Eficacia del aceite de oliva en la prevención de úlceras por presión en pacientes inmovilizados en atención primaria. Ensayo clínico aleatorizado, multicéntrico, paralelo, triple ciego, de no inferioridad

Las úlceras por presión representan un importante problema de salud pública y tienen un importante impacto económico en los sistemas de salud. La mayoría de los estudios para prevenir las úlceras por presión se han llevado a cabo en contextos hospitalarios, usando ácidos grasos hiperoxigenados (AGHO) y hasta la fecha, no se ha realizado ningún estudio específico con aceite de oliva virgen extra (AOVE) en el entorno domiciliario. Material y método Objetivo principal: evaluar si la utilización de AOVE no es inferior a los AGHO en la prevención de úlceras por presión (UPP) en pacientes inmovilizados en el entorno domiciliario. Diseño: Ensayo clínico aleatorizado multicéntrico, paralelo, a triple ciego, de no inferioridad. Ámbito: Población consultante de centros de salud andaluces. Muestra: 831 pacientes inmovilizados en riesgo de padecer UPP. Resultados El período de seguimiento fue de 16 semanas. En el análisis por protocolo, ninguna de las zonas evaluadas presentó diferencias de riesgo de incidencia de las úlceras por presión que superasen el valor delta establecido (10%). Sacro: AOVE 8 (2,55%) vs AGHO 8 (3,08%), RAR 0,53 (-2,2 a 3,26). Talón derecho: AOVE 4 (1,27%) vs AGHO 5 (1,92)%, RAR 0,65 (-1,43 a 2,73). Talón izquierdo: AOVE 3 (0,96%) vs AGHO 3 (1,15%), RAR 0.2 (-1,49 a 1,88). Trocánter Derecho: AOVE 0 (0%) vs AGHO 4 (1,54%), RAR 1,54 (0,04-3,03). Trocánter izquierdo: AOVE 1 (0,32%) vs AGHO 1 (0,38%), RAR 0.07 (-0,91 a 1,04). Discusión Este ensayo clínico pretendía evaluar si la prevención de las UPP usando una fórmula de AOVE no era inferior a la prevención de UPP con el uso AGHO, en el entorno domiciliario y con pacientes inmovilizados de alto riesgo. Los resultados han mostrado esta no inferioridad al no observarse diferencias que hayan superado el límite inferior del intervalo de confianza y convierte al aceite de oliva en un producto eficaz para la prevención de UPP en este tipo de pacientes. Se necesitan más estudios para investigar el mecanismo de acción del AOVE en la prevención de las UPP y relacionarlo con la etiopatogenia de éstas. Bibliografía 1. Gorecki C, Brown JM, Nelson EA, Briggs M, Schoonhoven L, Dealey C, et al. Impact of pressure ulcers on quality of life in older patients: a systematic review. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2009 Jul;57(7):1175–83. 2. Yamamoto Y, Hayashino Y, Higashi T, Matsui M, Yamazaki S, Takegami M, et al. Keeping vulnerable elderly patients free from pressure ulcer is associated with high caregiver burden in informal caregivers. J Eval Clin Pract. 2010 Jun;16(3):585–9. 3. Hanson D, Langemo DK, Anderson J, Thompson P, Hunter S. Friction and shear considerations in pressure ulcer development. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2010 Jan;23(1):21–4. 4. Soldevilla Agreda JJ, Torra i Bou J-E, Verdú Soriano J, López Casanova P. 3.er Estudio Nacional de Prevalencia de Úlceras por Presión en España, 2009: Epidemiología y variables definitorias de las lesiones y pacientes. Gerokomos. 2011 Jun;22(2):77–90. 5. Kottner J, Lahmann N, Dassen T. [Pressure ulcer prevalence: comparison between nursing homes and hospitals]. Pflege Z. 2010 Apr;63(4):228–31. 6. Wilborn D, Halfens R, Dassen T, Tannen A. [Pressure ulcer prevalence in German nursing homes and hospitals: what role does the National Nursing Expert Standard Prevention of Pressure Ulcer play?]. Gesundheitswesen Bundesverb Ärzte Öffentl Gesundheitsdienstes Ger. 2010 Apr;72(4):240–5. 7. Tubaishat A, Anthony D, Saleh M. Pressure ulcers in Jordan: a point prevalence study. J Tissue Viability. 2011 Feb;20(1):14–9. 8. James J, Evans JA, Young T, Clark M. Pressure ulcer prevalence across Welsh orthopaedic units and community hospitals: surveys based on the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel minimum data set. Int Wound J. 2010 Jun;7(3):147–52. 9. Defloor T, Schoonhoven L, Katrien V, Weststrate J, Myny D. Reliability of the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel classification system. J Adv Nurs. 2006 Apr;54(2):189–98

Provision of care services for rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases-related foot and ankle problems: a survey from sixteen european countries

Background: The increased prevalence of foot and ankle pathologies in Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) is well documented1, however the provision of foot & ankle (F&A) healthcare services for people with RMDs in Europe has not been evaluated. Objectives: To assess the current healthcare systems for providing foot & ankle healthcare services for people with RMDs in Europe. Methods: A survey was undertaken to evaluate current provision of F&A health care services for people with RMDs across Europe. A questionnaire was distributed to all 22 country presidents representing HP associations within EULAR. The questionnaire used was developed and piloted (in 7 countries) by the EULAR F&A Study Group, and structured to capture the provision and type of F&A services for people with RMDs. When the HP presidents felt unable to answer specific questions they were encouraged to consult a colleague who may be better placed to provide the answers. Results: Sixteen questionnaires were completed (Norway, Ireland, Sweden, Hungary, Netherlands, UK, Denmark, Portugal, Italy, Switzerland, Austria, France, Czech Republic, Spain, Belgium, Malta). Of the 16, 13 respondents indicated provision of F&A health care services in their country, but only three countries had services specialising in RMD-related F&A problems (Netherlands, UK, Malta). The professions providing the care for patients with RMD-related F&A problems were different depending on the pathology and the country (Table1). Podiatrists provided care for F&A pain and deformity problems in 11 countries, but provided F&A ulcer care in only 8 countriesConclusions: Only 3 countries have F&A health care services specialised to the needs of people with RMDs. The professions providing the care varied between countries, and also depended on the F&A pathology. Interestingly, F&A healthcare services were provided by professions that do not solely specialised in F&A care. Further research is needed to assess the variation of F&A healthcare services between and within European countries and the impact on healthcare of various F&A healthcare service designs. References: Woodburn, J. & Helliwell, P. Foot problems in rheumatology. Rheumatology 36, 932-934 (1997).

Development of the Andalusian Registry of Patients Receiving Community Case Management, for the follow-up of people with complex chronic diseases.

Background: Complex chronic diseases are a challenge for the current configuration of Health services. Case management is a service frequently provided for people with chronic conditions and despite its effectiveness in many outcomes, such as mortality or readmissions, uncertainty remains about the most effective form of team organization, structures, and the nature of the interventions. Many processes and outcomes of case management for people with complex chronic conditions cannot be addressed with the information provided by electronic clinical records. Registries are frequently used to deal with this weakness. The aim of this study was to generate a registry-based information system of patients receiving case management to identify their clinical characteristics, their context of care, events identified during their follow-up, interventions developed by case managers, and services used. Methods and design: The study was divided into three phases, covering the detection of information needs, the design and its implementation in the healthcare system, using literature review and expert consensus methods to select variables that would be included in the registry. Objective: To describe the essential characteristics of the provision of ca re lo people who receive case management (structure, process and outcomes), with special emphasis on those with complex chronic diseases. Study population: Patients from any District of Primary Care, who initiate the utilization of case management services, to avoid information bias that may occur when including subjects who have already been received the service, and whose outcomes and characteristics could not be properly collected. Results: A total of 102 variables representing structure, processes and outcomes of case management were selected for their inclusion in the registry after the consensus phase. Total sample was composed of 427 patients, of which 211 (49.4%) were women and 216 (50.6%) were men. The average functional level (Barthel lndex) was 36.18 (SD 29.02), cognitive function (Pfeiffer) showed an average of 4.37 {SD 6.57), Chat1son Comorbidity lndex, obtained a mean of 3.03 (SD 2.7) and Social Support (Duke lndex) was 34.2 % (SD 17.57). More than half of patients include in the Registry, correspond lo immobilized or transitional care for patients discharged from hospital (66.5 %). The patient's educational level was low or very low (50.4%). Caregivers overstrain (Caregiver stress index), obtained an average value of 6.09% (SD 3.53). Only 1.2 % of patients had declared their advanced directives, 58.6 had not defined the tutelage and the vast majority lived at home 98.8 %. Regarding the major events recorded at RANGE Registry, 25.8 % of the selected patients died in the first three months, 8.2 % suffered a hospital admission at least once time, 2.3%, two times, and 1.2% three times, 7.5% suffered a fall, 8.7% had pressure ulcer, 4.7% had problems with medication, and 3.3 % were institutionalized. Stroke is the more prevalent health problem recorded (25.1%), followed by hypertension (11.1%) and COPD (11.1%). Patients registered by NCMs had as main processes diabetes (16.8%) and dementia (11.3 %). The most frequent nursing diagnoses referred to the self-care deficit in various activities of daily living. Regarding to nursing interventions, described by the Nursing Intervention Classification (NIC), dementia management is the most used intervention, followed by mutual goal setting, caregiver and emotional support. Conclusions: The patient profile who receive case management services is a chronic complex patient with severe dependence, cognitive impairment, normal social support, low educational level, health problems such as stroke, hypertension or COPD, diabetes or dementia, and has an informal caregiver. At the first follow up, mortality was 19.2%, and a discrete rate of readmissions and falls.

Atritis gotosa como causa de pie de riesgo

INTRODUCCIÓN: La gota es una manifestación común de la artritis, cuya inflamación se debe al depóstido de cristales de uratao monosódico en articulaciones y tejidos blandos por un aumento de ácido úrico en sangre y su padecimiento muestra una relación creciente con la edad. OBJETIVOS: Analizar las características fisiopatológicas de la artritis gotosa en el pie así como justificar la repercusión negativa que tiene su padecimiento en la calidad de vida de la población basándose en la simple afectación del pie. METODOLOGÍA: Se realizó una revisión bibliográfica basada en la búsqueda en las bases de datos PubMed y Scopus empleando los descriptores "gout", "gouty arthritis", "foot", "healing", "ulcer" y "wound". Se filtraron los artículos publicados posteriormente al año 2010 en inglés y castellano. RESULTADOS: Los niveles altos de ácido úrico en úlceras están relacionados con su gravedad y la mala cicatrización. La artritis gotosa en el pie se manifiesta mayoritariamente en la 1ª AMTF, siendo esto más común en hombres (68,6%) que en mujeres (31,8%). La manifestación en el pie se da al inicio de la enfermedad en el 43-76% de los casos. Su repercusión a nivel biomecánico-postural da lugar a zonas de presión anormales en el pie pudiendo causar complicaciones secudndarias (por ejemplo úlceras). DISCUSIÓN/CONCLUSIONES: La gota se relaciona íntimamente con la obesidad, el envejecimiento, la diabetes, patologías vasculares y más enfermedades concomicantes que están muy ligadas a la aparición de úlceras y su infeccción. ÇEl pie se ve afectado tanto en su función articular como muscular en este tipo de pacientes y el calzado es una interveción eficaz para reducir la discapacidad, deterioro, dolor y mejorar la marcha. Tanto en esto último como en la curaión de las zonas ulceradas y en la prevención de la artritis gotosa, el podólogo juega un papel fundamental.