Reacreditación o recertificación de los cirujanos generales en España: esa es la cuestión. Resultados de una encuesta nacional

IntroductionThe Law for the Regulation of Health Professions (LOPS) indicates that health professionals will carry out continuous training throughout their professional life, and will regularly prove their professional competence. The objective of the study was to carry out a national survey to find out the opinion of Spanish surgeons and thus be able to prepare a recertification project by the Spanish Association of Surgeons (AEC).MethodsCross-sectional observational study carried out in June-July 2020, through a survey sent to the members of the AEC.ResultsThe survey had a total of 1230 visits and an overall completion rate of 784 responses (67.3%). 69.6% were unaware of the LOPS forecasts and 83.4% were unaware of similar initiatives in other specialties and 95.5% agreed to demand adequate information. 71.4% believed it necessary but only 57% believed that it should be mandatory. 82.9% would agree that it should be regulated through an objective and predictable official procedure.ConclusionsThe concept of re-accreditation is not well known in our specialty and in view of the results obtained, adequate and reliable information seems necessary. Therefore, it would be pertinent to propose by the AEC a specific project to assess activities and skills.     

COVID-19 Gender Disparities and Mitigation Recommendations: A Narrative Review

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has rapidly created widespread impacts on global health and the economy. Data suggest that women are less susceptible to severe illness. However, sex-disaggregated data are incomplete, leaving room for misinterpretation, and focusing only on biologic sex underestimates the gendered impact of the pandemic on women. This narrative review summarizes what is known about gender disparities during the COVID-19 pandemic and the economic, domestic, and health burdens along with overlapping vulnerabilities related to the pandemic. In addition, this review outlines recommended strategies that advocacy groups, community leaders, and policymakers should implement to mitigate the widening gender disparities related to COVID-19.     

Emergency Care EMTALA Alterations During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States

The coronavirus 2019 pandemic has affected almost every aspect of health care delivery in the United States, and the emergency medicine system has been hit particularly hard while dealing with this public health crisis. In an unprecedented time in our history, medical systems and clinicians have been asked to be creative, flexible, and innovative, all while continuing to uphold the important standards in the US health care system. To continue providing quality services to patients during this extraordinary time, care providers, organizations, administrators, and insurers have needed to alter longstanding models and procedures to respond to the dynamics of a pandemic. The Emergency Medicine Treatment and Active Labor Act of 1986, or EMTALA, is 1 example of where these alterations have allowed health care facilities and clinicians to continue their work of caring for patients while protecting both the patients and the clinicians themselves from infectious exposures at the same time.     

流动人口基层医疗卫生机构首诊现状及影响因素分析

目的:了解流动人口基层首诊现状及其影响因素,为推进流动人口分级诊疗提供实证参考依据。方法:基于2017年全国流动人口动态监测调查数据中82734名最近1次患病(负伤)流动人口数据,利用SPSS 25.0统计软件分析其基层首诊情况及影响因素。结果:82734名最近1次患病(负伤)流动人口中首选到基层医疗卫生机构就诊15936人,基层首诊率仅为19.3%;二分类logistic回归分析结果显示:年龄≥65岁、农业户口、流动时间0~5年、患慢性病、至少参加1项医疗保险,居住地到最近医疗服务机构所需时间≤15 min的流动人口患病后更愿意选择到基层首诊。学历大专及以上、家庭月均收入>10000元、市跨县、东北地区、不愿意落户、自评健康状况为不健康的流动人口患病后更不愿意选择到基层首诊。结论:流动人口患病(负伤)后选择到基层首诊率较低,年龄、受教育程度、户口类型、家庭月均总收入、流动时间、流动范围、流入地区域、落户意愿、自评健康状况、是否患慢性病、有无参加医疗保险、居住地到最近医疗服务机构所需时间是影响流动人口患病(负伤)后选择到基层首诊的主要因素。     

Out of the boxes,out of the silos: The need of interdisciplinary collaboration to reduce poor-quality medical products in the supply chain

In this paper, we argue that understanding and addressing the problem of poor-quality medical products requires a more interdisciplinary approach than has been evident to date. While prospective studies based on rigorous standardized methodologies are the gold standard for measuring the prevalence of poor-quality medical products and understanding their distribution nationally and internationally, they should be complemented by social science research to unpack the complex set of social, economic, and governance factors that underlie these patterns. In the following sections, we discuss specific examples of prospective quality surveys and of social science studies, highlighting the value of cross-sector partnerships in driving high-quality, policy-relevant research in this area.     

特发性肺纤维化急性加重期证候与血清生物标志物的相关性研究＊

目的 通过分析特发性肺纤维化急性加重期（AE-IPF）患者证候与血清生物标志物的关系，为中医辨证治疗提供参考。方法 采用观察性研究设计，收集2019年3月至2019年11月三个中心的AE-IPF患者76例，其中痰热壅肺证26例、痰浊阻肺证50例，并纳入健康志愿者10例作为对照。采用ELISA测定患者血清CCL18、HMGB1、KL-6、MMP-7、SP-A和SP-D水平，分析与中医证候的相关性。结果 AE-IPF患者血清CCL18、HMGB1、KL-6、MMP-7、SP-A和SP-D水平均显著高于健康对照组。血清CCL18、HMGB1、KL-6、MMP-7和SP-D水平在痰热壅肺证和痰浊阻肺证患者间无显著性差异（P＞0.05），而血清SP-A水平存在显著性差异（P＜0.05）。结论 血清SP-A与AE-IPF证候存在一定的相关性，血清SP-A的浓度升高，与痰热壅肺证关系越密切，反之，血清SP-A浓度降低，则与痰浊阻肺证关系越密切。AE-IPF痰热壅肺证患者的预后可能较痰浊阻肺证患者更差。     

Variability in non-core vaccination rates of dogs and cats in veterinary clinics across the United States

Vaccination guidelines for dogs and cats indicate that core vaccines (for dogs, rabies, distemper, adenovirus, parvovirus; for cats, feline parvovirus, herpes virus-1, calicivirus) are essential to maintain health, and that non-core vaccines be administered according to a clinician’s assessment of a pet’s risk of exposure and susceptibility to infection. A reliance on individual risk assessment introduces the potential for between-practice inconsistencies in non-core vaccine recommendations. A study was initiated to determine non-core vaccination rates of dogs (Leptospira, Borrelia burgdorferi, Bordetella bronchiseptica, canine influenza virus) and cats (feline leukemia virus) in patients current for core vaccines in veterinary practices across the United States. Transactional data for 5,531,866 dogs (1,670 practices) and 1,914,373 cats (1,661 practices) were retrieved from practice management systems for the period November 1, 2016 through January 1, 2020, deidentified and normalized. Non-core vaccination status was evaluated in 2,798,875 dogs and 788,772 cats that were core-vaccine current. Nationally, median clinic vaccination rates for dogs were highest for leptospirosis (70.5%) and B. bronchiseptica (68.7%), and much lower for canine influenza (4.8%). In Lyme-endemic states, the median clinic borreliosis vaccination rate was 51.8%. Feline leukemia median clinic vaccination rates were low for adult cats (34.6%) and for kittens and 1-year old cats (36.8%). Individual clinic vaccination rates ranged from 0 to 100% for leptospirosis, B. bronchiseptica and feline leukemia, 0–96% for canine influenza, and 0–94% for borreliosis. Wide variation in non-core vaccination rates between clinics in similar geographies indicates that factors other than disease risk are driving the use of non-core vaccines in pet dogs and cats, highlighting a need for veterinary practices to address gaps in patient protection. Failure to implement effective non-core vaccination strategies leaves susceptible dogs and cats unprotected against vaccine-preventable diseases.