ABSTRACT
Samgyeopsal has become a widely popular cuisine in the Philippines since 2014. The rise of Samgyeopsal is evident worldwide as it is available in countries such as the United States, Northern, and Southern Asia. This study aimed to explore the intention to eat Samgyeopsal during the COVID-19 pandemic utilizing structural equation modeling and random forest classifier. With a total of 1014 responses collected online, the result showed that utilitarian and hedonic motivation, Korean influence, and attitude led to very high actual behavior in east Samgyeopsal in the Philippines. Moreover, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control, and intention led to significant results influencing intention to actual behavior. Lastly, the COVID-19 safety protocol showed the least significant result. This study is the first study that evaluated the intention of consumers to eat Samgyeopsal in the Philippines during the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of this study would be beneficial to Korean BBQ restaurateurs and the further development of their marketing strategies even in other countries. Finally, the model construct of this study can be extended and applied in evaluating the consumers' eating intention toward other varieties of food or cuisines worldwide.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Intention , Humans , Philippines , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Surveys and Questionnaires , Republic of KoreaABSTRACT
The pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus has been especially detrimental to patients with end-stage renal disease. History with other vaccines suggests that patients with renal disease may not respond adequately to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. The aim of this study is to evaluate the immunity to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in renal patients. Post SARS-CoV-2 vaccination first, and after the booster dose, antibodies and cellular immunity were studied in patients on hemodialysis (N = 20), peritoneal dialysis (N = 10) and renal transplantation (N = 10). After the two doses of vaccine, there was an effective immunity in dialysis patients, with 100% seroconversion and 87% detection of cellular immunity (85% in hemodialysis and 90% in peritoneal dialysis). In contrast, in renal transplant recipients there was only 50% seroconversion and cellular immunity was detected in 30% of patients. After the booster dose, all dialysis patients achieved a cellular and antibody immunity, whereas in transplant patients, despite improvement, 20% did not produce antibodies and in 37.5% cellular immunity could not be detected. The mRNA vaccine plus booster performs excellently in dialysis patients, whereas in kidney transplant recipients, despite the booster, complete immunization is not achieved.Copyright © 2022
ABSTRACT
Background. Pulse glucocorticoid therapy is used in COVID-19 infection. We evaluated the effectiveness of methylprednisolone 250 mg/d for 3 days vs. dexamethasone 6 mg/ d for 10 days in patients with severe but not critical COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods. A multicentre, randomized, open-label, controlled trial was conducted between February 2021 and August 2021 at 4 hospitals in Spain and included 128 hospitalized adults with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia needing oxygen therapy but not critically ill. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive dexamethasone 6 once daily for 10 days or methylprednisolone 250 mg once daily for 3 days. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Results. Of the 128 randomized patients, 125 were analysed (mean age 60 +/- 17 years;82 males [66%]). Mortality at 28 days was 4.8% in the 250 mg methylprednisolone group vs. 4.8 % in the 6 mg dexamethasone group (absolute risk difference, 0.1% [95% CI, -8.8 to 9.1%];P=0.98). The post-hoc added composite outcome of mortality at 90 days or intubation was 15.9% in the 250 mg methylprednisolone group vs. 15% in the 6 mg dexamethasone group (absolute risk difference, -0.9% [95% CI, -13.8 to 12.3%];P=0.83). Hyperglycaemia was more frequent in the methylprednisolone group, at 27.0 vs. 8.1 % (absolute risk difference, -18.9% [95% CI, -31.8 to - 5.6%];P=0.007). Conclusion. Among severe but not critical patients with COVID-19, 250 mg/d for 3 days of methylprednisolone compared with 6 mg/d for 10 days of dexamethasone did not result in a decrease in mortality or intubation.
ABSTRACT
The pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus has been especially detrimental to patients with end-stage renal disease. History with other vaccines suggests that patients with renal disease may not respond adequately to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. The aim of this study is to evaluate the immunity to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in renal patients. Post SARS-CoV-2 vaccination first, and after the booster dose, antibodies and cellular immunity were studied in patients on hemodialysis (N=20), peritoneal dialysis (N=10) and renal transplantation (N=10). After the two doses of vaccine, there was an effective immunity in dialysis patients, with 100% seroconversion and 87% detection of cellular immunity (85% in hemodialysis and 90% in peritoneal dialysis). In contrast, in renal transplant recipients there was only 50% seroconversion and cellular immunity was detected in 30% of patients. After the booster dose, all dialysis patients achieved a cellular and antibody immunity, whereas in transplant patients, despite improvement, 20% did not produce antibodies and in 37.5% cellular immunity could not be detected. The mRNA vaccine plus booster performs excellently in dialysis patients, whereas in kidney transplant recipients, despite the booster, complete immunization is not achieved.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic will give rise to long-term changes in neurological care, which are not easily predictable. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A key informant survey was used to enquire about the changes expected in the specialty over the next 5 years. The survey was completed by heads of neurology departments with broad knowledge of the situation, having been active during the pandemic. RESULTS: Despite a low level of consensus between participants, there was strong (85%) and moderate consensus (70%) about certain subjects, mainly the increase in precautions to be taken, the use of telemedicine and teleconsultations, the reduction of care provided in in-person consultations to avoid the presence of large numbers of people in waiting rooms, the development of remote training solutions, and the changes in monitoring visits during clinical trials. There was consensus that there would be no changes to the indication of complementary testing or neurological examination. CONCLUSION: The key informant survey identified the foreseeable changes in neurological care after the pandemic.