C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, lactate and score apache II in septic patients' prognosis.

Background: APACHE-II IS a score, based on several clinical and analytical measurements within 24 hours of admission in Intensive Care Unit (ICU). C-Reactive Protein (CRP), Lactate and recently Procalcitonin (PCT), also are biomarkers for the assessment of septic patients. The aim of this study was to find out if CRP, lactate and PCT during the first 24 hours from severe sepsis or septic shock onset, improved prediction of the APACHE II in terms of prognosis. Conclusions: CRP improves the prediction of patients with sepsis used in conjunction with the APACHE II score in severe sepsis and, lactate along with the CRP are the best precictors of survival in the cases of septic shock. The PCT did not show any predictive value.

Retest reliability of individual p3 topography assessed by high density electroencephalography.

BACKGROUND Some controversy remains about the potential applicability of cognitive potentials for evaluating the cerebral activity associated with cognitive capacity. A fundamental requirement is that these neurophysiological parameters show a high level of stability over time. Previous studies have shown that the reliability of diverse parameters of the P3 component (latency and amplitude) ranges between moderate and high. However, few studies have paid attention to the retest reliability of the P3 topography in groups or individuals. Considering that changes in P3 topography have been related to different pathologies and healthy aging, the main objective of this article was to evaluate in a longitudinal study (two sessions) the reliability of P3 topography in a group and at the individual level. RESULTS The correlation between sessions for P3 topography in the grand average of groups was high (r = 0.977, p<0.001). The within-subject correlation values ranged from 0.626 to 0.981 (mean: 0.888). In the between-subjects topography comparisons, the correlation was always lower for comparisons between different subjects than for within-subjects correlations in the first session but not in the second session. CONCLUSIONS The present study shows that P3 topography is highly reliable for group analysis (comprising the same subjects) in different sessions. The results also confirmed that retest reliability for individual P3 maps is suitable for follow-up studies for a particular subject. Moreover, P3 topography appears to be a specific marker considering that the between-subjects correlations were lower than the within-subject correlations. However, P3 topography appears more similar between subjects in the second session, demonstrating that is modulated by experience. Possible clinical applications of all these results are discussed.

Cuestiones controvertidas en evaluación económica (II): medidas de resultado en salud de las intervenciones sanitarias

In this second article of a series of three, we will discuss using the Metaplan technique on controversial issues of health outcomes in economic evaluation of health care interventions. The four-discussion areas focus on: choice of health outcomes measures, where any outcome measure is superior to another; extrapolation and transferability of health outcomes measures, which should not be assumed the results of an EEIS of one country to another without making certain adjustments; appropriate instruments to measure quality of life in Spain, where the EQ-5D was indicated as convenient due to its widespread international use; and, indirect comparisons, where the combination of both comparisons, direct and indirect, it would be advisable if the test for indirect estimates is consistent and has been validated. Finally, research lines to try to overcome the identified discrepancies were identified in each of these areas, some of those are: doing studies of correlation between scores of specific and generic instruments measuring quality of life; update or create a database of economic evaluations in Spain; estimating utilities for the Spanish population by existing generic and specific instruments; or, establish a common way to show the results of a meta-analysis network.