud (SNS), actualmente en proceso de revisión

Mindfulness in primary care healthcare and teaching professionals and its relationship with stress at work: a multicentric cross-sectional study

Background: Work stress is a common problem among the health personnel of the Spanish National Health System. The objective of this paper is to assess the state of mindfulness among Spanish primary care providers and to evaluate its potential relationship with work stress and basic labor and sociodemographic characteristics. Methods: Cross-sectional, multi-centric study. Primary care nurses, teachers, teaching collaborators and residents assigned to six Spanish Family Medicine/Family and Community Care Departments were invited to participate (n = 475). A template was designed in Google Forms, including sociodemographic and work-related variables. The state of mindfulness was measured with the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ), while work-related stress was measured using an ordinal scale ranging from 0 to 10 points. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were carried out, as well as bivariate and multivariate statistics. Results: The mean age of participants was 40, 14 ± 13.12 (range:23–65 years); 66.9% were women, 42.5% internal medicine residents, 29.3% family physicians, and 20.2% nurses. More than half (54.5%) knew about mindfulness, with 24.0% have received training on it, and 22.5% were usual practitioners. The average level of mindfulness was 127.18 ± 15.45 (range: 89–177). The average score of stress at work was 6.00 ± 2.44; 49.9% (range: 0–10). 49.9% of participants scored 7 or more on the stress at work scale. There was an inverse correlation between the levels of mindfulness (FFMQ total score) and work-related stress (Spearman’s r = - 0.155, p = 0.003). Significant relationships between the mindfulness practice and the level of mindfulness (F = 29.80, p < 0.001), as well as between the mindfulness practice and the level of work-related stress (F = 9.68, p = 0.042), were also found. Conclusions: Levels of mindfulness in primary care health providers were in line with those levels observed in other groups of health professionals. Half of all of the primary care providers suffered from a high degree of stress. Although weak, inverse relationships were observed between levels of mindfulness and stress at work, with lower values of stress at work among those who practiced mindfulness. Trial registration: NCT03629457

Controlled clinical trial comparing the effectiveness of a mindfulness and self-compassion 4-session programme versus an 8-session programme to reduce work stress and burnout in family and community medicine physicians and nurses: MINDUUDD study protocol

Background: Health personnel are susceptible to high levels of work stress and burnout due to the psychological and emotional demands of their work, as well as to other aspects related to the organisation of that work. This paper describes the rationale and design of the MINDUUDD study, the aim of which is to evaluate the effectiveness of a mindfulness and self-compassion 4-session programme versus the standard 8-session programme to reduce work stress and burnout in Family and Community Medicine and Nursing tutors and residents. Methods: The MINDUDD study is a multicentre cluster randomised controlled trial with three parallel arms. Six Teaching Units will be randomised to one of the three study groups: 1) Experimental Group-8 (EG8); 2) Experimental Group-4 (EG4) Control group (CG). At least 132 subjects will participate (66 tutors/66 residents), 44 in the EG8, 44 in the EG4, and 44 in the CG. Interventions will be based on the Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) program, including some self-compassion practices of the Mindful Self-Compassion (MSC) programme. The EG8 intervention will be implemented during 8 weekly face-to-face sessions of 2.5 h each, while the EG4 intervention will consist of 4 sessions of 2.5 h each. The participants will have to practice at home for 30 min/day in the EG8 and 15 min/day in the EG4. The Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ), Self-Compassion Scale (SCS), Perceived Stress Questionnaire (PSQ), Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI), Jefferson Scale of Physician Empathy (JSPE), and Goldberg Anxiety-Depression Scale (GADS) will be administered. Measurements will be taken at baseline, at the end of the programs, and at three months after completion. The effect of the interventions will be evaluated by bivariate and multivariate analyses (Multiple Linear Regression). Discussion: If the abbreviated mindfulness programme is at least as effective as the standard program, its incorporation into the curriculum and training plans will be easier and more appropriate. It will also be more easily applied and accepted by primary care professionals because of the reduced resources and means required for its implementation, and it may also extend beyond care settings to academic and teaching environments as well

Social Prescribing Schemes in Primary Care in Spain (EvalRA Project): a mixed-method study protocol to build an evaluation model

Abstract Background Social Prescribing is a Primary Health Care service that provides people with non-clinical care alternatives that may have an impact on their health. Social Prescribing can be more or less formal and structured. Social Prescribing Schemes are formal Social Prescribing of health assets by Primary Health Care teams in coordination and follow-up of patients with providers. The emerging evidence suggests that this service can improve people’s health and well-being, create value and provide sustainability for the healthcare system. However, some evaluations note that the current evidence regarding social prescribing is insufficient and needs further investigation. The EvaLRA project aims to elaborate an evaluation model of Social Prescribing Schemes in Primary Health Care based on a set of structure, process, and outcomes indicators. Methods In the region of Aragon, the Community Health Care Strategy aims to promote the development of social prescription schemes in Primary Health Care teams. This study is divided into two stages. Stage 1: identification of primary health care teams that implement social prescribing schemes and establish a first set of indicators to evaluate social prescribing using qualitative consensus techniques with experts. Stage 2 evaluation of the relevance, feasibility and sensitivity of selected indicators after 6 and 12 months in primary health care teams. The results will provide a set of indicators considering structure, process and outcomes for social prescribing schemes. Discussion Current evaluations of the application of social prescribing schemes use different criteria and indicators. A set of agreed indicators and its piloting in primary health care teams will provide a tool to evaluate the implementation of social prescription schemes. In addition, the scorecard created could be of interest to other health systems in order to assess the service and improve its information system, deployment and safety