Idoneidad de la prescripción antibiótica en atención primaria en la Comunidad Autónoma Vasca

ObjetivoEstudiar la variabilidad e idoneidad de la prescripción antibiótica en atención primaria en la Comunidad Autónoma Vasca (CAV).DiseñoEstudio descriptivo, prospectivo.EmplazamientoCentros de atención primaria de la red reformada y no reformada de la CAV.Mediciones y resultados principalesSe estudiaron 3.182 infecciones obtenidas de consultas sobre enfermedad infecciosa mediante muestreo estratificado por área sanitaria durante febrero, marzo y abril de 1998. La idoneidad de la prescripción de antibióticos (ATB) se comparó con unos patrones elaborados tras una extensa revisión bibliográfica. Un 68,6% de las consultas son infecciones que no requieren ATB (catarro de vías altas [IRA], bronquitis aguda, gripe y gastroenteritis). Se utilizan ATB en un 28,5% de estos casos (IC, 26,6-30,5). Destaca la bronquitis aguda, con un 90,7% (IC, 87,3-93,4). La prescripción innecesaria supone un 39,7% de la prescripción total antibiótica (IC, 37,2-42,1%), suponiendo un gasto anual innecesario de 1.155 millones de pesetas.En el 31,4% de las infecciones que requieren tratamiento con ATB, se opta por uno no adecuado en un 23,7% (IC, 21-26,7%).En total, la idoneidad del tratamiento global fue del 72,2% (IC, 70,6-73,8). El hecho de trabajar en la red reformada se asoció a una mejor prescripción en todos los casos. Los pediatras prescriben mejor en el caso de las infecciones no susceptibles de tratamiento con ATB.ConclusionesLa prescripción de ATB no se realiza conforme a la evidencia científica disponible. Los tratamientos incorrectos tienen lugar sobre todo en procesos benignos y autolimitados. Es necesaria una política local de uso de ATB que incluya colaboración multidisciplinaria y formación continuada efectiva.ObjectiveTo study the variability and suitability of antibiotic prescription in primary care in the Basque Country.DesignProspective, descriptive study.SettingBasque Country health care centres both within and not in the reformed network.Measurements and main results3182 infections from consultations for infectious disease were studied through sampling stratified by health area during February, March and April 1998. The appropriateness of antibiotics (ATB) prescription was compared with some standards after an extensive bibliographic review. 68.6% of consultations were infections not needing ATB (infections of respiratory airways, acute bronchitis, flu and gastro-enteritis). ATB were used in 28.5% of these cases (CI: 26.6-30.5), especially in acute bronchitis (90.7%) (CI: 87.3-93.4). Unnecessary prescription supposes 39.7% of total antibiotic prescription (CI: 37.2-42.1%), which means unnecessary annual expenditure of 1155 million pesetas. In 31.4% of the infections that require ATB treatment, in 23.7% inappropriate treatment was chosen (CI: 21-26.7%). Overall appropriateness of treatment was 72.2% (CI: 70.6-73.8). Working in the reformed system was linked to better prescription in all cases. Paediatricians prescribed better in the case of infections not susceptible to ATB treatment.ConclusionsATB prescription is not consistent with the available scientific evidence. Incorrect treatments occur especially in benign and self-limiting processes. A local policy of ATB use that includes multi-disciplinary collaboration and effective ongoing training is necessary

Perceptions and attitudes of clinicians in Spain toward clinical practice guidelines and grading systems : A protocol for a qualitative study and a national survey

FADQThis project has been funded by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund (PI08 90647). The publication of this document has been funded within the framework of collaboration designed for the Quality Plan of the Spanish National Health System, under the agreement signed by the Carlos III Health Institute and the Aragon Health Science Institute as GuiaSalud secretariat. Pablo Alonso-Coello is funded by a Miguel Servet contract by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (CP09/00137).Background: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have become a very popular tool for decision making in healthcare. While there is some evidence that CPGs improve outcomes, there are numerous factors that influence their acceptability and use by healthcare providers. While evidence of clinicians' knowledge, perceptions and attitudes toward CPGs is extensive, results are still disperse and not conclusive. Our study will evaluate these issues in a large and representative sample of clinicians in Spain. Methods/Design. A mixed-method design combining qualitative and quantitative research techniques will evaluate general practitioners (GPs) and hospital-based specialists in Spain with the objective of exploring attitudes and perceptions about CPGs and evidence grading systems. The project will consist of two phases: during the first phase, group discussions will be carried out to gain insight into perceptions and attitudes of the participants, and during the second phase, this information will be completed by means of a survey, reaching a greater number of clinicians. We will explore these issues in GPs and hospital-based practitioners, with or without previous experience in guideline development. Discussion. Our study will identify and gain insight into the perceived problems and barriers of Spanish practitioners in relation to guideline knowledge and use. The study will also explore beliefs and attitudes of clinicians towards CPGs and evidence grading systems used to rate the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations. Our results will provide guidance to healthcare researchers and healthcare decision makers to improve the use of guidelines in Spain and elsewhere. © 2010 Kotzeva et al; licensee BioMed Central Lt

Perceptions and attitudes of clinicians in Spain toward clinical practice guidelines and grading systems: a protocol for a qualitative study and a national survey

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have become a very popular tool for decision making in healthcare. While there is some evidence that CPGs improve outcomes, there are numerous factors that influence their acceptability and use by healthcare providers. While evidence of clinicians' knowledge, perceptions and attitudes toward CPGs is extensive, results are still disperse and not conclusive. Our study will evaluate these issues in a large and representative sample of clinicians in Spain. METHODS/DESIGN: A mixed-method design combining qualitative and quantitative research techniques will evaluate general practitioners (GPs) and hospital-based specialists in Spain with the objective of exploring attitudes and perceptions about CPGs and evidence grading systems. The project will consist of two phases: during the first phase, group discussions will be carried out to gain insight into perceptions and attitudes of the participants, and during the second phase, this information will be completed by means of a survey, reaching a greater number of clinicians. We will explore these issues in GPs and hospital-based practitioners, with or without previous experience in guideline development. DISCUSSION: Our study will identify and gain insight into the perceived problems and barriers of Spanish practitioners in relation to guideline knowledge and use. The study will also explore beliefs and attitudes of clinicians towards CPGs and evidence grading systems used to rate the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations. Our results will provide guidance to healthcare researchers and healthcare decision makers to improve the use of guidelines in Spain and elsewhere

Attitudes and perceptions about clinical guidelines: a qualitative study with Spanish physicians

Estudio cuyo objetivo es la evaluación de las actitudes y percepciones los médicos españoles con relación las Guías de práctica clínica. Spanish physicians towards CGs

Desarrollo de guías de práctica clínica en pacientes con comorbilidad y pluripatología

La atención a pacientes con comorbilidad y pluripatología supone un reto para cualquier sistema sanitario. Las guías de práctica clínica (GPC) presentan limitaciones cuando se aplican a esta población. El objetivo de este trabajo es realizar una propuesta terminológica y metodológica sobre el abordaje de la comorbilidad y la pluripatología en las GPC. De acuerdo a la revisión bibliográfica efectuada, se sugieren algunas propuestas para su abordaje en las diferentes fases de elaboración de las GPC, con especial atención a la inclusión de los clusters de comorbilidad en las preguntas clínicas iniciales, la incorporación de la evidencia indirecta, el peso de la carga de gestionar la enfermedad para el paciente y su entorno en la formulación de recomendaciones, así como las estrategias de difusión e implementación. Estas propuestas deben desarrollarse en mayor profundidad con la participación de más agentes para disponer de herramientas válidas y útiles en esta población

Development of clinical practice guidelines for patients with comorbidity and multiple diseases Desarrollo de guías de práctica clínica en pacientes con comorbilidad y pluripatología

The management of patients with comorbidity and polypathology represents a challenge for all healthcare systems. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have limitations when applied to this population. The aim of this study is to propose the terminology and methodology for optimally approach comorbidity and polypathology in the CPGs. Based on a literature review, we suggest a number of proposals for the approach in different phases of CPG preparation, with special attention to the inclusion of clusters of comorbidity in the initial questions the implementation of indirect evidence, the burden of disease management for patients and their environment, when establishing recommendations, as well as the strategies of dissemination and implementation. These proposals should be developed in greater depth with the implication of more agents in order to have valid and useful tools for this population. © 2013 Elsevier Espãna, S.L.U. All rights reserved

Perceptions and attitudes of clinicians in Spain toward clinical practice guidelines and grading systems: a protocol for a qualitative study and a national survey

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have become a very popular tool for decision making in healthcare. While there is some evidence that CPGs improve outcomes, there are numerous factors that influence their acceptability and use by healthcare providers. While evidence of clinicians' knowledge, perceptions and attitudes toward CPGs is extensive, results are still disperse and not conclusive. Our study will evaluate these issues in a large and representative sample of clinicians in Spain. METHODS/DESIGN: A mixed-method design combining qualitative and quantitative research techniques will evaluate general practitioners (GPs) and hospital-based specialists in Spain with the objective of exploring attitudes and perceptions about CPGs and evidence grading systems. The project will consist of two phases: during the first phase, group discussions will be carried out to gain insight into perceptions and attitudes of the participants, and during the second phase, this information will be completed by means of a survey, reaching a greater number of clinicians. We will explore these issues in GPs and hospital-based practitioners, with or without previous experience in guideline development. DISCUSSION: Our study will identify and gain insight into the perceived problems and barriers of Spanish practitioners in relation to guideline knowledge and use. The study will also explore beliefs and attitudes of clinicians towards CPGs and evidence grading systems used to rate the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations. Our results will provide guidance to healthcare researchers and healthcare decision makers to improve the use of guidelines in Spain and elsewhere