Comparison of the traditional pharmaceutical validation method versus an assisted pharmaceutical validation in hospitalized patients

Objective: To analyze pharmaceutical interventions that have been carried out with the support of an automated system for validation of treatments vs. the traditional method without computer support. Method: The automated program, ALTOMEDICAMENTOS® version 0, has 925 052 data with information regarding approximately 20 000 medicines, analyzing doses, administration routes, number of days with such a treatment, dosing in renal and liver failure, interactions control, similar drugs, and enteral medicines. During eight days, in four different hospitals (high complexity with over 1 000 beds, 400-bed intermediate, geriatric and monographic), the same patients and treatments were analyzed using both systems. Results: 3,490 patients were analyzed, with 42 155 different treatments. 238 interventions were performed using the traditional system (interventions 0.56% / possible interventions) vs. 580 (1.38%) with the automated one. Very significant pharmaceutical interventions were 0.14% vs. 0.46%; significant was 0.38% vs. 0.90%; non-significant was 0.05% vs. 0.01%, respectively. If both systems are simultaneously used, interventions are performed in 1.85% vs. 0.56% with just the traditional system. Using only the traditional model, 30.5% of the possible interventions are detected, whereas without manual review and only the automated one, 84% of the possible interventions are detected. Conclusions: The automated system increases pharmaceutical interventions between 2.43 to 3.64 times. According to the results of this study the traditional validation system needs to be revised relying on automated systems. The automated program works correctly in different hospitals.

Comparison of two field methods for estimating body fat in different Spanish Dance disciplines

The purpose of the present study was to investigate percentage body fat (%BF) differences in three Spanish dance disciplines and to compare skinfold and bioelectrical impedance predictions of body fat percentage in the same sample. Seventy-six female dancers, divided into three groups, Classical (n=23), Spanish (n=29) and Flamenco (n=24), were measured using skinfold measurements at four sites: triceps, subscapular, biceps and iliac crest, and whole body multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance (BIA). The skin-fold measures were used to predict body fat percentage via Durnin and Womersley's and Segal, Sun and Yannakoulia equations by BIA. Differences in percent fat mass between groups (Classical, Spanish and Flamenco) were tested by using repeated measures analysis (ANOVA). Also, Pearson's product-moment correlations were performed on the body fat percentage values obtained using both methods. In addition, Bland-Altman plots were used to assess agreement, between anthropometric and BIA methods. Repeated measures analysis of variance did not found differences in %BF between modalities (p<0.05). Fat percentage correlations ranged from r= 0.57 to r=0.97 (all, p<0.001). Bland-Altman analysis revealed differences between BIA Yannakoulia as a reference method with BIA Segal (-0.35 ± 2.32%, 95%CI: -0.89to 0.18, p=0.38), with BIA Sun (-0.73 ± 2.3%, 95%CI: -1.27 to -0.20, p=0.014) and Durnin-Womersley (-2.65 ± 2,48%, 95%CI: -3.22 to -2.07, p<0.0001). It was concluded that body fat percentage estimates by BIA compared with skinfold method were systematically different in young adult female ballet dancers, having a tendency to produce underestimations as %BF increased with Segal and Durnin-Womersley equations compared to Yannakoulia, concluding that these methods are not interchangeable.