Derivaciones en los centros de salud de Andalucía según el sexo de profesionales y pacientes: un análisis de género.

BACKGROUND It has been identified differences of medical care practice in primary care related to physician's sex. Simultaneously, there are gender inequalities in the assignment of health resources. Both aspects give rise to an increasing growing interest in the management and provision of health services. OBJECTIVES To examine the differences in the referral practice made by female and male primary care physicians working in health centers in Andalusia, to consider whether there are disparities in referrals received by men and women, and to examine the interaction between patient's sex and physician's sex. METHODS Observational, cross-sectional, and multicenter study. POPULATION 4 health districts in Andalucía and their physicians. SAMPLE 382 physicians. MEASUREMENTS referral rate per visit (RV), referral rate per patient quota (RQ), patient's sex, physician: sex, age, postgraduate family medicine specialty, size of the patient quota by sex, mean number of patients/day by sex, mean age of the patient quota by sex, and proportion of men in the quota. Health center: urban / rural, size of the team, enrolled population, and postgraduate family medicine specialty's accreditation. SOURCES databases of health districts. PERIOD OF STUDY 2010. ANALYSIS Bivariate and multivariate multilevel analysis of the referral rate per visit with mixed Poisson model. RESULTS In 2010 382 physicians made 129,161 referrals to specialized care. The RQ was 23.47 and the RV was 4.92. The RQ in women and men was 27.23 and 19.78 for women physicians, being 27.37 and 19.51 for male physicians. The RV in women and men was 4.92 and 5.48 for women physicians, being 4.54 and 4.93 for male physicians. CONCLUSION There are no differences in referral according to physician's sex. However, there are signs that might indicate the existence of gender inequality, and women patient received less referrals. There are no physician-patient's sex interaction.

El informe sanitario como instrumento para la protección de la salud ambiental

The difficult mission of monitoring environmental health requires that public authorities react by making decisions that safeguard public health. A health report is a tool developed by professionals who give technical advice and provide specialized knowledge to decision-making power bodies to support the management of environmental health risks. This article pays special attention to the main features that characterize the work of this type of administrative document and its functional value and describes some of the problems related to the use of the health report in public management in order to improve the effects of the administrative action. We provide an overview of the fields of intervention requiring the issuance of health reports in the environmental health sphere within the Andalusian public administration in order to present the most recent advances in environmental health protection.

Validación de la versión española del cuestionario sobre la práctica basada en la evidencia en enfermería

Background: The lack of adequate instruments prevents the possibility of assessing the competence of health care staff in evidence-based decision making and further, the identification of areas for improvement with tailored strategies. The aim of this study is to report about the validation process in the Spanish context of the Evidence-Based Practice Questionnaire (EBPQ) from Upton y Upton. Methods: A multicentre, cross-sectional, descriptive psychometric validation study was carried out. For cultural adaptation, a bidirectional translation was developed, accordingly to usual standards. The measuring model from the questionnaire was undergone to contrast, reproducing the original structure by Exploratory Factorial Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factorial Analysis (CFA), including the reliability of factors. Results: Both EFA (57.545% of total variance explained) and CFA (chi2=2359,9555; gl=252; p<0.0001; RMSEA=0,1844; SRMR=0,1081), detected problems with items 7, 16, 22, 23 and 24, regarding to the original trifactorial version of EBPQ. After deleting some questions, a reduced version containing 19 items obtained an adequate factorial structure (62.29% of total variance explained), but the CFA did not fit well. Nevertheless, it was significantly better than the original version (chi2=673.1261; gl=149; p<0.0001; RMSEA=0.1196; SRMR=0.0648). Conclusions: The trifactorial model obtained good empiric evidence and could be used in our context, but the results invite to advance with further refinements into the factor “attitude”, testing it in more contexts and with more diverse professional profiles.