ABSTRACT
The main goal of this paper is to evaluate the health status of Poles in the context of their dietary patterns. Results of a desk research study on dietary habits of persons working during the coronavirus pandemic and attitudes of Poles towards meal delivery services provided to the authors by external research institutions were utilized for the purpose of the article. In the framework of practical scientific cooperation, the following reports containing results of research on dietary patterns of people working during the pandemic have been made available for the purpose of this study: "Healthy, speedy or conveniently?" and "Healthy eating". The results were used with retain of copyright and ethical principles. Data analysis led to the conclusion that people have tended to pay more attention to the food intake as well as spend more time on self-preparation of meals during the pandemic. Based on analysis of the study results, a thesis was formulated that during a pandemic, we pay more attention to what we eat, and we also spend more time preparing meals on our own. Assuming that the population of Poland in 2020 was 38,265 thousand people, it could be stated in the light of the study results that almost 650 thousand Poles were on a well-balanced diet adapted to individual consumer needs.
ABSTRACT
Widespread immunization efforts have been linked to increased life expectancy and reduced illness. U.S. vaccination programs, headed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), have helped eradicate smallpox and nearly eradicate polio globally, and eliminate several infectious diseases domestically. With the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic now causing major health and economic impacts across the world, efforts are underway to make safe and effective vaccines available quickly to help curb spread of the virus. © 2021 by Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
ABSTRACT
In recent months, the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has spread globally, with the United States now reporting the highest number of cases of any country in the world. Currently, there are few treatment options available to lessen the health impact of the disease and no vaccines or other prophylactic treatments to curb the spread of the virus. The biomedical community has been working to develop new therapies or vaccines, and to repurpose already approved therapeutics, that could prevent COVID-19 infections or lessen severe outcomes in patients. In addition, efforts have been underway to develop new diagnostic tools (i.e., testing) to help better identify and isolate positive cases, thereby reducing the spread of the disease. To this end, Congress has appropriated funds for research and development into new medical countermeasures (MCMs) in several recent supplemental appropriations acts. MCMs are medical products that may be used to treat, prevent, or diagnose conditions associated with emerging infectious diseases or chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear (CBRN) agents. MCMs include biologics (e.g., vaccines, monoclonal antibodies), drugs (e.g., antimicrobials, antivirals), and medical devices (e.g., diagnostic tests). This chapter answers frequently asked questions about current efforts related to research and development of medical countermeasures, their regulation, and related policy issues. Although several efforts are underway, medical product research, development, and approval is a difficult and high-risk endeavor that takes years in typical circumstances. In response to COVID-19, this process has been expedited, including through several federal programs and mechanisms covered in this chapter. However, expedited medical product development can carry certain risks, such as a more limited safety profile for new products upon approval. © 2021 by Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: The prevailing COVID-19 pandemic forces paramedics to take medical rescue operations using personal protective equipment (PPE) for aerosol-generating procedures (AGP). The use of PPE-AGP may reduce the effectiveness of the procedures performed, including airway management, intravascular access, or chest compression. The goal of the current study was to compare the quality by which a chest compression during simulated COVID-19 resuscitation while wearing PPE-AGP. A secondary goal was to assess provider preferences with standard versus OHD chest compression methods while wearing PPE-AGP. Methods: This is a randomized cross-over single-blinded study involving 37 paramedics performing 2-min continuous chest compression using two methods: the standard chest compression (CC) method during which the rescuer takes a position to the side of the victim (STD) and over-the-head position (OHD). During cardiopulmonary resuscitation, study participants wore Class C PPE-AGP. Both the order of study participants and compression methods were random. The results were blinded before statistical analysis. The compression rate per minute (CPM), CC depth as well as full chest recoil were measured. The analysis was undertaken using STATISTICA (V13.3EN). Results : Mean chest compression depth using distinct CC methods varied and amounted to 42 ± 2mm for STD vs. 46 ± 4mm for OHD (p < 0.001). Chest compressions based on the OHD method were associated with a lower frequency of chest compressions (107 ± 7CPM) compared with STD (114.5 ± 8;p< 0.001). A higher percentage of full chest recoil was observed in the case of STD (42 ± 6%) than in the case of OHD (34 ± 10%). Conclusions : Based on the current simulation trial, it is impossible to clearly determine which method (STD vs. OHD) is more effective in resuscitation with PPE-AGP. Paramedics wearing PPE-AGP achieved better chest compression depth for OHD compared to the STD, however, OHD resuscitation causes a lower degree of full chest relaxation. A further well-designed clinical study looking at efficacy, safety, and outcomes is needed to confirm current results. © 2020 Via Medica.