BackgroundPulmonary Rehabilitation for moderate Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in primary care could improve patients’ quality of life.MethodsThis study aimed to assess the efficacy of a 3-month Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR) program with a further 9 months of maintenance (RHBM group) compared with both PR for 3 months without further maintenance (RHB group) and usual care in improving the quality of life of patients with moderate COPD.We conducted a parallel-group, randomized clinical trial in Majorca primary health care in which 97 patients with moderate COPD were assigned to the 3 groups. Health outcomes were quality of life, exercise capacity, pulmonary function and exacerbations.ResultsWe found statistically and clinically significant differences in the three groups at 3 months in the emotion dimension (0.53; 95%CI0.06-1.01) in the usual care group, (0.72; 95%CI0.26-1.18) the RHB group (0.87; 95%CI 0.44-1.30) and the RHBM group as well as in fatigue (0.47; 95%CI 0.17-0.78) in the RHBM group. After 1 year, these differences favored the long-term rehabilitation group in the domains of fatigue (0.56; 95%CI 0.22-0.91), mastery (0.79; 95%CI 0.03-1.55) and emotion (0.75; 95%CI 0.17-1.33). Between-group analysis only showed statistically and clinically significant differences between the RHB group and control group in the dyspnea dimension (0.79 95%CI 0.05-1.52). No differences were found for exacerbations, pulmonary function or exercise capacity.ConclusionsWe found that patients with moderate COPD and low level of impairment did not show meaningful changes in QoL, exercise tolerance, pulmonary function or exacerbation after a one-year, community based rehabilitation program. However, long-term improvements in the emotional, fatigue and mastery dimensions (within intervention groups) were identified.Trial registrationISRCTN94514482

ObjectivesPrimary: To compare the effectiveness of intensive group and individual interventions for smoking cessation in a primary health care setting; secondary: to identify the variables associated with smoking cessation.MethodsThree-pronged clinical trial with randomisation at the individual level. We performed the following: an intensive individual intervention (III), an intensive group intervention (IGI) and a minimal intervention (MI). Included in the study were smokers who were prepared to quit smoking. Excluded from the study were individuals aged less than 18 years or with severe mental conditions or terminal illnesses. The outcome measure was continued abstinence at 12 months confirmed through CO-oximetry (CO). The analysis was based on intention to treat.ResultsIn total, 287 smokers were recruited: 81 in the III, 111 in the IGI, and 95 in the MI. Continued abstinence at 12 months confirmed through CO was 7.4% in the III, 5.4% in the IGI, and 1% in the MI. No significant differences were noted between III and MI on the one hand, and between IGI and MI on the other [RR 7.04 (0.9-7.2) and RR 5.1 (0.6-41.9), respectively]. No differences were noted between IGI and III [RR 0.7 (0.2-2.2)]. In multivariate analysis, only overall visit length showed a statistically significant association with smoking cessation.ConclusionsThe effectiveness of intensive smoking interventions in this study was lower than expected. No statistically significant differences were found between the results of individual and group interventions.Trial registration numberISRCTN32323770

No abstract

Background: High participation rates are needed to ensure that breast cancer screening programs effectively reduce mortality. We identified the determinants of non-participation in a public breast cancer screening program.

Confining the entire population to a lockdown after the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 was an unprecedented measure designed to protect the health of those living in Spain. The objective of the present study is to assess the evolution of mental health and psychological wellbeing during lockdown. To do this, we carried out a longitudinal study, via an online survey over the eight weeks of lockdown (weekly assessments). Sociodemographic variables were recorded, along with data related to COVID-19, psychological wellbeing (anxiety, depression, psychotropic drugs, consultations made to improve mood or anxiety), life satisfaction, and self-perceived health. A total of 681 individuals participated in the study, 76.8% were women; the mean age was 43 years old (SD = 12.7). Initially, high scores were reported for anxiety, depression, and the number of consultations to improve mood, but these decreased significantly over the study period. The reverse seems to be true for life satisfaction, perceived good health, and intake of psychotropic drugs. We also identified groups whose psychological wellbeing was more susceptible to the effects of lockdown. Women, those worried about their jobs after the pandemic, and those afraid of being infected were the most affected individuals. More generally, after the initial negative effect on psychological wellbeing, various indicators improved over the lockdown period.