In this experimental study we have investigated whether the inclusion of the dietary fiber Plantago ovata husk could be recommended as coadjuvant in treatments with oral hypoglycemic drugs. We evaluated the use of Plantago ovata husk-metformin association in diabetic rabbits by determining its effects on glucose and insulin concentrations. Six groups of 6 rabbits were used. Groups 1 to 3 were fed with standard chow and groups 4 to 6 with chow supplemented with Plantago ovata husk (3.5 mg/kg/day). Two groups (numbers 1 and 4) were used as controls (receiving standard or supplemented chow), two groups (numbers 2 and 5) received metformin orally, and the other two (numbers 3 and 6) were treated orally with metformin and psyllium. Plasma glucose concentrations were lower in groups fed with fiber-supplemented chow whereas insulin levels showed important interindividual variations. Glucose pharmacokinetics parameters showed significant differences in C max and t max in relation to fiber intake. Insulin pharmacokinetics parameters after treatment with oral metformin showed an important increase in C max, AUC, and t max in animals fed with fiber. We conclude that Plantago ovata husk intake can contribute to the oral antihyperglycemic treatment of type 2 diabetes.

RESUMENLa ivermectina es un fármaco antiparasitario muy utilizado en Medicina Veterinaria, dado su espectro de actividad que abarca tanto endo como ectoparásitos, elevada eficacia y amplio margen de seguridad. No obstante, su administración puede dar lugar a efectos tóxicos. La mayoría de ellos derivan de la sobredosificación del compuesto, aunque también se han descrito, a dosis terapéuticas, casos de susceptibilidad extrema a los efectos neurotóxicos del fármaco en determinadas razas o subpoblaciones de animales, así como reacciones anafilácticas por la destrucción masiva de parásitos.Palabras clave: ivermectina, toxicidad, efectos adversos. ABSTRACTThe antiparasitic drug Ivermectin is frequently used in veterinary medicine, due to its broad spectrum of activity (both against endo-and ectoparasites, high efficacy and wide margin of safety. However, its administration can give rise to toxic effects. Most of them come from the overdosage of the compound, although, at therapeutic doses, it also has been described an increased susceptibility to Ivermectin toxicosis in some breeds and subpopulations of animals, as well as severe anaphylactic reactions due to the sudden massive release of parasite toxins.

The use of certain strategies for the implementation of a specific recommendation yields better results in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of an evidence-based model using clinical audits (GRIP model), for the implementation of recommendations in pain and urinary incontinence management as well as fall prevention, in the Spanish National Health System during the period 2015–2018. A quasi-experimental study has been conducted. The subjects were patients treated in hospitals, primary care units and nursing home centers. There were measures related to pain, fall prevention and urinary incontinence. Measurements were taken at baseline and at months 3, 6, 9, and 12. The sample consisted of 22,114 patients. The frequency of pain assessment increased from 59.9% in the first cycle to a mean of 71.6% in the last cycle, assessments of risk of falling increased from 56.8% to 87.8% in the last cycle; and finally, the frequency of assessments of urinary incontinence increased from a 43.4% in the first cycles to a mean of 62.2% in the last cycles. The implementation of specific evidence-based recommendations on pain, fall prevention, and urinary incontinence using a model based on clinical audits improved the frequency of assessments and their documentation.

Background: For more than four decades, studies have reported the existence of a large gap between research and clinical practice. This means that research results are not contributing to the improvement of care, and there is a high level of variability which complicates deciding on and implementing the “best care” available. In this context, it is important to understand how nurses use the research by generating different knowledge translation networks in clinical practice. Therefore, a tool is required to detect the structure of the links that are generated during the research utilization. Aim: to validate the content of a questionnaire for exploring the knowledge translation networks established among nursing professionals. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional content validity study of an instrument created to explore the knowledge translation network between nurses was carried out. The participants were divided into two groups: experts in Social Network Analysis (SNA) and practicing nurses. The instrument was a questionnaire with items that collected both the network's variables, and those of the individual. The content of the items of the questionnaire was validated as set out in the Content Validity Index (CVI). Results: The total Content Validity Index (CVI) of the survey was 0.91. All items received an excellent rating (K*>0.81). The modified kappa coefficient for the whole scale was 0.9. Conclusions: The validated questionnaire has good content validity for exploring social networks for knowledge translation and research utilization among nursing professionals.

Introducción: El conocimiento es una herramienta necesaria para la investigación científica y el progreso de cualquier disciplina. Pero el conocimiento científico y las dinámicas de información no sólo están sostenidas por los individuos, sino que son producidas y mantenidas por grupos de personas que trabajan en un mismo entorno donde los vínculos y las relaciones pueden influir en el proceso. Objetivo: Analizar las redes sociales de utilización de fuentes de información, de ayuda/consejo para la transferencia de conocimiento y los lugares donde los profesionales de enfermería comparten información.Método: Análisis de Redes Sociales a través de un cuestionario validado. Se reclutaron profesionales de 6 unidades hospitalarias.Resultados: Participaron 77 profesionales con una edad media de 42,9 (DE:11,48). Los compañeros son la fuente de información más utilizada (76 elecciones) frente a las bases de datos y artículos científicos que son la menos seleccionada (63 elecciones). Las redes homófilas horizontales (profesionales con estatus/intereses similares) son las más frecuentes para obtener información sobre resultados de investigación (74 elecciones). La unidad asistencial es el entorno más señalado para compartir información (50 elecciones).Conclusiones: Los profesionales consideran el conocimiento de sus compañeros como la principal fuente para obtener información sobre resultados de investigación. Unidades con determinado grado de especialización utilizan guías de práctica clínica y protocolos como fuente principal de información. Los profesionales de enfermería utilizan redes homófilas-horizontales para obtener información. El entorno laboral en sus diferentes ámbitos (unidad, office, reuniones) es el más utilizado para compartir información sobre resultados de investigación. Introduction: Knowledge is a necessary tool for scientific research and progress in any discipline. But scientific knowledge and information dynamics are not only sustained by individuals but are produced and maintained by groups of people working in the same environment where links and relationships can influence the process. Aim: To analyze the social networks of information source utilization, help/advice for knowledge transfer and the places where nursing professionals share information.Method: Analysis of social networks through a validated questionnaire. Professionals from 6 hospital units were recruited.Results: 77 professionals participated with a mean age of 42.9 (SD:11.48). Peers were the most frequently used source of information (76 choices) compared to databases and scientific articles, which were the least selected (63 choices). Horizontal homophilous networks (professionals with similar status/interests) are the most frequent for obtaining information on research results (74 choices). The care unit is the most pointed environment for sharing information (50 choices).Conclusions: Professionals consider the knowledge of their peers as the main source for obtaining information on research results. Units with a certain degree of specialization use clinical practice guidelines and protocols as the main source of information. Nursing professionals use homophilic-horizontal networks to obtain information. The work environment in its different settings (unit, office, meetings) is the most used for sharing information on research results.