ABSTRACT
Introduccion: Estudiamos el impacto del COVID-19 en pacientes con Enfermedad Inflamatoria Intestinal (EII) en Castilla-La Mancha. Metodos: Estudio observacional retrospectivo utilizando inteligencia artificial con capacidad de procesamiento de lenguaje natural, SAVANA manager. Esta herramienta, a pesar de sus sesgos (ej: duplicacion de casos), permite analizar grandes poblaciones. Analizamos datos de 1.808.010 pacientes durante 2020. Resultados: Se identificaron 2.243 pacientes con EII y COVID-19, que en comparacion con los casos de COVID-19 sin EII hubo mas hipertension arterial, diabetes mellitus, dislipemia, obesidad o tabaquismo. A pesar de ello, no se apreciaron diferencias en hospitalizacion (0,8607, 0,7320-1,0121, p = 0,0696), ingreso en UCI (0,4113, 0,1025-1,6508, p = 0,2102) o mortalidad (0,9099, 0,6123-1,3521, p = 0,6402). COVID-19 fue mas frecuente en pacientes con EII (3,6413, 3,4616-3,8303, p < 0,0001). Comparando pacientes con EII y COVID-19 segun sus tratamientos, vedolizumab es el unico con mayor riesgo de COVID-19 (0,3091, 0,0967-0,9886, p = 0,0478), sin embargo, el riesgo de hospitalizacion para vedolizumab es menor (0,3091, 0,0967-0,9886, p = 0,0478). Los inmunomoduladores tambien tienen un menor riesgo de hospitalizacion tanto solos (0,6677, 0,4650-0,9588, p = 0,0287) como combinados con anti-TNF (0,5109, 0,2836-0,9205, p = 0,0254). No se encontraron diferencias para monoterapia anti-TNF, ustekinumab o tofacitinib. La tasa de UCI y la mortalidad no son diferentes entre los tratamientos, salvo para tofacitinib (tasa de UCI 0,00%, mortalidad 10,00%), sin embargo, el pequeno numero de pacientes podrian sesgar este resultado. [Table presented] Conclusiones: COVID-19 en pacientes con EII no es diferente en hospitalizacion, ingreso en UCI o mortalidad en comparacion con la poblacion sin Ell. Los pacientes con Ell expuestos a inmunomoduladores y vedolizumab tienen menor riesgo de hospitalizacion que los no expuestos, no se encontraron diferencias para anti-TNF monoterapia o ustekinumab.Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Espana, S.L.U. Todos los derechos reservados.
ABSTRACT
Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been a pandemic that is still very prevalent. Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) represent a special population considering their already altered immune system and their exposure to several immunosuppressive therapies. We pretend to study the impact of COVID-19 on IBD patients in our community, Castilla-La Mancha (a region in central Spain). Method(s): Retrospective observational study using an artificial intelligence with natural language processing capability, the SAVANA manager, we analyzed data from 1 808 010 patients with Electronic Medical Records (EMR) within the public health system of Castilla-La Mancha from March 1st 2020 to January 1st 2021. Data on demographic characteristics, hospitalization, ICU admission and mortality were collected. We compared COVID outcomes between IBD and non-IBD patients. We compared COVID outcomes in IBD patients according to their treatment (comparing each treatment group to those IBD patients with no treatment);we considered: Immunomodulators (azathioprine, mercaptopurine, methotrexate), antiTNF alone or combined with immunomodulator, vedolizumab, ustekinumab and tofacitinib;mesalazine and corticosteroids were not analyzed. Result(s): 2 243 patients with IBD suffered COVID-19, compared to COVID-19 cases without IBD there were less females, they suffered more arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, obesity, or tabacco use (TABLE 1). And yet, despite these being proven risk factors for worse outcomes for COVID-19, no differences were appreciated in hospitalization rate, ICU admission, or mortality between those with or without IBD (TABLE 2). COVID-19 was more frequent in IBD patients (32.59 vs 13.28%). Comparing IBD patients with COVID-19 according to their treatments (TABLE 3), vedolizumab is the only treatment with a higher risk for COVID-19 infection, however the hospitalization risk for vedolizumab is lower than for those without it. Immunomodulators do also have a lower hospitalization risk both alone or in combination with antiTNF, no differences were found for antiTNF monotherapy, ustekinumab or tofacitinib. ICU rate and mortality are no different between treatments, except for tofacitinib (0.00% ICU rate, 10.00% mortality), however the small number of patients using this treatment may bias this result. Conclusion(s): COVID-19 in IBD patients is no different in hospitalization, ICU admission or mortality compared to non-IBD population. IBD patients exposed to immunomodulators and vedolizumab have less hospitalization risk than those not exposed, no differences were found for antiTNF alone or ustekinumab. The impact of tofacitinib in COVID outcomes requires further investigation.
ABSTRACT
Introduction and objectives: primary care paediatricians need reliable rapid diagnostic techniques (RDTs) to prevent the spread of coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) through early and effective screening while awaiting a vaccine. The objective of this study was to evaluate the sensitivity (Sen) of the Abbott laboratory SARS-CoV-2 Panbio antigen test, newly introduced in primary care, in both adults and children (symptomatic and asymptomatic contacts) in comparison to the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. Sample and methods: the study included 591 patients (222 aged less than 14 years) from 7 primary care centres;of who 249 were symptomatic and 342 asymptomatic contacts. We calculated the Sen and specificity (Spe) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the independence of the two results with the McNemar test. Results: the Sen of the test within 5 days from onset was 81% in adults (95% CI, 66.16-96.34) and 80% in children (95% CI: 34.94-100). In contacts, we assessed the Sen within 5 days, in adults (68%;95% CI: 51.13-86.37), in 5 to 9 days (85%) and in children (66%;95% CI: 30.31-100). The most frequent source of exposure were household contacts (52% of the cases). The Spe was 100% in every case. Conclusions: the Panbio SARS-CoV-2 rapid antigen test can be useful for diagnosis in adults and children within 5 days of onset, and from days 5 to 9 in contacts of confirmed COVID 19 cases. Further studies are required for adequate interpretation of the latter result. © 2022, Spanish Association of Primary Care Pediatrics. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: During lockdown by COVID-19, some individuals engaged in behaviours generating a greater sense of positivity and control. The objective was to identify relationships between affect, coping strategies, and resilience with task management, distress caused by lockdown, and difficulty observing public health restrictions. Methods: A cross-sectional observational study (May 2020) was carried out in the Complutense University of Madrid. The sample consisted of 50 first-year Health Sciences students, wich were assessed during lockdown by COVID19. The followins scales were used: the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS), the Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced inventory, the ConnorDavidson Resilience Scale, and the Escala de Gestion de Actividades en Situacion de Confinamiento (Activity Management during Lockdown Scale). Results: Thirty-five students (70%) displayed a score of (3)6 on the scale measuring the distress caused by the public health restrictions. Associations with r values of =0.5 were: distress caused by the pandemic and positive affect (r=0.512);seeking new hobbies and seeking social support (r=0.567);seeking new hobbies and humour (r=0.56);reading and active problem-focused coping (r=0.5). Conclusions: Positive affect is influenced by behaviours linked to helping neighbours. Strategies allowing subjects to occupy their time more constructively were: active problem-focused coping, seeking psychosocial support, and acceptance and personal growth. The factors related to negative affect were alcohol consumption and/or drug use, humour.