Prescription of anxiolytics, sedatives, hypnotics and antidepressants in outpatient, universal care during the COVID-19 pandemic in Portugal: a nationwide, interrupted time-series approach.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on the population's mental health. However, its impact on the consumption of anxiolytics, sedatives, hypnotics and antidepressants remains to be evaluated. Hence, this article aims to assess the prescription trends of these drugs in Portugal, from January 2018 to March 2021, while critically examining whether the COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on these prescription trends or not. METHODS: A nationwide interrupted time-series analysis of the prescription data of anxiolytics, sedatives, hypnotics and antidepressants in outpatient setting of the public health sector was conducted. The data encompassed the defined daily dose per month, age range and sex and were analysed following a segmented regression approach. RESULTS: The pandemic preceded an immediate reduction in the prescription of anxiolytics, sedatives and hypnotics for children and adolescents. However, an increasing trend throughout the pandemic has been noted in the prescription of these drugs, especially among adults aged 65 years or above. A drop in antidepressant prescription was observed as an immediate effect of the pandemic among male and female adolescents and elderly women. From March 2020 to March 2021, a decreasing prescription trend has been noted among men. CONCLUSIONS: When analysing specific genders and age ranges, differences can be noted, in terms of both immediate impact and prescribing trends throughout 1 year of the COVID-19 pandemic. The impact of the pandemic on mental health and its association with the consumption trends of psychoactive drugs, and with the access to mental health treatments, should be further assessed.

Repurposing selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for severity of COVID-19: A population-based study.

The World Health Organization has proposed that a search be made for alternatives to vaccines for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19, with one such alternative being selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). This study thus sought to assess: the impact of previous treatment with SSRI antidepressants on the severity of COVID-19 (risk of hospitalisation, admission to an intensive care unit [ICU], and mortality), its influence on susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 and progression to severe COVID-19. We conducted a population-based multiple case-control study in a region in the north-west of Spain. Data were sourced from electronic health records. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95%CIs were calculated using multilevel logistic regression. We collected data from a total of 86,602 subjects: 3060 cases PCR+, 26,757 non-hospitalised cases PCR+ and 56,785 controls (without PCR+). Citalopram displayed a statistically significant decrease in the risk of hospitalisation (aOR=0.70; 95% CI 0.49-0.99, p = 0.049) and progression to severe COVID-19 (aOR=0.64; 95% CI 0.43-0.96, p = 0.032). Paroxetine was associated with a statistically significant decrease in risk of mortality (aOR=0.34; 95% CI 0.12 - 0.94, p = 0.039). No class effect was observed for SSRIs overall, nor was any other effect found for the remaining SSRIs. The results of this large-scale, real-world data study indicate that, citalopram, could be a candidate drug for being repurposed as preventive treatment aimed at reducing COVID-19 patients' risk of progressing to severe stages of the disease.

Effect of Previous Anticoagulant Treatment on Risk of COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about the role played by anticoagulants in COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of previous anticoagulant treatment on risk of hospitalization due to COVID-19, progression to severe COVID-19 and susceptibility to COVID-19 infection. METHODS: We conducted a multiple population-based case-control study in northwest Spain, in 2020, to assess (1) risk of hospitalization: cases were all patients admitted due to COVID-19 with PCR confirmation, and controls were a random matched sample of subjects without a positive PCR; (2) progression: cases were hospitalized COVID-19 subjects, and controls were all non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients; and (3) susceptibility: cases were patients with a positive PCR (hospitalized and non-hospitalized), and the controls were the same as for the hospitalization model. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using a generalized linear mixed model. RESULTS: The consumption of antivitamin K and direct-acting anticoagulants apparently was not associated with the risk of progression to severe COVID-19 (OR 0.93 [95% CI 0.74-1.17] and OR 1.04 [95% CI 0.79-1.36], respectively). Antivitamin K anticoagulants were associated with a significantly lower risk of hospitalization (OR 0.77 [95% CI 0.64-0.93]), which, in part, can be explained by a decreased risk of susceptibility to infection (OR 0.83 [95% CI 0.74-0.92]). The use of direct-acting anticoagulants was not associated with the risk of hospitalization, although it also seems to decrease susceptibility (OR 0.85 [95% CI 0.74-0.98]). It has also been observed that low-molecular-weight heparins were associated with an increased risk of progression to severe COVID-19 (OR 1.25 [95% CI 1.01-1.55]). CONCLUSION: The results of this study have shown that antivitamin K anticoagulants and direct-acting anticoagulants do not increase the risk of progression to more severe stages. Antivitamin K consumption was associated with a lower risk of hospitalization and susceptibility to infection.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Prescribing of Antiasthmatic Treatments in Portugal: A Nationwide Study.

PURPOSE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a profound impact on everyday life, the environment, and health care services. A shift from in-person medical appointments to telemedicine was a main adjustment. Such changes can have repercussions on the control and management of chronic respiratory diseases, such as asthma. The available data suggest that there was an overall decrease in asthma-related morbidities during the first year of the pandemic. Therefore, the goal of this study was to quantify the effects of the pandemic on the prescribing of antiasthmatic treatments in outpatient care (public and private health care). METHODS: This before-after study used a time series approach based on data from monthly prescriptions of antiasthmatic drugs (anti-inflammatory drugs and bronchodilators) dated between April 2018 and March 2021. An interrupted time series (ITS) design was used for assessing changes in antiasthmatic prescribing patterns in the short and long terms after COVID-19 was recognized as a pandemic. The results are complemented with seasonal autoregressive integrated moving average (sARIMA) models. FINDINGS: The ITS analysis showed a non-significant increase in antiasthmatic prescribing in the short term. In the long term, after the pandemic was declared, a statistically significant decrease was observed in the prescribing of antiasthmatics (in anti-inflammatory drugs and, more pronounced, in bronchodilators). In the sARIMA model, the mean monthly volume of antiasthmatic prescriptions was 18.1% lower than predicted. The numbers of months outside of the 95% CIs were different between anti-inflammatory drugs (1 month) and bronchodilators (7 months). IMPLICATIONS: The prescribing of antiasthmatic drugs in the long term was significantly decreased with the COVID-19 pandemic, with a greater effect in the case of bronchodilators.

Colchicine and risk of hospitalization due to COVID-19: A population-based study.

Colchicine is one of the most widely studied and best-known anti-inflammatory treatments. This study aimed to assess the effect of colchicine on risk of hospitalization due to COVID-19; and its effect on susceptibility to and severity of the virus in patients with COVID-19. We carried out a population-based case-control study. The following groups were applied: (1) to assess risk of hospitalization, cases were patients with a positive PCR who were hospitalized due to COVID-19, and controls without a positive PCR; (2) to assess susceptibility to COVID-19, cases were patients with a positive PCR (hospitalized and non-hospitalized), and the same controls; (3) to determine potential severity, cases were subjects with COVID-19 hospitalized, and controls patients with COVID-19 nonhospitalised. Different electronic, linked, administrative health and clinical databases were used to extract data on sociodemographic variables, comorbidities, and medications dispensed. The study covered 3060 subjects with a positive PCR who were hospitalized, 26 757 with a positive PCR who were not hospitalized, and 56 785 healthy controls. After adjustment for sociodemographic variables, comorbidities and other treatments, colchicine did not modify risk of hospitalization due to COVID-19 (adjusted odd ratio [OR] 1.08 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-1.53]), patients' susceptibility to contracting the disease (adjusted OR 1.12 (95% CI 0.91-1.37)) or the severity of the infection (adjusted OR 1.03 [95% CI 0.67-1.59]). Our results would neither support the prophylactic use of colchicine for prevention of the infection or hospitalization in any type of patient, nor justify the withdrawal of colchicine treatment due to a higher risk of contracting COVID-19.

Understanding Primary Care Physician Vaccination Behaviour: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Vaccine hesitancy decreases adult vaccination coverage and has been recognized by WHO as a major health threat. Primary care physicians (PCP) play a key role in vaccination by giving vaccine counselling to their patients. The aim of this systematic review is to identify the knowledge, beliefs, attitudes and barriers (KBAB) associated with own vaccination and patient recommendation in primary care physicians. METHODS: MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were used to search and identify relevant studies based on their title and abstract. In the next step, the full text of each previously selected article was read for eligibility. Articles were selected by two independent reviewers and data extraction was performed using tables. The following information was extracted: methodological characteristics, demographic factors, professional characteristics, and intrinsic or extrinsic factors influencing vaccination or recommendation. RESULTS: Our search yielded 41 eligible papers, data-sources, previous practices, belief in the effectiveness or safety of the vaccine, perceived risk, and trust in health authorities were all shown to be related to own vaccination and patient recommendation. CONCLUSION: Internet is the main source of information for PCP related to vaccine hesitancy. It is therefore essential to increase the presence and access to pro-vaccination content in this area. In addition, involving PCP in the establishment of vaccination recommendations could improve their credibility in the institutions. On the other hand, training in communication skills and establishing reminder systems could reflect higher vaccination coverage among their patients.

Insights on COVID-19 Vaccination in Portugal: A Qualitative Study among Health Professionals and Teachers.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination against COVID-19 has had a major impact over the course of the pandemic, leading to a reduced number of hospitalizations and deaths. However, the mass vaccination process has been accompanied by skepticism and hesitancy since its beginning. As health professionals and teachers are important public health actors who can strongly intervene to reduce vaccination hesitancy among their patients and students, respectively, this study aimed to assess their main perceptions towards COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: Two focus group sessions, one with health professionals and the other with teachers, were conducted according to the COREQ checklist. Qualitative data were analyzed through theoretical thematic analysis. RESULTS: In general, none of the groups showed vaccine hesitancy, although both groups had concerns regarding the safety and efficacy of the vaccines. The main concerns of health professionals were mostly related to the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, while teachers were more worried about the lack of access to reliable information about the COVID-19 vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: It is plausible to conclude that it is imperative to provide clear and accurate information for the population in order to avoid vaccination hesitancy.

Impact of infectious disease epidemics on xenophobia: A systematic review.

Background Globally, xenophobia towards out-groups is frequently increased in times of economic and political instability, such as in infectious disease outbreaks. This systematic review aims to: (1) assess the xenophobic attitudes and behaviors towards migrants during disease outbreaks; and (2) identify adverse health outcomes linked to xenophobia. Methods We searched nine scientific databases to identify studies measuring xenophobic tendencies towards international migrants during disease outbreaks and evaluated the resulting adverse health effects. Results Eighteen articles were included in the review. The findings were grouped into: (1) xenophobia-related outcomes, including social exclusion, out-group avoidance, support for exclusionary health policies, othering, and germ aversion; and (2) mental health problems, such as anxiety and fear. Depending on the disease outbreak, different migrant populations were negatively affected, particularly Asians, Africans, and Latino people. Factors such as perceived vulnerability to disease, disgust sensitivity, medical mistrust individualism, collectivism, disease salience, social representation of disease and beliefs in different origins of disease were associated with xenophobia. Conclusions Overall, migrants can be a vulnerable population frequently blamed for spreading disease, promoting irrational fear, worry and stigma in various forms, thus leading to health inequities worldwide. It is urgent that societies adopt effective support strategies to combat xenophobia and structural forms of discrimination against migrants.

Unravelling the drivers behind COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy and refusal among teachers: A nationwide study.

This study aims to assess the determinants of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination hesitancy and refusal (VHR) among teachers, from pre-school to higher education, through an online survey. A logistic regression analysis was used to determine the adjusted odds ratio (OR) of the independent variables (perceptions, knowledge, and attitudes) per 1-point increase in the Likert scale, and VHR. Concerns about the vaccines' efficacy and safety increase the risk of VHR (OR = 6.97, 95 %CI: 4.82-10.09 and OR = 8.71, 95 %CI: 5.52-13.73, respectively). Higher risk perceptions of getting infected (1/OR = 3.94, 95 %CI: 2.93-5.29), trust in the effectiveness of vaccines in reducing this risk or protecting against suffering complications (OR = 3.52, 95 %CI: 2.72-4.55 and OR = 10.94, 95 %CI: 7.16-16.68, respectively), and higher trust levels on the information transmitted regarding COVID-19 vaccination, are associated to lower VHR. As VHR appears to be highly influenced by perceptions, knowledge, and attitudes, it is crucial to promote and design interventions targeted to transforming these determinants.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Antibiotic Prescribing by Dentists in Galicia, Spain: A Quasi-Experimental Approach.

BACKGROUND: Antibiotic resistance is one of the most pressing public health problems. Health authorities, patients, and health professionals, including dentists, are all involved in its development. COVID-19 pandemic restrictions on dental care may have had repercussions on antibiotic prescribing by dentists. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on antibiotic prescribing by dentists, and to review antibiotic consumption according to the WHO Access, Watch, Reserve classification. We conducted a natural, before-and-after, quasi-experimental study, using antibiotic prescription data covering the period from January 2017 to May 2021. A segmented regression analysis with interrupted time series data was used to analyse the differences between the numbers of defined daily doses (DDD) of antibiotics prescribed monthly. The outcomes showed an immediate significant decrease in overall antibiotic prescribing by primary-care dentists during lockdown, followed by a non-significant upward trend for the next year. This same pattern was, likewise, observed for Access and Watch antibiotics. COVID-19 pandemic restrictions on dental care influenced the prescription of antibiotics. During confinement, an initial decrease was observed, this trend changed when in person consultations were recovered. It might be beneficial to analyse the prescription of antibiotics using the WHO AWaRe classification, in order to monitor their appropriate use.

What determines health professionals' COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy? A nationwide study.

INTRODUCTION: To contain the COVID-19 pandemic, higher vaccination rates are essential. However, as vaccine hesitancy is a reality, it is important to understand what drives health professionals to refuse getting vaccinated against COVID-19, who have been in the frontline of this pandemic since its beginning and may be key actors to improve vaccine coverage among their patients. PURPOSE: This study aims to assess the factors associated with vaccine hesitancy (VH) among health professionals (physicians, nurses, pharmacists and dentists). METHODS: A nationwide cross-sectional study was conducted through an online survey, with 890 Portuguese health professionals. A logistic regression analysis was used to determine the adjusted odds ratio (OR) of the independent variables (perceptions, knowledge and attitudes) per 1-point increase in the Likert scale and VH. RESULTS: Complacency, communications, confidence and convenience were strongly associated with VH probability. Concerns about vaccines' efficacy (ORPhysicians  = 8.33, 95% CI: 4.51-15.36) and safety (ORNurses  = 11.07, 95% CI: 4.12-29.77) increase the risk of VH on all health professional groups. A reduction of VH probability is associated with higher risk perceptions of getting infected (1/ORNurses  = 2.76, 95% CI: 1.52-5.02) and suffering complications (1/ORNurses  = 33.72, 95% CI: 8.48-134.13), higher confidence in the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines (1/ORDentists  = 12.29, 95% CI: 2.91-51.89), risk perception of getting infected if vaccinated (1/ORPhysicians  = 14.92, 95% CI: 6.85-32.50), risk of suffering from complications after getting vaccinated, and higher trust levels on the information transmitted by competent authorities (1/ORDentists  = 17.76, 95% CI: 3.83-82.22). CONCLUSIONS: To reduce COVID-19 VH, which appears to be highly influenced by perceptions, knowledge and attitudes, it is essential to promote interventions directed to transforming these potentially modifiable determinants.

Perceptions, knowledge and attitudes about COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in older Portuguese adults.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) has become a public-health emergency of international concern. Most efforts to contain the spread and transmission of the virus rely on campaigns and interventions targeted to reduce Vaccine Hesitancy and Refusal (VHR). OBJECTIVE: this study aims to assess the major factors associated with VHR in the older population in Portugal. METHODS: a nation-wide cross-sectional study was conducted in the older Portuguese population (≥65 years old) through computer-assisted telephone interviewing. Logistic regression was used to determine the adjusted odds ratio (OR) of the independent variables (perceptions, knowledge and attitudes) and of the outcome (VHR). RESULTS: the response rate was 60.1% (602/1,001). Perceptions, knowledge and attitudes were strongly associated with VHR probability. A 1-point Likert scale increase in concerns about the vaccines' efficacy and safety increased the risk of VHR by 1.96 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.40-6.28) and 3.13 (95%CI: 2.08-8.22), respectively. A reduction of VHR probability for 'reliability of the information released by social media' (OR = 0.34, 95%CI: 0.16-0.70) and for 'trust in national and international competent authorities' (OR = 0.34, 95%CI: 0.17-0.69) is also observed per 1-point increase. CONCLUSIONS: as VHR seems to be strongly associated with perceptions, knowledge and attitudes, the design and promotion of vaccination campaigns/educational interventions specifically targeted at changing these potentially modifiable determinants may help to tackle COVID-19 VHR and achieve a wider vaccine coverage.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Antibiotic Prescribing Trends in Outpatient Care: A Nationwide, Quasi-Experimental Approach.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread globally and is currently having a damaging impact on nearly all countries in the world. The implementation of stringent measures to stop COVID-19 dissemination had an influence on healthcare services and associated procedures, possibly causing antibiotic consumption fluctuations. This paper aims to evaluate the immediate and long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on antibiotic prescribing trends in outpatient care of the Portuguese public health sector, including in primary healthcare centers and hospitals, as well as on specific antibiotic groups known to be closely associated with increased resistance. Segmented regression analysis with interrupted time series data was used to analyze whether the COVID-19 pandemic had an impact in antibiotic prescribing tendencies at a national level. The outcomes from this quasi-experimental approach demonstrate that, at the beginning of the pandemic, a significant, immediate decrease in the overall antibiotic prescribing trends was noticed in the context of outpatient care in Portugal, followed by a statistically non-significant fall over the long term. The data also showed a significant reduction in the prescription of particular antibiotic classes (antibiotics from the Watch group, 3rd-generation cephalosporins, fluoroquinolones, and clarithromycin) upon COVID-19 emergence. These findings revealed an important disruption in antibiotics prescribing caused by the current public health emergency.