Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
Multidiscip Respir Med ; 17(1): 837, 2022 Jan 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1835037

ABSTRACT

Despite the uncertainty about the follow up of COVID-19 survivors, there is a growing body of evidence supporting specific interventions including pulmonary rehabilitation, which may lead to a reduced hospital stay and improved overall respiratory function. The aim of this short report was to assess the attitudes toward pulmonary rehabilitation following COVID-19 among Ecuadorian physicians. A cross-sectional study was conducted, in which a 5-question survey was used to assess the level of agreement to specific statements with a 5-point Likert scale. Out of the 282 participants, 48.2% (n=136) were male, with a mean of 12.6 (SD=11.3) years of experience. More than half of physicians (63.8%, n=180; χ2(2) = 139.224, p=0.000) considered that diagnosis and treatment of patients with sub-acute and chronic COVID-19 pulmonary sequelae is not clear. Additionally, 94.3% (n=266; χ2(2) = 497.331, p=0.000) agreed that pulmonary rehabilitation must be considered as a relevant strategy in long-term care following an acute infection, with 92.6% (n=261; χ2(2) = 449.772, p=0.000) stating it will improve the likelihood of survival and return to baseline health. In conclusion, we found that considerable majority of physicians held positive attitudes to the role of pulmonary rehabilitation and considered it as a relevant strategy in long-term care following COVID-19. However, most of them also conveyed that the diagnosis and treatment of chronic pulmonary sequalae is unclear, and that guidelines for assessing pulmonary function should be established.

2.
Ann Med Surg (Lond) ; 72: 103044, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1517016

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Limited large-scale studies have been conducted to investigate the adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccine in Latin America, particularly among the healthcare worker (HCW) population in Ecuador. The objective of this study was to assess a cohort of Ecuadorian healthcare workers for adverse reactions following vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. METHODS: We conducted an observational cross-sectional study to assess the potential adverse reactions to the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine among a sample of healthcare workers (HCWs) in the city of Guayaquil, Ecuador, from March to May 2021. RESULTS: The sample comprised 1291 patients, with a mean age of 39.3 years (SD, 13.5). In general, 79% (N = 1020) of participants presented an adverse effect of any type at first dose, while 75.1% (N = 969) did so at the second dose. Pain at the puncture site was the most common adverse effect overall after either the first (68.4%) and second (55.6%) dose. Regarding anaphylaxis, no participant developed the condition after the first dose, and only 0.2% (N = 2) developing it at the second dose. No fatalities were reported. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that adverse reactions following COVID-19 vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine are relatively common, albeit often mild and self-limited. Consistent with the literature there were few cases of anaphylaxis, and no deaths that could be attributed to the inoculation with the vaccine. We hope our findings can help to reassure the public that benefits of vaccination highly outweigh the risks and contribute to the effort of reducing vaccine hesitancy among those who are concerned about the safety and potential side effects.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL