RESUMO

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: To assess the methodological quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) for the diagnosis and management of Retinal Vein Occlusion (RVO). METHODS: A systematic review of CPGs for the diagnosis and management of RVO was carried out with a search in databases, metasearch engines, CPG development institutions, ophthalmology associations and CPG repositories until April 2022. Search update was performed on April 2023, with no new record available. Five CPGs published in the last 10 years in English/Spanish were selected, and 5 authors evaluated them independently, using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE-II) instrument. An individual assessment of each CPG by domain (AGREE-II), an overall assessment of the guide, and its use with or without modifications were performed. Additionally, a meta-synthesis of the recommendations for the most relevant outcomes was carried out. RESULTS: The lowest score (mean 18.8%) was for domain 5 'applicability', and the highest score (mean 62%) was for domain 4 'clarity of presentation'. The 2019 American guideline (PPP) presented the best score (40.4%) in domain 3 'rigour of development'. When evaluating the overall quality of the CPGs analysed, all CPGs could be recommended with modifications. In the meta-synthesis, anti-VEGF therapy is the first-choice therapy for macular oedema associated with RVO, but there is no clear recommendation about the type of anti-VEGF therapy to choose. Recommendations for diagnosis and follow-up are similar among the CPGs appraised. CONCLUSION: Most CPGs for the diagnosis and management of RVO have a low methodological quality assessed according to the AGREE-II. PPP has the higher score in the domain 'rigour of development'. Among the CPGs appraised, there is no clear recommendation on the type of anti-VEGF therapy to choose.

Assuntos

Assuntos

Assuntos

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: A new type of coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) causes a respiratory distress syndrome that has been called COVID-19 and has generated an unprecedented pandemic. Serious complications include pneumonia, and mortality ranges from 2 to 5%. Until March 26, the World Health Organization reports 462 684 confirmed cases and 20 834 deaths worldwide. Dissemination occurs from aerosols or respiratory droplets. Different scientific societies have published clinical practice guidelines regarding ophthalmic care in the COVID-19 pandemic, but the information is presented inconsistently, which makes decision-making difficult. METHODS: We conducted a sensitive bibliographic search in EMBASE and ophthalmic society webpages, of the clinical practice guidelines of ophthalmic care in pandemic COVID-19. We extracted the recommendations, organizing them into three categories: "Which patients to attend", "How should the clinic work", and "What interventions should be avoided". For each guideline, we assessed whether the search was systematic and whether the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was followed. RESULTS: Fourteen relevant articles were found. Fifty-one recommendations were extracted and are shown in a summary table. None are based on a systematic search for evidence, nor do any use GRADE to develop the recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical practice guidelines that we reviewed all recommend rescheduling all non-urgent consultations and surgeries, reinforcing contact precautions, the use of personal protection elements, and the disinfection of surfaces and instruments. The guidelines should be improved by incorporating systematic searches for evidence, using GRADE for recommendations, and Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) for reporting.

INTRODUCCIÓN: Un nuevo tipo de coronavirus, denominado SARS­CoV-2, puede provocar patología respiratoria, denominada COVID-19, y ha generado una pandemia sin precedentes. Las complicaciones graves incluyen neumonía y la mortalidad oscila entre un 2 a un 5%. Hasta el 26 de marzo de 2020 la OMS informó 462 684 casos confirmados, y 20 834 muertes en todo el mundo. Se transmite por aerosoles o gotitas respiratorias. Distintas sociedades científicas han publicado guías de práctica clínica respecto a la atención oftalmológica en pandemia COVID-19. Cada una expone la información de manera diferente, lo que dificulta la toma de decisiones. MÉTODOS: Realizamos una búsqueda bibliográfica sensible en EMBASE y dirigida en sociedades oftalmológicas de guías de práctica clínica de atención oftalmológica en pandemia COVID-19. Extrajimos las recomendaciones, organizándolas en tres categorías: "qué pacientes tratar", "funcionamiento del policlínico y consulta" y "qué intervenciones evitar". En cada una se evaluó la búsqueda sistemática de evidencia y el uso en las recomendaciones de metodología Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation, GRADE. RESULTADOS: Se encontraron 14 artículos relevantes. Se extrajeron 51 recomendaciones, elaborando una tabla resumen. Ninguna efectuó búsqueda sistemática de evidencia, ni incorporó GRADE en las recomendaciones. CONCLUSIONES: Las guías de práctica clínica revisadas comparten los principios generales de reprogramar toda consulta y cirugía no urgente, reforzando las precauciones de contacto, el uso de elementos de protección personal y desinfección de superficies e instrumentos. Se deben mejorar las guías de práctica clínica incorporando búsquedas sistemáticas de evidencia, usando metodología GRADE para las recomendaciones y Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) para el reporte.

Assuntos

RESUMO

INTRODUCCIÓN: Un nuevo tipo de coronavirus, denominado SARS­CoV-2, puede provocar patología respiratoria, denominada COVID-19, y ha generado una pandemia sin precedentes. Las complicaciones graves incluyen neumonía y la mortalidad oscila entre un 2 a un 5%. Hasta el 26 de marzo de 2020 la OMS informó 462 684 casos confirmados, y 20 834 muertes en todo el mundo. Se transmite por aerosoles o gotitas respiratorias. Distintas sociedades científicas han publicado guías de práctica clínica respecto a la atención oftalmológica en pandemia COVID-19. Cada una expone la información de manera diferente, lo que dificulta la toma de decisiones. MÉTODOS: Realizamos una búsqueda bibliográfica sensible en EMBASE y dirigida en sociedades oftalmológicas de guías de práctica clínica de atención oftalmológica en pandemia COVID-19. Extrajimos las recomendaciones, organizándolas en tres categorías: "qué pacientes tratar", "funcionamiento del policlínico y consulta" y "qué intervenciones evitar". En cada una se evaluó la búsqueda sistemática de evidencia y el uso en las recomendaciones de metodología Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation, GRADE. RESULTADOS: Se encontraron 14 artículos relevantes. Se extrajeron 51 recomendaciones, elaborando una tabla resumen. Ninguna efectuó búsqueda sistemática de evidencia, ni incorporó GRADE en las recomendaciones. CONCLUSIONES: Las guías de práctica clínica revisadas comparten los principios generales de reprogramar toda consulta y cirugía no urgente, reforzando las precauciones de contacto, el uso de elementos de protección personal y desinfección de superficies e instrumentos. Se deben mejorar las guías de práctica clínica incorporando búsquedas sistemáticas de evidencia, usando metodología GRADE para las recomendaciones y Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) para el reporte.

INTRODUCTION: A new type of coronavirus (SARS­CoV-2) causes a respiratory distress syndrome called COVID-19 that has generated an un-precedented pandemic. Serious complications include pneumonia, and mortality ranges from 2 to 5%. Up until 26 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) reports 462 684 confirmed cases and 20 834 deaths worldwide. Dissemination occurs from aerosols or respiratory droplets. Different scientific societies have published clinical practice guidelines regarding ophthalmic care in the COVID-19 pandemic, but the information is presented inconsistently, which makes decision-making difficult. METHODS: We conducted a sensitive bibliographic search in EMBASE and ophthalmic society webpages of the clinical practice guidelines of ophthalmic care in the COVID-19 pandemic. We extracted the recommendations, organizing them into three categories: "which patients to treat", "how should the clinic work", and "what interventions should be avoided". For each guideline, we assessed whether the search was systematic and whether the methodology Grading of recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was followed. RESULTS: Fourteen relevant articles were found. Fifty-one recommendations were extracted and are shown in a table summary. None are based on a systematic search for evidence, nor do any use GRADE to develop the recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: All the clinical practice guidelines that we reviewed recommend rescheduling all non-urgent consultations and surgeries, reinforcing contact precautions, using personal protection elements, and disinfecting surfaces and instruments. The guidelines should be improved by incorporating a systematic search for evidence, using GRADE for recommendations, and the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE II) for reporting.

Assuntos

RESUMO

PURPOSE: To compare perceptions of the quality of ophthalmological services offered to outpatients from the public healthcare system to those from the private healthcare system, and to determine which measures are seen as necessary and a priority for improving the quality of care. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study on 200 patients, 101 and 99 of whom were from the public and private healthcare systems, respectively. All patients underwent an ophthalmological examination at an ophthalmology hospital in Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil. Personal interviews were conducted using two structured questionnaires adapted from the modified SERVQUAL scale. RESULTS: Overall, patients from the private healthcare system were significantly more dissatisfied than those from the public healthcare system. In both systems, reliability was considered to be the most important determinant of quality, and it presented the highest level of dissatisfaction. Satisfaction with the public healthcare system was significantly greater than that with the private healthcare system in terms of the tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, and assurance determinants of the SERVQUAL scale. CONCLUSIONS: Institutions must plan, execute, evaluate, and monitor measures that seek to improve the overall patient satisfaction with the quality of services provided, particularly in the private healthcare system, and special attention must be paid to reliability in both healthcare systems. The identification and monitoring of the quality of healthcare services through the periodic use of the SERVQUAL scale may provide healthcare managers with information so that they can identify, plan, and monitor necessary and priority measures. This could be a key strategy for improving the quality of outpatient health services in the public and private systems.

Assuntos

RESUMO

ABSTRACT Purpose: To compare perceptions of the quality of ophthalmological services offered to outpatients from the public healthcare system to those from the private healthcare system, and to determine which measures are seen as necessary and a priority for improving the quality of care. Methods: This was a prospective observational study on 200 patients, 101 and 99 of whom were from the public and private healthcare systems, respectively. All patients underwent an ophthalmological examination at an ophthalmology hospital in Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil. Personal interviews were conducted using two structured questionnaires adapted from the modified SERVQUAL scale. Results: Overall, patients from the private healthcare system were significantly more dissatisfied than those from the public healthcare system. In both systems, reliability was considered to be the most important determinant of quality, and it presented the highest level of dissatisfaction. Satisfaction with the public healthcare system was significantly greater than that with the private healthcare system in terms of the tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, and assurance determinants of the SERVQUAL scale. Conclusions: Institutions must plan, execute, evaluate, and monitor measures that seek to improve the overall patient satisfaction with the quality of services provided, particularly in the private healthcare system, and special attention must be paid to reliability in both healthcare systems. The identification and monitoring of the quality of healthcare services through the periodic use of the SERVQUAL scale may provide healthcare managers with information so that they can identify, plan, and monitor necessary and priority measures. This could be a key strategy for improving the quality of outpatient health services in the public and private systems.

RESUMO Objetivo: Comparar a percepção da qualidade dos serviços oftalmológicos prestado aos pacientes ambulatoriais do sistema público com a do sistema privado e detectar quais ações são percebidas como necessárias e prioritárias para melhorar a qualidade do atendimento. Métodos: Foi realizado estudo prospectivo observacional de 200 pacientes sendo 101 do sistema público de saúde e 99 do sistema privado submetidos a exame oftalmológico em Hospital Especializado em Oftalmologia (HEO) - Belo Horizonte - MG - Brasil. Realizaram-se entrevistas pessoais, mediante a aplicação de dois questionários estruturados adaptados da escala SERVQUAL modificada. Resultados: No geral, detectou-se que pacientes do sistema de saúde privado, estão significativamente mais insatisfeitos que aqueles do sistema público de saúde. Em ambos os sistemas a confiabilidade foi considerada o determinante de qualidade mais importante e o que apresentou o maior índice de insatisfação. No sistema público a satisfação foi significativamente superior à do sistema privado a nível dos determinantes da escala SERVQUAL: tangibilidade, confiabilidade, atendimento e segurança. Conclusões: A instituição deve planejar, executar, avaliar e monitorar ações que busquem melhorar a satisfação geral dos pacientes com a qualidade do serviço recebido, principalmente do sistema privado, com atenção especial à confiabilidade nos dois sistemas. A identificação e monitorização da qualidade dos serviços de saúde, empregando periodicamente a escala SERVQUAL, poderá fornecer informações à administração dos serviços de saúde para que possam detectar, planejar e monitorizar as ações necessárias e prioritárias, podendo funcionar como chave estratégica para o aprimoramento da qualidade dos serviços de saúde ambulatoriais públicos e privados.

Assuntos

Assuntos

Assuntos

RESUMO

Resumo Objetivo: Este trabalho tem como objetivo avaliar o conhecimento de médicos com formação nas especialidades de clínica médica e cirúrgica acerca do processo de doação de córneas, bem como avaliar a segurança por parte desses profissionais neste processo e, se há insegurança, os motivos para tal. Métodos: A pesquisa se baseia na coleta de dados por meio de um questionário com dez perguntas de múltipla escolha sobre o processo de doação de córneas, sendo duas perguntas sobre segurança no processo de doação. A amostra consiste em 60 profissionais médicos do Hospital Universitário HU-UFSC selecionados por conveniência e não probabilística. Resultados: Os entrevistados obtiveram uma média de acertos de 72,2%. Em relação à segurança no processo de doação de córneas, 41 (68,66%) referem se sentir seguros quanto ao mesmo e 19 (31,33%) revelam não ter segurança para essa condição. Do total de entrevistados que revelaram insegurança no processo de doação de córneas, 13 apontaram como fator contribuinte pouca informação sobre o assunto na faculdade. Alguns temas relevantes a respeito do assunto se mostraram insuficientes e 31,66% dos entrevistados se revelaram inseguros frente a uma situação que envolva doação de córneas. Conclusão: Esses achados sugerem a necessidade de melhorar o nível de informação transmitida durante o curso de graduação acerca do processo de doação de córneas, a fim de conscientizar, melhorar o conhecimento e promover segurança frente a um potencial doador.

Abstract Objective: This study aims to evaluate the knowledge of physicians trained in Internal medicine and General surgery specialties about cornea donation process clinic, as well as to assess the confidence by these professionals in this process and, if there is uncertainty, the reasons for this. Methods: The research is based on data collected through a questionnaire with ten multiple choice questions about the process of cornea donation, in which two questions are about confidence in the donation process. The sample consists of 60 physicians of University Hospital HU-UFSC selected for convenience and non-probability. Results: Respondents had a mean score of 72.2%. Regarding confidence in the donation of corneas, 41 (68.66%) feel confident in the donation process and 19 (31.33%) did not reveal safety for this condition. From the total of respondents who revealed insecurity in cornea donation process, 13 of these indicated as a contributing factor little information on the subject in college. Some relevant themes on the subject are insufficient and 31.66% of the interviewees proved insecure against a situation involving the corneal donation. Conclusion: This finds suggest the need to improve the level of information transmitted during the undergraduate course about the process of corneal donation in order to raise awareness, improve knowledge and promote confidence when facing a potential donor.

Assuntos