BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The aim was assessing a short training for healthcare providers on patient-focused counselling to treat childhood obesity in primary care, along with dietitian-led workshops and educational materials. METHODS: Randomized clustered trial conducted with paediatrician-nurse pairs (Basic Care Units [BCU]) in primary care centres from Tarragona (Spain). BCUs were randomized to intervention (MI) (motivational interview, dietitian-led education, and educational materials) or control group (SC, standard care). Participants were 8-14-year-old children with obesity, undergoing 1-11 monthly treatment visits during 1 year at primary care centres. The primary outcome was BMI z-score reduction. RESULTS: The study included 44 clusters (23 MI). Out of 303 allocated children, 201 (n = 106 MI) completed baseline, final visits, and at least one treatment visit and were included in the analysis. BMI z-score reduction was -0.27 (±0.31) in SC, versus -0.36 (±0.35) in MI (p = 0.036). Mixed models with centres as random effects showed greater reductions in BMI in MI than SC; differences were B = -0.11 (95% CI: -0.20, -0.01, p = 0.025) for BMI z-score, and B = -2.06 (95% CI: -3.89, -0.23, p = 0.028) for BMI %. No severe adverse events related to the study were notified. CONCLUSION: Training primary care professionals on motivational interviewing supported by dietitians and educational materials, enhanced the efficacy of childhood obesity therapy.

Introduction: The health emergency caused by COVID-19 has led to substantial changes in the usual working system of primary healthcare centers and in relations with users. The Catalan Society of Family and Community Medicine designed a survey that aimed to collect the opinions and facilitate the participation of its partners on what the future work model of general practitioners (GPs) should look like post-COVID-19. Methodology: Online survey of Family and Community Medicine members consisting of filiation data, 22 Likert-type multiple-choice questions grouped in five thematic axes, and a free text question. Results: The number of respondents to the questionnaire was 1051 (22.6% of all members): 83.2% said they spent excessive time on bureaucratic tasks; 91.8% were against call center systems; 66% believed that home care is the responsibility of every family doctor; 77.5% supported continuity of care as a fundamental value of patient-centered care; and >90% defended the contracting of complementary tests and first hospital visits from primary healthcare (PHC). Conclusions: The survey responses describe a strong consensus on the identity and competencies of the GP and on the needs of and the threats to the PHC system. The demand for an increase in health resources, greater professional leadership, elimination of bureaucracy, an increase in the number of health professionals, and greater management autonomy, are the axes towards which a new era in PHC should be directed.

BackgroundThe Covid-19 pandemic has increased stress levels in GPs, who have resorted to different coping strategies to deal with this crisis. Gender differences in coping styles may be contributing factors in the development of psychological distress.ObjectivesTo identify differences by gender and by stress level in coping strategies of GPs during the Covid-19 pandemic.MethodsA cross-sectional, web-based survey conducted with GPs in Catalonia (Spain), in June-July 2021. via the institution’s email distribution list, all GPs members of the Catalan Society of Family and Community Medicine were invited to complete a survey assessing sociodemographic, health and work-related characteristics, experienced stress (Stress scale of the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scales-DASS 21) and the frequency of use of a range of coping strategies (Brief-COPE) classified as problem-focused, emotion-focused and avoidant strategies, some of which are adaptive and others maladaptive. We compared the scores of each strategy by gender and stress level using Student’s t-test.ResultsOf 4739 members, 522 GPs participated in the study (response rate 11%; 79.1% women; mean age = 46.9 years, SD = 10.5). Of these, 41.9% reported moderate-severe stress levels. The most common coping strategies were acceptance, active coping, planning, positive reframing and venting. More frequently than men, women resorted to emotional and instrumental support, venting, distraction and self-blame, whereas men used acceptance and humour more commonly than women. Moderate-severe stress levels were associated with non-adaptive coping, with increased use of avoidance strategies, self-blame, religion and venting, and decreased use of positive reframing and acceptance.ConclusionThe most common coping strategies were adaptive and differed by gender. However, highly stressful situations caused maladaptive strategies to emerge.

Objective: To evaluate the feasibility, reliability and validity of the VIG-express questionnaire. Design: Descriptive, observational, cross-sectional and multicenter study. Setting: Catalonia. Participants: 24 professionals from 18 centers: 10 from Primary Care, 5 from hospitals acute, 2 intermediate care and 3 residential. Main measurements: For the feasibility analysis, the administration time-mean and standard deviation (SD)-. The questionnaire was administered twice to the same patient by the same professional (intraobserver agreement), or by two different professionals (interobserver agreement), evaluating the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Discriminant validity was calculated by comparing the responses of subgroup with higher fragility (percentile > 75) and subgroup with lower fragility (percentile < 25), for each item of the questionnaire. Results: 195 questionnaires were administered, 59 repeatedly, in a group of elderly (mean age of 79 years) and fragile (mean score of 0.33 in the Fragile Index-VIG). The average administration time was 6.52 minutes (DE: 6.02). The concordance in the degree of fragility score obtained a ICC of 0.95 (intraobserver) and 0.72 (interobserver). In discriminant validity, the differences in response frequencies between the two subgroups ranged from 1.7 (oncological disease) to 67.1 (medication management), all of which were statistically significant (p < 0.05), with the sole exceptions of the presence of oncological and neurological diseases. Conclusions: The VIG-express questionnaire appears to be a feasible, reliable and valid tool for rapid multidimensional/geriatric assessment. (c) 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Espana, S.L.U. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license