Gender and the professional career of primary care physicians in Andalusia (Spain).

Background: Although the proportion of women in medicine is growing, female physicians continue to be disadvantaged in professional activities. The purpose of the study was to determine and compare the professional activities of female and male primary care physicians in Andalusia and to assess the effect of the health center on the performance of these activities. Methods: Descriptive, cross-sectional, and multicenter study. Setting: Spain. Participants: Population: urban health centers and their physicians. Sample: 88 health centers and 500 physicians. Independent variable: gender. Measurements: Control variables: age, postgraduate family medicine specialty (FMS), patient quota, patients/day, hours/day housework from Monday to Friday, idem weekend, people at home with special care, and family situation. Dependent variables: 24 professional activities in management, teaching, research, and the scientific community. Self-administered questionnaire. Descriptive, bivariate, and multilevel logistic regression analyses. Results: Response: 73.6%. Female physicians: 50.8%. Age: female physicians, 49.1 ± 4.3 yrs; male physicians, 51.3 ± 4.9 yrs (p < 0.001). Female physicians with FMS: 44.2%, male physicians with FMS: 33.3% (p < 0.001). Female physicians dedicated more hours to housework and more frequently lived alone versus male physicians. There were no differences in healthcare variables. Thirteen of the studied activities were less frequently performed by female physicians, indicating their lesser visibility in the production and diffusion of scientific knowledge. Performance of the majority of professional activities was independent of the health center in which the physician worked. Conclusions: There are gender inequities in the development of professional activities in urban health centers in Andalusia, even after controlling for family responsibilities, work load, and the effect of the health center, which was important in only a few of the activities under study.

The development of the Quality Indicator for Rehabilitative Care (QuIRC): a measure of best practice for facilities for people with longer term mental health problems

BACKGROUND: Despite the progress over recent decades in developing community mental health services internationally, many people still receive treatment and care in institutional settings. Those most likely to reside longest in these facilities have the most complex mental health problems and are at most risk of potential abuses of care and exploitation. This study aimed to develop an international, standardised toolkit to assess the quality of care in longer term hospital and community based mental health units, including the degree to which human rights, social inclusion and autonomy are promoted. METHOD: The domains of care included in the toolkit were identified from a systematic literature review, international expert Delphi exercise, and review of care standards in ten European countries. The draft toolkit comprised 154 questions for unit managers. Inter-rater reliability was tested in 202 units across ten countries at different stages of deinstitutionalisation and development of community mental health services. Exploratory factor analysis was used to corroborate the allocation of items to domains. Feedback from those using the toolkit was collected about its usefulness and ease of completion. RESULTS: The toolkit had excellent inter-rater reliability and few items with narrow spread of response. Unit managers found the content highly relevant and were able to complete it in around 90 minutes. Minimal refinement was required and the final version comprised 145 questions assessing seven domains of care. CONCLUSIONS: Triangulation of qualitative and quantitative evidence directed the development of a robust and comprehensive international quality assessment toolkit for units in highly variable socioeconomic and political contexts

A cohort study of routinely used sepsis biomarkers and 28-day mortality.

The evaluation of sepsis severity is complicated by the highly variable and nonspecific nature of clinical signs and symptoms. We studied routinely used biomarkers together with clinical parameters to compare their prognostic value for severe sepsis and evaluate their usefulness.

Management of bleeding and coagulopathy following major trauma: an updated European guideline.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence-based recommendations are needed to guide the acute management of the bleeding trauma patient. When these recommendations are implemented patient outcomes may be improved. METHODS: The multidisciplinary Task Force for Advanced Bleeding Care in Trauma was formed in 2005 with the aim of developing a guideline for the management of bleeding following severe injury. This document represents an updated version of the guideline published by the group in 2007 and updated in 2010. Recommendations were formulated using a nominal group process, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) hierarchy of evidence and based on a systematic review of published literature. RESULTS: Key changes encompassed in this version of the guideline include new recommendations on the appropriate use of vasopressors and inotropic agents, and reflect an awareness of the growing number of patients in the population at large treated with antiplatelet agents and/or oral anticoagulants. The current guideline also includes recommendations and a discussion of thromboprophylactic strategies for all patients following traumatic injury. The most significant addition is a new section that discusses the need for every institution to develop, implement and adhere to an evidence-based clinical protocol to manage traumatically injured patients. The remaining recommendations have been re-evaluated and graded based on literature published since the last edition of the guideline. Consideration was also given to changes in clinical practice that have taken place during this time period as a result of both new evidence and changes in the general availability of relevant agents and technologies. CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach to trauma care and mechanisms with which to ensure that established protocols are consistently implemented will ensure a uniform and high standard of care across Europe and beyond.