Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 11(4)2023 Mar 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2293455

ABSTRACT

The Republic of Guatemala's reported COVID-19 vaccination coverage is among the lowest in the Americas and there are limited studies describing the disparities in vaccine uptake within the country. We performed a cross-sectional ecological analysis using multi-level modeling to identify sociodemographic characteristics that were associated with low COVID-19 vaccination coverage among Guatemalan municipalities as of 30 November 2022. Municipalities with a higher proportion of people experiencing poverty (ß = -0.25, 95% CI: -0.43--0.07) had lower vaccination coverage. Municipalities with a higher proportion of people who had received at least a primary education (ß = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.38-1.08), children (ß = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.36-1.77), people aged 60 years and older (ß = 2.94, 95% CI: 1.70-4.12), and testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection (ß = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.14-0.36) had higher vaccination coverage. In the simplified multivariable model, these factors explained 59.4% of the variation in COVID-19 vaccination coverage. Poverty remained significantly associated with low COVID-19 vaccination coverage in two subanalyses restricting the data to the time period of the highest national COVID-19-related death rate and to COVID-19 vaccination coverage only among those aged 60 years or older. Poverty is a key factor associated with low COVID-19 vaccination and focusing public health interventions in municipalities most affected by poverty may help address COVID-19 vaccination and health disparities in Guatemala.

2.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 28(13): S277-S287, 2022 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2162888

ABSTRACT

We evaluated clinical and socioeconomic burdens of respiratory disease in banana farm workers in Guatemala. We offered all eligible workers enrollment during June 15-December 30, 2020, and annually, then tracked them for influenza-like illnesses (ILI) through self-reporting to study nurses, sentinel surveillance at health posts, and absenteeism. Workers who had ILI submitted nasopharyngeal swab specimens for testing for influenza virus, respiratory syncytial virus, and SARS-CoV-2, then completed surveys at days 0, 7, and 28. Through October 10, 2021, a total of 1,833 workers reported 169 ILIs (12.0 cases/100 person-years), and 43 (25.4%) were laboratory-confirmed infections with SARS-CoV-2 (3.1 cases/100 person-years). Workers who had SARS-CoV-2‒positive ILIs reported more frequent anosmia, dysgeusia, difficulty concentrating, and irritability and worse clinical and well-being severity scores than workers who had test result‒negative ILIs. Workers who had positive results also had greater absenteeism and lost income. These results support prioritization of farm workers in Guatemala for COVID-19 vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza, Human , Virus Diseases , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 Testing , Virus Diseases/epidemiology
3.
Medicina clinica (English ed.) ; 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2092950

ABSTRACT

Background Point of care lung ultrasound (POCUS) has been recently used to assess prognosis in COVID-19 patients. However, there are no data comparing POCUS and chest-X ray, a technique widely used. Patients and methods Retrospective analysis in stable COVID-19 patients. Schalekamp radiological lung scale and LUZ-Score ultrasound scale were compared. Primary end-point was in-hospital death and/or need for Intensive Care Unit admission. Results A total of 138 patients were included. Median Schalekamp scale was 2 (2) and median LUZ-Score scale was 21 (10). No significant correlation was observed between both techniques. Patients with a LUZ-Score ≥ 21 points at admission had worse lung function and higher concentrations of LDH, CRP and Interleuquine-6. Schalekamp scale failed to identify patients at a higher risk at admission for the primary end-point. Addition of POCUS to a previous clinical model, improved risk prediction (AUC 0.805 [95% CI: 0.662-0.948];P = < .001). Conclusions Chest X-ray and POCUS showed no correlation at admission in this analysis. Only POCUS identified a group of patients with greater clinical and analytical involvement. POCUS improved, previous clinical model, while chest X-ray did not add relevant predictive information for the primary endpoint.

4.
Med Clin (Engl Ed) ; 159(11): 515-521, 2022 Dec 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2086544

ABSTRACT

Background: Point of care lung ultrasound (POCUS) has been recently used to assess prognosis in COVID-19 patients. However, there are no data comparing POCUS and chest-X ray, a technique widely used. Patients and methods: Retrospective analysis in stable COVID-19 patients. Schalekamp radiological lung scale and LUZ-Score ultrasound scale were compared. Primary end-point was in-hospital death and/or need for Intensive Care Unit admission. Results: A total of 138 patients were included. Median Schalekamp scale was 2 (2) and median LUZ-Score scale was 21 (10). No significant correlation was observed between both techniques. Patients with a LUZ-Score ≥ 21 points at admission had worse lung function and higher concentrations of LDH, CRP and Interleuquine-6. Schalekamp scale failed to identify patients at a higher risk at admission for the primary end-point. Addition of POCUS to a previous clinical model, improved risk prediction (AUC 0.805 [95% CI: 0.662-0.948]; P = <0.001). Conclusions: Chest X-ray and POCUS showed no correlation at admission in this analysis. Only POCUS identified a group of patients with greater clinical and analytical involvement. POCUS improved, previous clinical model, while chest X-ray did not add relevant predictive information for the primary endpoint.


Antecedentes: La ecografía torácica es una técnica novedosa para estratificar el riesgo de los pacientes COVID-19. Sin embargo, no existen datos que comparen dicha técnica con la radiografía de tórax, una técnica ampliamente utilizada en esta enfermedad. Pacientes y métodos: Análisis retrospectivo en pacientes estables COVID-19. Se compararon la escala de daño pulmonar radiológica de Schalekamp y ecográfica de LUZ-Score. El objetivo primario fue la muerte intrahospitalaria o la necesidad de ingreso en la UCI para tratamiento con ventilación mecánica. Resultados: Se reclutaron 138 pacientes. La mediana de la escala de Schalekamp fue de 2 (2) y la del LUZ-Score de 21 (10). No se objetivó una correlación significativa entre ambas escalas. Los pacientes con un LUZ-Score ≥ 21 puntos al ingreso presentaron peor función pulmonar y mayores concentraciones de LDH, PCR e interleucina-6. La escala radiológica de Schalekamp no logró identificar a una población de mayor riesgo. Únicamente la adición de la ecografía pulmonar a un modelo de valoración clínica mejoró de manera significativa el área bajo la curva para el objetivo primario (ABC 0,805 [IC 95%: 0,662−0,948]; p ≤ 0,001). Conclusiones: No se objetivó una correlación entre la afectación radiológica y la ecográfica. Únicamente la ecografía pulmonar identificó un subgrupo de pacientes con una mayor afectación clínico-analítica. La ecografía pulmonar mejoró el modelo de predicción clínico, mientras que la radiografía de tórax no añadió información relevante.

5.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 10(7)2022 Jul 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1988047

ABSTRACT

Essential agricultural workers work under occupational conditions that may increase the risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure and transmission. Data from an agricultural worker cohort in Guatemala, and anti-SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid IgG (anti-N IgG) testing were used to estimate past infections and analyze risk factors associated with seropositivity at enrollment and association with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The stability of neutralizing antibody (NAb) responses were assessed in a subset of participants. The adjusted relative risk (aRR) for seroprevalence at enrollment was estimated accounting for correlations within worksites. At enrollment, 616 (46.2%) of 1334 (93.2%) participants had anti-N IgG results indicating prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. A cough ≤ 10 days prior to enrollment (aRR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.13-1.46) and working as a packer (aRR = 2.00, 95% CI: 1.67-2.38) or packing manager within the plants (aRR = 1.82, 95% CI: 1.36-2.43) were associated with increased risk of seropositivity. COVID-19 incidence density among seronegative workers was 2.3/100 Person-Years (P-Y), higher than seropositive workers (0.4/100 P-Y). Most workers with follow-up NAb testing (65/77, 84%) exhibited a 95% average decrease in NAb titers in <6 months. While participants seropositive at baseline were less likely to experience a symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection during follow-up, NAb titers rapidly waned, underscoring the need for multipronged COVID-19 prevention strategies in the workplace, including vaccination.

6.
Med Clin (Barc) ; 159(11): 515-521, 2022 12 09.
Article in English, Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1796327

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Point of care lung ultrasound (POCUS) has been recently used to assess prognosis in COVID-19 patients. However, there are no data comparing POCUS and chest-X ray, a technique widely used. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis in stable COVID-19 patients. Schalekamp radiological lung scale and LUZ-Score ultrasound scale were compared. Primary end-point was in-hospital death and/or need for Intensive Care Unit admission. RESULTS: A total of 138 patients were included. Median Schalekamp scale was 2 (2) and median LUZ-Score scale was 21 (10). No significant correlation was observed between both techniques. Patients with a LUZ-Score ≥21points at admission had worse lung function and higher concentrations of LDH, CRP and Interleuquine-6. Schalekamp scale failed to identify patients at a higher risk at admission for the primary end-point. Addition of POCUS to a previous clinical model, improved risk prediction (AUC 0.805 [95%CI: 0.662-0.948]; P=<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Chest X-ray and POCUS showed no correlation at admission in this analysis. Only POCUS identified a group of patients with greater clinical and analytical involvement. POCUS improved, previous clinical model, while chest X-ray did not add relevant predictive information for the primary endpoint.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , Retrospective Studies , Hospital Mortality , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Radiography , Prognosis , Hospitals
7.
Eur Respir J ; 58(3)2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1403208

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Lung ultrasound is feasible for assessing lung injury caused by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the prognostic meaning and time-line changes of lung injury assessed by lung ultrasound in COVID-19 hospitalised patients are unknown. METHODS: Prospective cohort study designed to analyse prognostic value of lung ultrasound in COVID-19 patients by using a quantitative scale (lung ultrasound Zaragoza (LUZ)-score) during the first 72 h after admission. The primary end-point was in-hospital death and/or admission to the intensive care unit. Total length of hospital stay, increase of oxygen flow and escalation of medical treatment during the first 72 h were secondary end-points. RESULTS: 130 patients were included in the final analysis; mean±sd age was 56.7±13.5 years. Median (interquartile range) time from the beginning of symptoms to admission was 6 (4-9) days. Lung injury assessed by LUZ-score did not differ during the first 72 h (21 (16-26) points at admission versus 20 (16-27) points at 72 h; p=0.183). In univariable logistic regression analysis, estimated arterial oxygen tension/inspiratory oxygen fraction ratio (PAFI) (hazard ratio 0.99, 95% CI 0.98-0.99; p=0.027) and LUZ-score >22 points (5.45, 1.42-20.90; p=0.013) were predictors for the primary end-point. CONCLUSIONS: LUZ-score is an easy, simple and fast point-of-care ultrasound tool to identify patients with severe lung injury due to COVID-19, upon admission. Baseline score is predictive of severity along the whole period of hospitalisation. The score facilitates early implementation or intensification of treatment for COVID-19 infection. LUZ-score may be combined with clinical variables (as estimated by PAFI) to further refine risk stratification.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Point-of-Care Systems , Adult , Aged , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2
8.
Revista de bioética y derecho ; - (50):295-313, 2020.
Article in Spanish | IBECS | ID: covidwho-1016812

ABSTRACT

El COVID-19 tanto como pandemia como cuanto riesgo global reta a los sistemas de salud pública de los Estados. Pero también este acontecimiento desafía a los principios de la bioética de origen occidental y muestra sus límites lo que demanda por un nuevo conjunto de principios fundados en la ontología y en un orden moral objetivo COVID-19 as a pandemics as well as a global risk challenges States'public health systems. But also this event defies the Western-based principles of bioethics and shows their limits asking for a new set of principles based upon ontology and objective moral order La COVID-19 tant com pandèmia com a risc global repta als sistemes de salut pública dels Estats. Però també aquest esdeveniment desafia els principis de la bioètica d'origen occidental I mostra els seus límits, fet que aboga per un nou conjunt de principis fonamentats en l'ontologia I en un ordre moral objectiu

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL