Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
Arch Dis Child ; 2022 Aug 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2255474

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of mandatory use of face covering masks (FCMs) in schools during the first term of the 2021-2022 academic year. DESIGN: A retrospective population-based study. SETTING: Schools in Catalonia (Spain). POPULATION: 599 314 children aged 3-11 years attending preschool (3-5 years, without FCM mandate) and primary education (6-11 years, with FCM mandate). STUDY PERIOD: From 13 September to 22 December 2021 (before Omicron variant). INTERVENTIONS: A quasi-experimental comparison between children in the last grade of preschool (5 years old), as a control group, and children in year 1 of primary education (6 years old), as an interventional group. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence of SARS-CoV-2, secondary attack rates (SARs) and effective reproductive number (R*). RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 incidence was significantly lower in preschool than in primary education, and an increasing trend with age was observed. Six-year-old children showed higher incidence than 5 year olds (3.54% vs 3.1%; OR 1.15 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.22)) and slightly lower but not statistically significant SAR (4.36% vs 4.59%; incidence risk ratio 0.96 (95% CI 0.82 to 1.11)) and R* (0.9 vs 0.93; OR 0.96 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.09)). Results remained consistent using a regression discontinuity design and linear regression extrapolation approaches. CONCLUSIONS: We found no significant differences in SARS-CoV-2 transmission due to FCM mandates in Catalonian schools. Instead, age was the most important factor in explaining the transmission risk for children attending school.

2.
Fam Pract ; 2022 Jul 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2233455

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the incidence of chronic disease had drastically been reduced due to health care interruptions. The aim of this study is to analyse cancer diagnosis during the last 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Time-series study of cancer diagnoses recorded in primary care settings, using data from the primary care electronic health records from January 2014 to December 2021. We obtained the expected monthly rate per 100,000 inhabitants using a time regression adjusted by trend and seasonality. We additionally compared rates of cancer diagnoses in 2019 with those of 2020 and 2021 using the t-test. We performed the analysis globally, by sex and by type of cancer. RESULTS: In 2020, the rate of cancer diagnoses had reduced by -21% compared to 2019 (P < 0.05). Greater reductions were observed during the lockdown in early 2020 (>40%) and with some types of cancers, especially prostate and skin cancers (-29.6% and -26.9%, respectively, P < 0.05). Lung cancers presented statistically non-significant reductions in both years. Cancer diagnosis returned to expected around March 2021, and the rate in 2021 was similar to that of 2019 (overall difference of 0.21%, P = 0.967). However, an 11% reduction was still found when comparing the pandemic months of 2020-2021 with pre-pandemic months. CONCLUSIONS: Although primary care cancer diagnoses in 2021 have returned to pre-pandemic levels, missing diagnoses during the last 2 years have not been fully recovered.

3.
BMC Prim Care ; 24(1): 9, 2023 01 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2196055

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The incidence of chronic diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic has drastically been reduced worldwide due to disruptions in healthcare systems. The aim of our study is to analyse the trends in the incidence of 7 commonly managed primary care chronic diseases during the last 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic in Catalonia. METHODS: We performed an observational retrospective population-based study using data from primary care electronic health records from January 2018 to August 2022 (5.1 million people older than 14 years). We divided the study period into two: a pre-pandemic period (before 14 March 2020) and a pandemic period. We performed a segmented regression analysis of daily incidence rates per 100,000 inhabitants of 7 chronic diseases: type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), ischemic heart disease (IHD), heart failure (HF), hypertension and hypercholesterolemia. In addition, we compared annual incidence between pandemic years (2020, 2021 and 2022) and 2019. Associated incidence rate ratios (IRR) were also calculated. Finally, we estimated the number of expected diagnoses during the pandemic period using data from 2019 and we compared it with the observed data. RESULTS: We analysed 740,820 new chronic diseases' diagnoses. Daily incidence rates of all 7 chronic diseases were drastically interrupted on 14 March 2020, and a general upward trend was observed during the following months. Reductions in 2020 were around 30% for all conditions except COPD which had greater reductions (IRR: 0.58 [95% CI: 0.57 to 0.6]) and HF with lesser drops (IRR: 0.86 [95% CI: 0.84 to 0.88]). Some of the chronic conditions have returned to pre-pandemic diagnosis levels, except asthma, COPD and IHD. The return to pre-pandemic diagnosis levels compensated for the drops in 2020 for T2DM and HF, but not for hypertension which presented an incomplete recovery. We also observed an excess of hypercholesterolemia diagnoses of 8.5% (95%CI: 1.81% to 16.15%). CONCLUSIONS: Although primary care has recovered the pre-pandemic diagnosis levels for some chronic diseases, there are still missing diagnoses of asthma, COPD and IHD that should be addressed.


Subject(s)
Asthma , COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Heart Failure , Hypercholesterolemia , Hypertension , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Pandemics , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Electronic Health Records , Hypercholesterolemia/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/epidemiology , Asthma/epidemiology , Chronic Disease , Heart Failure/epidemiology , Primary Health Care , Hypertension/epidemiology
4.
Lancet Reg Health Eur ; 15: 100337, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1829137

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Many countries have resumed mass-gathering events like music festivals, despite the risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spreading. In this study, we aimed to assess the effect of two mass-gathering outdoor events, held during a peak of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, on COVID-19 incidence. METHODS: This was a retrospective, population-based control-matched analysis. The study population included attendees to two outdoor music festivals held in Catalonia (North-East Spain). The primary objective was to compare the incidence of COVID-19 within the 3-to-10 days following the event between attendees and a population-based control group. FINDINGS: The analysis included 18,275 and 27,347 attendees to the first and second festivals, respectively, and their corresponding controls. The post-festival 7-day cumulative COVID-19 incidence among attendees and controls was 4.14% (95% CI 3.86-4.44) vs. 1.69% (1.51-1.88) for the first festival (RR 2.46; 2.16-2.80), and 2.42% (2.35-2.61) and 1.10% (0.99-1.2) for the second festival (RR 2.19; 1.92-2.51). COVID-19 incidence among immunized individuals was also two-fold higher in attendees than in controls. Previous COVID-19 infection, vaccination, and adequate mask-wearing were significantly associated with a lower risk of COVID-19 infection after the events. INTERPRETATION: Despite the proven effectiveness of preventive measures such as Ag-RDT screening, mask-wearing and vaccination, caution should be taken when holding these events during a period of high community SARS-CoV-2 transmission. FUNDING: Crowdfunding campaign YoMeCorono (https://www.yomecorono.com/) and the Generalitat de Catalunya.

5.
Nat Commun ; 13(1): 1639, 2022 03 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1758236

ABSTRACT

Small trials have suggested that heterologous vaccination with first-dose ChAdOx1 and second-dose BNT162b2 may generate a better immune response than homologous vaccination with two doses of ChAdOx1. In this cohort analysis, we use linked data from Catalonia (Spain), where those aged <60 who received a first dose of ChAdOx1 could choose between ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 for their second dose. Comparable cohorts were obtained after exact-matching 14,325/17,849 (80.3%) people receiving heterologous vaccination to 14,325/149,386 (9.6%) receiving homologous vaccination by age, sex, region, and date of second dose. Of these, 464 (3.2%) in the heterologous and 694 (4.8%) in the homologous groups developed COVID-19 between 1st June 2021 and 5th December 2021. The resulting hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) is 0.66 [0.59-0.74], favouring heterologous vaccination. The two groups had similar testing rates and safety outcomes. Sensitivity and negative control outcome analyses confirm these findings. In conclusion, we demonstrate that a heterologous vaccination schedule with ChAdOx1 followed by BNT162b2 was more efficacious than and similarly safe to homologous vaccination with two doses of ChAdOx1. Most of the infections in our study occurred when Delta was the predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant in Spain. These data agree with previous phase 2 randomised trials.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , BNT162 Vaccine/adverse effects , BNT162 Vaccine/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/adverse effects , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/therapeutic use , Humans , Vaccination/adverse effects , Vaccination/methods
6.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(1)2022 Jan 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1595744

ABSTRACT

Nursing homes have accounted for a significant part of SARS-CoV-2 mortality, causing great social alarm. Using data collected from electronic medical records of 1,319,839 institutionalised and non-institutionalised persons ≥ 65 years, the present study investigated the epidemiology and differential characteristics between these two population groups. Our results showed that the form of presentation of the epidemic outbreak, as well as some risk factors, are different among the elderly institutionalised population with respect to those who are not. In addition to a twenty-fold increase in the rate of adjusted mortality among institutionalised individuals, the peak incidence was delayed by approximately three weeks. Having dementia was shown to be a risk factor for death, and, unlike the non-institutionalised group, neither obesity nor age were shown to be significantly associated with the risk of death among the institutionalised. These differential characteristics should be able to guide the actions to be taken by the health administration in the event of a similar infectious situation among institutionalised elderly people.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , Humans , Nursing Homes , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2
7.
BMJ ; 374: n1868, 2021 08 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1365155

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine associations of BNT162b2 vaccination with SARS-CoV-2 infection and hospital admission and death with covid-19 among nursing home residents, nursing home staff, and healthcare workers. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Nursing homes and linked electronic medical record, test, and mortality data in Catalonia on 27 December 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 28 456 nursing home residents, 26 170 nursing home staff, and 61 791 healthcare workers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants were followed until the earliest outcome (confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospital admission or death with covid-19) or 26 May 2021. Vaccination status was introduced as a time varying exposure, with a 14 day run-in after the first dose. Mixed effects Cox models were fitted to estimate hazard ratios with index month as a fixed effect and adjusted for confounders including sociodemographics, comorbidity, and previous medicine use. RESULTS: Among the nursing home residents, SARS-CoV-2 infection was found in 2482, 411 were admitted to hospital with covid-19, and 450 died with covid-19 during the study period. In parallel, 1828 nursing home staff and 2968 healthcare workers were found to have SARS-CoV-2 infection, but fewer than five were admitted or died with covid-19. The adjusted hazard ratio for SARS-CoV-2 infection after two doses of vaccine was 0.09 (95% confidence interval 0.08 to 0.11) for nursing home residents, 0.20 (0.17 to 0.24) for nursing home staff, and 0.13 (0.11 to 0.16) for healthcare workers. Adjusted hazard ratios for hospital admission and mortality after two doses of vaccine were 0.05 (0.04 to 0.07) and 0.03 (0.02 to 0.04), respectively, for nursing home residents. Nursing home staff and healthcare workers recorded insufficient events for mortality analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination was associated with 80-91% reduction in SARS-CoV-2 infection in all three cohorts and greater reductions in hospital admissions and mortality among nursing home residents for up to five months. More data are needed on longer term effects of covid-19 vaccines.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , COVID-19/mortality , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Homes for the Aged/statistics & numerical data , Nursing Homes/statistics & numerical data , Patient Admission/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Proportional Hazards Models , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain/epidemiology , Treatment Outcome
8.
BMC Fam Pract ; 21(1): 208, 2020 10 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-843521

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To analyse the impact of the COVID-19 epidemic and the lockdown measures on the follow-up and control of chronic diseases in primary care. METHODS: Retrospective study in 288 primary care practices (PCP) of the Catalan Institute of Health. We analysed the results of 34 indicators of the Healthcare quality standard (EQA), comprising different types: treatment (4), follow-up (5), control (10), screening (7), vaccinations (4) and quaternary prevention (4). For each PCP, we calculated each indicator's percentage of change in February, March and April 2020 respective to the results of the previous month; and used the T-Student test for paired data to compare them with the percentage of change in the same month of the previous year. We defined indicators with a negative effect those with a greater negative change or a lesser positive change in 2020 in comparison to 2019; and indicators with a positive effect those with a greater positive change or a lesser negative change. RESULTS: We observed a negative effect on 85% of the EQA indicators in March and 68% in April. 90% of the control indicators had a negative effect, highlighting the control of LDL cholesterol with a reduction of - 2.69% (95%CI - 3.17% to - 2.23%) in March and - 3.41% (95%CI - 3.82% to - 3.01%) in April; and the control of blood pressure with a reduction of - 2.13% (95%CI - 2.34% to - 1.9%) and - 2.59% (95%CI - 2.8% to - 2.37%). The indicators with the greatest negative effect were those of screening, such as the indicator of diabetic foot screening with a negative effect of - 2.86% (95%CI - 3.33% to - 2.39%) and - 4.13% (95%CI - 4.55% to - 3.71%) in March and April, respectively. Only one vaccination indicator, adult Measles-Mumps-Rubella vaccine, had a negative effect in both months. Finally, among the indicators of quaternary prevention, we observed negative effects in March and April although in that case a lower inadequacy that means better clinical outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 epidemic and the lockdown measures have significantly reduced the results of the follow-up, control, screening and vaccination indicators for patients in primary care. On the other hand, the indicators for quaternary prevention have been strengthened and their results have improved.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Primary Health Care/organization & administration , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Quarantine/statistics & numerical data , Adult , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Registries , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL