Submitted by Automa??o e Estat?stica (sst@bczm.ufrn.br) on 2016-06-27T17:53:00Z
No. of bitstreams: 1
LuisAlcidesDeLucenaMarinho_DISSERT.pdf: 1320162 bytes, checksum: cef9d2a20ccf311289d904d465faabe9 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Arlan Eloi Leite Silva (eloihistoriador@yahoo.com.br) on 2016-06-29T21:36:17Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1
LuisAlcidesDeLucenaMarinho_DISSERT.pdf: 1320162 bytes, checksum: cef9d2a20ccf311289d904d465faabe9 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-06-29T21:36:17Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
LuisAlcidesDeLucenaMarinho_DISSERT.pdf: 1320162 bytes, checksum: cef9d2a20ccf311289d904d465faabe9 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2015-08-07 / INTRODU??O: A doen?a renal cr?nica (DRC) ? um problema de sa?de mundial, com preval?ncia crescente no seu est?gio terminal, fatos que podem ser justificados pela falha no reconhecimento da doen?a e dos seus fatores de risco. OBJETIVO: Avaliar o perfil de conhecimento de m?dicos residentes (MR) e m?dicos preceptores (MP) em hospitais da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte em Natal-RN - Brasil, sobre a DRC, com base na diretriz do Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI). M?TODOS: Estudo de corte transversal, onde 64 MR (R1=32; R2=15; R3=17) e 63 MP responderam um question?rio baseado na diretriz do KDOQI, dividido em sete sess?es, abordando aspectos da DRC desde a defini??o, at? o encaminhamento ao nefrologista. RESULTADOS: Apenas 20 participantes (15.7%) informaram utilizar alguma diretriz para o manejo da DRC. Os scores obtidos por sess?o foram: Defini??o e classifica??o (46.1?47.8); Fatores de risco (70.5?27.9); Avalia??o laboratorial (58.2?8.8); Plano de a??o cl?nica (57.6?19.9); Redu??o da protein?ria (68.3?15.0); Complica??es (64.8?19.9); Encaminhamento ao nefrologista (73.0?44.6). Observamos que houve uma diferen?a estatisticamente significante entre o conhecimento dos MR e MP nas sess?es: Avalia??o laboratorial (MR 61.5?8.4 vs MP 54.8?7.9; p<0.001); Redu??o da protein?ria (MR 73.1?11.4 vs MP 63.5?16.7; p<0.001) e Encaminhamento ao nefrologista (MR 81.2?39.3 vs MP 64.5?48.2; p=0.035). Entre os MR, os R2 obtiveram a melhor pontua??o (R1 63.9?22.6 vs R2 71.9?17.2 vs R3 63.5?22.5; p=0.445). Observamos um baixo percentual de acerto dos m?dicos sobre a defini??o da DRC (MP=46%; R1=40.6%; R2=60%; R3=52.9%; p=0.623), assim como a classifica??o da DRC (MP=34.9%; R1=53.1%; R2=60%; R3=52.9%; p=0.158). CONCLUS?O E CONSIDERA??ES FINAIS: Diretrizes para DRC s?o pouco utilizadas por m?dicos que, mesmo atuando em ambiente universit?rio, ainda exp?em lacunas no conhecimento sobre o tema. Nesse sentido, propomos a realiza??o de uma oficina para os m?dicos participantes e estudantes do internato da UFRN, utilizando estrat?gias educacionais centradas no estudante, no sentido de fortalecer a incorpora??o das diretrizes da DRC no ensino de gradua??o e na pr?tica cl?nica de m?dicos em geral. / INTRODUCTION: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a global health problem, with increasing prevalence in its terminal stage and one of the factors that can contribute is the failure to recognize the disease and its risk factors. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the knowledge of medical residents (MR) and medical preceptors (MP) in hospitals in the Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte in Natal-RN - Brazil, on the DRC, based on the policy of the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO ). METHODS: Cross-sectional study where 64 MR (R1 = 32; R2 = 15; R3 = 17) and 63 MP answered a questionnaire divided into seven sessions that addressed aspects of the DRC since the setting up referral to a nephrologist. RESULTS: Only 20 participants (15.7%) reported using any guidelines for the management of CKD. The scores obtained by session were: Definition and classification (46.1 ? 47.8); Risk factors (70.5 ? 27.9); Laboratory evaluation (58.2 ? 8.8); Clinical action plan (57.6 ? 19.9); Reduction in proteinuria (68.3 ? 15.0); Complications (64.8 ? 19.9); Referral to a nephrologist (73.0 ? 44.6). There was a statistically significant difference between the knowledge of MR and MP in the sessions: Laboratory evaluation (MR 61.5 ? 8.4 vs 54.8 ? 7.9 MP; p <0.001); Reduction in proteinuria (73.1 ? 11.4 vs MR MP 63.5 ? 16.7; p <0.001) and Referral to a nephrologist (MR 81.2 ? 39.3 vs 64.5 ? 48.2 MP; p = 0.035). Among the MR, the R2 obtained the best score (63.9 ? 22.6 vs R1 R2 R3 71.9 ? 17.2 vs 63.5 ? 22.5, p = 0.445). It identified a low percentage of success of the doctors on the definition of CKD (MP = 46%; R1 = 40.6%; R2 = 60%; R3 = 52.9%; p = 0.623) and classification (MP = 34.9%; R1 = 53.1%, R2 = 60%; R3 = 52.9%; p = 0.158). CONCLUSION: The study showed that most doctors do not use any guidelines for clinical management of CKD and that there are gaps in knowledge on the subject, even among physicians who work in the university environment. In this sense, we propose the realization of mini-workshops for participants and students from boarding UFRN, using Case-Based Learning Strategy (CBL), with small group discussion, to strengthen the incorporation of CKD guidelines in undergraduate teaching and in clinical medical practice in general.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:IBICT/oai:repositorio.ufrn.br:123456789/20834 |
| Date | 07 August 2015 |
| Creators | Marinho, Luis Alcides de Lucena |
| Contributors | 15479110420, http://lattes.cnpq.br/4265369922470937, Pereira, Edna Regina Silva, 27949222387, http://lattes.cnpq.br/4503589425013098, Almeida, Jos? Bruno de, 05716233449, http://lattes.cnpq.br/1398736458693233, Vilar, Maria Jos? Pereira |
| Publisher | Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, PROGRAMA DE P?S-GRADUA??O EM ENSINO NA SA?DE, UFRN, Brasil |
| Source Sets | IBICT Brazilian ETDs |
| Language | Portuguese |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion, info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis |
| Source | reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRN, instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, instacron:UFRN |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds