Tratamientos Psicológicos Empíricamente Apoyados Para Adultos: Una Revisión Selectiva [Evidence-Based Psychological Treatments for Adults: A Selective Review]

Antecedentes: los tratamientos psicológicos han mostrado su efi cacia, efectividad y efi ciencia para el abordaje de los trastornos mentales; no obstante, considerando el conocimiento científi co generado en los últimos años, no se dispone de trabajos de actualización en español sobre cuáles son los tratamientos psicológicos con respaldo empírico. El objetivo fue realizar una revisión selectiva de los principales tratamientos psicológicos empíricamente apoyados para el abordaje de trastornos mentales en personas adultas. Método: se recogen niveles de evidencia y grados de recomendación en función de los criterios propuestos por el Sistema Nacional de Salud de España (en las Guías de Práctica Clínica) para diferentes trastornos psicológicos. Resultados: los resultados sugieren que los tratamientos psicológicos disponen de apoyo empírico para el abordaje de un amplio elenco de trastornos psicológicos. El grado de apoyo empírico oscila de bajo a alto en función del trastorno psicológico analizado. La revisión sugiere que ciertos campos de intervención necesitan una mayor investigación. Conclusiones: a partir de esta revisión selectiva, los profesionales de la psicología podrán disponer de información rigurosa y actualizada que les permita tomar decisiones informadas a la hora de implementar aquellos procedimientos psicoterapéuticos empíricamente fundamentados en función de las características de las personas que demandan ayuda. // Evidence-Based Psychological Treatments for Adults: A Selective Review. Background: Psychological treatments have shown their effi cacy, effectiveness, and effi ciency in dealing with mental disorders. However, considering the scientifi c knowledge generated in recent years, in the Spanish context, there are no updating studies about empirically supported psychological treatments. The main goal was to carry out a selective review of the main empirically supported psychological treatments for mental disorders in adults. Method: Levels of evidence and degrees of recommendation were collected based on the criteria proposed by the Spanish National Health System (Clinical Practice Guidelines) for different psychological disorders. Results: The results indicate that psychological treatments have empirical support for the approach to a wide range of psychological disorders. These levels of empirical evidence gathered range from low to high depending on the psychological disorder analysed. The review indicates the existence of certain fi elds of intervention that need further investigation. Conclusions: Based on this selective review, psychology professionals will be able to have rigorous, up-to-date information that allows them to make informed decisions when implementing empirically based psychotherapeutic procedures based on the characteristics of the people who require help

Why Are Outcomes Different for Registry Patients Enrolled Prospectively and Retrospectively? Insights from the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF).

Background: Retrospective and prospective observational studies are designed to reflect real-world evidence on clinical practice, but can yield conflicting results. The GARFIELD-AF Registry includes both methods of enrolment and allows analysis of differences in patient characteristics and outcomes that may result. Methods and Results: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and ≥1 risk factor for stroke at diagnosis of AF were recruited either retrospectively (n = 5069) or prospectively (n = 5501) from 19 countries and then followed prospectively. The retrospectively enrolled cohort comprised patients with established AF (for a least 6, and up to 24 months before enrolment), who were identified retrospectively (and baseline and partial follow-up data were collected from the emedical records) and then followed prospectively between 0-18 months (such that the total time of follow-up was 24 months; data collection Dec-2009 and Oct-2010). In the prospectively enrolled cohort, patients with newly diagnosed AF (≤6 weeks after diagnosis) were recruited between Mar-2010 and Oct-2011 and were followed for 24 months after enrolment. Differences between the cohorts were observed in clinical characteristics, including type of AF, stroke prevention strategies, and event rates. More patients in the retrospectively identified cohort received vitamin K antagonists (62.1% vs. 53.2%) and fewer received non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (1.8% vs . 4.2%). All-cause mortality rates per 100 person-years during the prospective follow-up (starting the first study visit up to 1 year) were significantly lower in the retrospective than prospectively identified cohort (3.04 [95% CI 2.51 to 3.67] vs . 4.05 [95% CI 3.53 to 4.63]; p = 0.016). Conclusions: Interpretations of data from registries that aim to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with AF must take account of differences in registry design and the impact of recall bias and survivorship bias that is incurred with retrospective enrolment. Clinical Trial Registration: - URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362)

Risk profiles and one-year outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation in India: Insights from the GARFIELD-AF Registry.

BACKGROUND: The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) is an ongoing prospective noninterventional registry, which is providing important information on the baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, and 1-year outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This report describes data from Indian patients recruited in this registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 52,014 patients with newly diagnosed AF were enrolled globally; of these, 1388 patients were recruited from 26 sites within India (2012-2016). In India, the mean age was 65.8 years at diagnosis of NVAF. Hypertension was the most prevalent risk factor for AF, present in 68.5% of patients from India and in 76.3% of patients globally (P < 0.001). Diabetes and coronary artery disease (CAD) were prevalent in 36.2% and 28.1% of patients as compared with global prevalence of 22.2% and 21.6%, respectively (P < 0.001 for both). Antiplatelet therapy was the most common antithrombotic treatment in India. With increasing stroke risk, however, patients were more likely to receive oral anticoagulant therapy [mainly vitamin K antagonist (VKA)], but average international normalized ratio (INR) was lower among Indian patients [median INR value 1.6 (interquartile range {IQR}: 1.3-2.3) versus 2.3 (IQR 1.8-2.8) (P < 0.001)]. Compared with other countries, patients from India had markedly higher rates of all-cause mortality [7.68 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval 6.32-9.35) vs 4.34 (4.16-4.53), P < 0.0001], while rates of stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding were lower after 1 year of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Compared to previously published registries from India, the GARFIELD-AF registry describes clinical profiles and outcomes in Indian patients with AF of a different etiology. The registry data show that compared to the rest of the world, Indian AF patients are younger in age and have more diabetes and CAD. Patients with a higher stroke risk are more likely to receive anticoagulation therapy with VKA but are underdosed compared with the global average in the GARFIELD-AF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01090362

Evaluation of appendicitis risk prediction models in adults with suspected appendicitis

Background Appendicitis is the most common general surgical emergency worldwide, but its diagnosis remains challenging. The aim of this study was to determine whether existing risk prediction models can reliably identify patients presenting to hospital in the UK with acute right iliac fossa (RIF) pain who are at low risk of appendicitis. Methods A systematic search was completed to identify all existing appendicitis risk prediction models. Models were validated using UK data from an international prospective cohort study that captured consecutive patients aged 16–45 years presenting to hospital with acute RIF in March to June 2017. The main outcome was best achievable model specificity (proportion of patients who did not have appendicitis correctly classified as low risk) whilst maintaining a failure rate below 5 per cent (proportion of patients identified as low risk who actually had appendicitis). Results Some 5345 patients across 154 UK hospitals were identified, of which two‐thirds (3613 of 5345, 67·6 per cent) were women. Women were more than twice as likely to undergo surgery with removal of a histologically normal appendix (272 of 964, 28·2 per cent) than men (120 of 993, 12·1 per cent) (relative risk 2·33, 95 per cent c.i. 1·92 to 2·84; P < 0·001). Of 15 validated risk prediction models, the Adult Appendicitis Score performed best (cut‐off score 8 or less, specificity 63·1 per cent, failure rate 3·7 per cent). The Appendicitis Inflammatory Response Score performed best for men (cut‐off score 2 or less, specificity 24·7 per cent, failure rate 2·4 per cent). Conclusion Women in the UK had a disproportionate risk of admission without surgical intervention and had high rates of normal appendicectomy. Risk prediction models to support shared decision‐making by identifying adults in the UK at low risk of appendicitis were identified

Cardiac myosin activation with omecamtiv mecarbil in systolic heart failure

BACKGROUND The selective cardiac myosin activator omecamtiv mecarbil has been shown to improve cardiac function in patients with heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction. Its effect on cardiovascular outcomes is unknown. METHODS We randomly assigned 8256 patients (inpatients and outpatients) with symptomatic chronic heart failure and an ejection fraction of 35% or less to receive omecamtiv mecarbil (using pharmacokinetic-guided doses of 25 mg, 37.5 mg, or 50 mg twice daily) or placebo, in addition to standard heart-failure therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of a first heart-failure event (hospitalization or urgent visit for heart failure) or death from cardiovascular causes. RESULTS During a median of 21.8 months, a primary-outcome event occurred in 1523 of 4120 patients (37.0%) in the omecamtiv mecarbil group and in 1607 of 4112 patients (39.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86 to 0.99; P = 0.03). A total of 808 patients (19.6%) and 798 patients (19.4%), respectively, died from cardiovascular causes (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.11). There was no significant difference between groups in the change from baseline on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score. At week 24, the change from baseline for the median N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level was 10% lower in the omecamtiv mecarbil group than in the placebo group; the median cardiac troponin I level was 4 ng per liter higher. The frequency of cardiac ischemic and ventricular arrhythmia events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection, those who received omecamtiv mecarbil had a lower incidence of a composite of a heart-failure event or death from cardiovascular causes than those who received placebo. (Funded by Amgen and others; GALACTIC-HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02929329; EudraCT number, 2016 -002299-28.)

Management and 1-year outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation and chronic kidney disease: Results from the prospective garfield-af registry

Background-—Using data from the GARFIELD-AF (Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD–Atrial Fibrillation), we evaluated the impact of chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage on clinical outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods and Results-—GARFIELD-AF is a prospective registry of patients from 35 countries, including patients from Asia (China, India, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Thailand). Consecutive patients enrolled (2013–2016) were classified with no, mild, or moderate-to-severe CKD, based on the National Kidney Foundation’s Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative guidelines. Data on CKD status and outcomes were available for 33 024 of 34 854 patients (including 9491 patients from Asia); 10.9% (n=3613) had moderate-to-severe CKD, 16.9% (n=5595) mild CKD, and 72.1% (n=23 816) no CKD. The use of oral anticoagulants was influenced by stroke risk (ie, post hoc assessment of CHA2DS2-VASc score), but not by CKD stage. The quality of anticoagulant control with vitamin K antagonists did not differ with CKD stage. After adjusting for baseline characteristics and antithrombotic use, both mild and moderate-to-severe CKD were independent risk factors for all-cause mortality. Moderate-to-severe CKD was independently associated with a higher risk of stroke/systemic embolism, major bleeding, new-onset acute coronary syndrome, and new or worsening heart failure. The impact of moderate-to-severe CKD on mortality was significantly greater in patients from Asia than the rest of the world (P=0.001). Conclusions-—In GARFIELD-AF, moderate-to-severe CKD was independently associated with stroke/systemic embolism, major bleeding, and mortality. The effect of moderate-to-severe CKD on mortality was even greater in patients from Asia than the rest of the world

Vitamin K antagonist control in patients with atrial fibrillation in Asia compared with other regions of the world: Real-world data from the GARFIELD-AF registry

Objective: To compare the distribution of international normalized ratios (INRs) in patients receiving vitamin K antagonist (VKA) for newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation in Eastern and Southeastern Asia and in other regions of the world (ORW) represented in the ongoing, global observational study GARFIELD-AF

Evolving antithrombotic treatment patterns for patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation

Objective We studied evolving antithrombotic therapy patterns in patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and >= 1 additional stroke risk factor between 2010 and 2015

Two-year outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation: results from GARFIELD-AF

The relationship between outcomes and time after diagnosis for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is poorly defined, especially beyond the first year