Impacto financiero de la unificación del plan obligatorio de salud subsidiado (pos-s) en las empresas sociales del estado (ese) de mediana complejidad de Cundinamarca

A partir de la Ley 100 de 1993, el sistema de salud en Colombia ha presentado una serie de trasformaciones que buscan mejorar la prestación de los servicios y lograr cubrimiento de la población no favorecida y excluida del Plan Obligatorio de Salud (POS). Sin embargo, las Empresas sociales del Estado (ESE), en aras de dar cumplimiento a las disposiciones y normatividades que exige la ley, funcionan y prestan sus servicios acorde con los objetivos corporativos planteados por ellas mismas, a pesar de tener una gran cartera por parte de las Entidades Promotoras de Salud (EPS). El propósito de esta investigación es evaluar el impacto financiero en una muestra de cuatro hospitales públicos de Cundinamarca (las ESE San Rafael de Facatativá, Fusagasugá, Cáqueza, y el Salvador de Ubaté), luego de la aplicación del Acuerdo 032 del 2012 de la Comisión de Regulación en Salud (CRES). Se seleccionaron cuatro hospitales públicos de mediana complejidad de Cundinamarca, por ser uno de los departamentos más representativos en hospitales de este tipo. Se encontró una mayor convergencia en términos de estructura administrativa y financiera, lo que hace posible que la información obtenida sea comparable y útil para la medición en términos de presupuesto y liquidez. El incremento de la cartera y la disminución de la rotación de la misma, con la afectación respectiva de la liquidez y la rentabilidad, dificultan el logro de las instituciones como lo son la sostenibilidad y perdurabilidad. El cambio del pagador después de la aplicación de la norma incidió directamente en lo anterior; igualmente, traspasar la población no cubierta al régimen subsidiado eliminó el desembolso por parte de la Secretaría de Salud y lo trasladó a las EPS subsidiados, afectando directamente los tiempos de rotación de cartera como se documenta en el análisis.

Riesgo de accidentes biológicos en estudiantes de la salud: revisión de la literatura en los últimos 14 años.

Introducción: Todos los trabajadores del área de la salud están en riesgo de padecer un accidente biológico. No obstante los estudiantes de estas aéreas, pueden presentar más riesgo porque apenas están en formación y no tienen la práctica o experiencia suficiente. Existen varios artículos que han estudiado la incidencia y prevalencia de accidentes biológicos en los trabajadores del área de la salud, Sin embargo, sobre esta problemática de la población estudiantil del área de la salud, se encuentra menos literatura. Por lo tanto con esta revisión sistemática se busca analizar y actualizar este tema. Métodos: Se realizó una revisión de la literatura científica de artículos publicados en los últimos 14 años, en relación con la prevalencia de accidentes biológicos en estudiantes de medicina, odontología, enfermería y residentes del área de la salud a nivel mundial. Se llevó a cabo la búsqueda en la base de datos de Pubmed, encontrando un total de 100 artículos, escritos en inglés, francés, español o portugués. Resultados: Las prevalencias encontradas sobre accidentes biológicos en estudiantes fueron las siguientes: en países europeos a nivel de enfermería los valores oscilan entre 10.2 % a 32%, en medicina fueron del 16%-58.8%, y en odontología del 21 %. En países asiáticos, se encontró que en enfermería el porcentaje varía de 49%-96 %, en medicina van del 35% -68%, y en odontología varia de 68.a 75.4%. En Norte América, en medicina las cifras fluctúan alrededor del 11-72.7 % y en odontología giran alrededor del 19.1%. Finalmente respecto a Suramérica la prevalencia fue de 31.2 a 46.7% en medicina, y del 40% en enfermería. Conclusiones: Por lo anterior se pudo concluir que, la prevalencia de accidentes biológicos en los estudiantes del área de la salud es elevada y varía según el continente en el que se encuentren.

Global Acceleration and Dispossesion: Regression in the Right to Life and Public Health during Ecuador’s Neoliberal Decades

The present essay’s central argument or hypothesis is, consequently, that the mechanisms accelerating a wealth concentrating and exclusionary economy centred on the benefit and overprotection of big business—with a corresponding plundering of resources that are vital for life—generated forms of loss and regression in the right to healthcare and the dismantling of institutional protections. These are all expressed in indicators from 1990-2005, which point not only to the deterioration of healthcare programs and services but also to the undermining of the general conditions of life (social reproduction) and, in contrast to the reports and predictions of the era’s governments, a stagnation or deterioration in health indicators, especially for those most sensitive to the crisis. The present study’s argument is linked together across distinct chapters. First, we undertake the necessary clarification of the categories central to the understanding of a complex issue; clarifying the concept of health itself and its determinants, emphasizing the necessity of taking on an integral understanding as a fundamental prerequisite to unravelling what documents and reports from this era either leave unsaid or distort. Based on that analysis, we will explain the harmful effects of global economic acceleration, the monopolization and pillaging of strategic healthcare goods; not only those which directly place obstacles on the access to health services, but also those like the destructuration of small economies, linked to the impoverishment and worsening of living modes. Thinking epidemiologically, we intend to show signs of the deterioration of broad collectivities’ ways of life as a result of the mechanisms of acceleration and pillage. We will then collect disparate evidence of the deterioration of human health and ecosystems to, finally, establish the most urgent conclusions about this unfortunate period of our social and medical history.

The experiences and priorities of young people who care for their siblings in Tanzania and Uganda

This report presents key findings from a small-scale pilot research project that explored the experiences and priorities of young people caring for their siblings in sibling-headed households affected by AIDS in Tanzania and Uganda. Qualitative and participatory research was conducted with 33 young people living in sibling-headed households and 39 NGO staff and community members in rural and urban areas of Tanzania and Uganda. The report analyses the ways that young people manage transitions to caring for their younger siblings following their parents’ death and the impacts of caring on their family relations, education, emotional wellbeing and health, social lives and their transitions to adulthood. The study highlights gendered- and age-related differences in the nature and extent of young people’s care work and discusses young people’s needs and priorities for action, based on the views of young people, NGO staff and community members. Meeting the basic needs of young people living in sibling-headed households, listening to young people’s views, fostering peer support and relationships of trust with supportive adults, raising awareness and advocacy emerge as key priorities to safeguard the rights of children and young people living in sibling-headed households and challenge the stigma and marginalisation they sometimes face.

The contribution of building research to the independence and quality of life of older people

Many nations are experiencing rapid rises in the life expectancy of their citizens. The implications of this major demographic shift are considerable offering opportunities as well as challenges to reconsider how people should spend their later years. A key task is enhancing the quality of life of older people through enabling them to continue to live independently even though illness, accident or frailty may have severely reduced their physical and sensory abilities and, possibly, mental health. Yet the needs of older people and disabled people have been largely ignored in the design of everyday consumer products, the home, transport systems and the built environment in general. Whilst the need for designers, engineers and technologists to provide products, environments and systems which are inclusive of all members of society is widely accepted, there is little understanding of how this can be achieved. In 1998 the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council established its EQUAL Initiative. This has encouraged design, engineering and technology researchers in universities to join with their colleagues from the social, medical and health sciences to investigate a wide range of issues experienced by older and disabled people and to propose solutions. Their research, which directly involves older and disabled people and, for example, social housing providers, social services departments, charities, engineering and architectural consultants, and transport firms, has been extremely successful. In a very short time it has influenced government policy on housing, long-term care, and building standards, and findings have been taken up by architects, designers, health-care professionals and bodies which represent older and disabled people.

Protocol for the PINCER trial: a cluster randomised trial comparing the effectiveness of a pharmacist-led IT-based intervention with simple feedback in reducing rates of clinically important errors in medicines management in general practices

Background: Medication errors are an important cause of morbidity and mortality in primary care. The aims of this study are to determine the effectiveness, cost effectiveness and acceptability of a pharmacist-led information-technology-based complex intervention compared with simple feedback in reducing proportions of patients at risk from potentially hazardous prescribing and medicines management in general (family) practice. Methods: Research subject group: "At-risk" patients registered with computerised general practices in two geographical regions in England. Design: Parallel group pragmatic cluster randomised trial. Interventions: Practices will be randomised to either: (i) Computer-generated feedback; or (ii) Pharmacist-led intervention comprising of computer-generated feedback, educational outreach and dedicated support. Primary outcome measures: The proportion of patients in each practice at six and 12 months post intervention: - with a computer-recorded history of peptic ulcer being prescribed non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs - with a computer-recorded diagnosis of asthma being prescribed beta-blockers - aged 75 years and older receiving long-term prescriptions for angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or loop diuretics without a recorded assessment of renal function and electrolytes in the preceding 15 months. Secondary outcome measures; These relate to a number of other examples of potentially hazardous prescribing and medicines management. Economic analysis: An economic evaluation will be done of the cost per error avoided, from the perspective of the UK National Health Service (NHS), comparing the pharmacist-led intervention with simple feedback. Qualitative analysis: A qualitative study will be conducted to explore the views and experiences of health care professionals and NHS managers concerning the interventions, and investigate possible reasons why the interventions prove effective, or conversely prove ineffective. Sample size: 34 practices in each of the two treatment arms would provide at least 80% power (two-tailed alpha of 0.05) to demonstrate a 50% reduction in error rates for each of the three primary outcome measures in the pharmacist-led intervention arm compared with a 11% reduction in the simple feedback arm. Discussion: At the time of submission of this article, 72 general practices have been recruited (36 in each arm of the trial) and the interventions have been delivered. Analysis has not yet been undertaken.