Towards a psychosocial and cultural definition of Mexican homeless girls: a qualitative approach

Homeless women are one of the most vulnerable groups worldwide since they are victims of labor and sexual exploitation, abuse, discrimination and marginalization at a higher rate than the rest of the population. However, currently, Mexico lacks of an accurate definition of such social group, and their characteristics as well as the magnitude and dimensions of the phenomenon are only partially and superficially known. The purpose of this research was to develop and validate a typology of homeless women living in Mexico City. To fulfill this purpose, 300 indepth interviews were conducted and examined thoroughly with a systematic analysis of the content. The main results indicate that homeless women constitute a social group immersed predominantly in circumstances of violence, marginalization, poverty and social exclusion. Also, this collective includes two subgroups: women at risk of homelessness and women emergency sheltered, unsheltered or absolutely homeless and living in places not intended for human habitation. With this typology it is possible to define, characterize and distinguish homeless women. In addition, the phenomenon can be known with more certainty and accuracy enabling, thus, the design of effective treatment strategies.

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.