Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
2.
PLoS Med ; 19(5): e1004000, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1854979

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic factors have been consistently associated with suicide, and economic recessions are linked to rising suicide rates. However, evidence on the impact of socioeconomic interventions to reduce suicide rates is limited. This study investigates the association of the world's largest conditional cash transfer programme with suicide rates in a cohort of half of the Brazilian population. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used data from the 100 Million Brazilian Cohort, covering a 12-year period (2004 to 2015). It comprises socioeconomic and demographic information on 114,008,317 individuals, linked to the "Bolsa Família" programme (BFP) payroll database, and nationwide death registration data. BFP was implemented by the Brazilian government in 2004. We estimated the association of BFP using inverse probability of treatment weighting, estimating the weights for BFP beneficiaries (weight = 1) and nonbeneficiaries by the inverse probability of receiving treatment (weight = E(ps)/(1-E(ps))). We used an average treatment effect on the treated (ATT) estimator and fitted Poisson models to estimate the incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for suicide associated with BFP experience. At the cohort baseline, BFP beneficiaries were younger (median age 27.4 versus 35.4), had higher unemployment rates (56% versus 32%), a lower level of education, resided in rural areas, and experienced worse household conditions. There were 36,742 suicide cases among the 76,532,158 individuals aged 10 years, or older, followed for 489,500,000 person-years at risk. Suicide rates among beneficiaries and nonbeneficiaries were 5.4 (95% CI = 5.32, 5.47, p < 0.001) and 10.7 (95% CI = 10.51, 10.87, p < 0.001) per 100,000 individuals, respectively. BFP beneficiaries had a lower suicide rate than nonbeneficiaries (IRR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.42, 0.45, p < 0.001). This association was stronger among women (IRR = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.33, 0.38, p < 0.001), and individuals aged between 25 and 59 (IRR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.40, 0.43, p < 0.001). Study limitations include a lack of control for previous mental disorders and access to means of suicide, and the possible under-registration of suicide cases due to stigma. CONCLUSIONS: We observed that BFP was associated with lower suicide rates, with similar results in all sensitivity analyses. These findings should help to inform policymakers and health authorities to better design suicide prevention strategies. Targeting social determinants using cash transfer programmes could be important in limiting suicide, which is predicted to rise with the economic recession, consequent to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Suicide Prevention , Adult , Brazil/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Incidence , Middle Aged , Socioeconomic Factors
3.
Lancet Glob Health ; 10(3): e390-e397, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1747373

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Universal health coverage is one of the WHO End TB Strategy priority interventions and could be achieved-particularly in low-income and middle-income countries-through the expansion of primary health care. We evaluated the effects of one of the largest primary health-care programmes in the world, the Brazilian Family Health Strategy (FHS), on tuberculosis morbidity and mortality using a nationwide cohort of 7·3 million individuals over a 10-year study period. METHODS: We analysed individuals who entered the 100 Million Brazilians Cohort during the period Jan 1, 2004, to Dec 31, 2013, and compared residents in municipalities with no FHS coverage with residents in municipalities with full FHS coverage. We used a cohort design with multivariable Poisson regressions, adjusted for all relevant demographic and socioeconomic variables and weighted with inverse probability of treatment weighting, to estimate the effect of FHS on tuberculosis incidence, mortality, cure, and case fatality. We also performed a range of stratifications and sensitivity analyses. FINDINGS: FHS exposure was associated with lower tuberculosis incidence (rate ratio [RR] 0·78, 95% CI 0·72-0·84) and mortality (0·72, 0·55-0·94), and was positively associated with tuberculosis cure rates (1·04, 1·00-1·08). FHS was also associated with a decrease in tuberculosis case-fatality rates, although this was not statistically significant (RR 0·84, 95% CI 0·55-1·30). FHS associations were stronger among the poorest individuals for all the tuberculosis indicators. INTERPRETATION: Community-based primary health care could strongly reduce tuberculosis morbidity and mortality and decrease the unequal distribution of the tuberculosis burden in the most vulnerable populations. During the current marked rise in global poverty due to the COVID-19 pandemic, investments in primary health care could help protect against the expected increases in tuberculosis incidence worldwide and contribute to the attainment of the End TB Strategy goals. FUNDING: TB Modelling and Analysis Consortium (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation), Wellcome Trust, and Brazilian Ministry of Health. TRANSLATION: For the Portuguese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.


Subject(s)
Community Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Tuberculosis/epidemiology , Tuberculosis/therapy , Universal Health Insurance/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Age Distribution , Brazil/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Community Health Services/methods , Female , Humans , Incidence , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Poverty/statistics & numerical data , Primary Health Care/methods , Young Adult
4.
Lancet Reg Health Am ; 6: 100154, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1587084

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Aging influences COVID-19 severity and response to vaccination, but previous vaccine effectiveness (VE) analyzes lack the power to evaluate its role in subgroups within the elderly age group. Here we analyzed the impact of age on viral vector and inactivated virus vaccines' effectiveness, the main platforms used in low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: We report a retrospective longitudinal study of 75,919,840 Brazilian vaccinees from January 18 to July 24, 2021, evaluating documented infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), COVID-19-related hospitalisation, ICU admission, and death. Negative binomial regression models adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics were used for VE estimation. FINDINGS: The overall analyzes of full vaccination showed VE against hospitalisation, ICU admission, and death of 91·4% (95%CI:90·1-92·5), 91·1% (95%CI:88·9-92·9) and 92·3% (95%CI:90·5-93·7) for Vaxzevria and 71·2% (95%CI:70·0-72·4), 72·2% (95%CI:70·2-74·0) and 73·7% (95%CI:72·1-75·2) for CoronaVac, respectively. VE for all outcomes is progressively lower with age. In fully-Vaxzevria-vaccinated individuals aged <60 years, VE against death was 96.5% (95%CI:82.1-99.3) versus 68·5% (95%CI:40·0-83·4) in those ≥90 years. Among fully-CoronaVac-vaccinated individuals, VE against death was 84.8% (95%CI:77.1-89.9) in those <60 years compared to 63.5 (95%CI 58.7-67.7) for vaccinees aged 80-89 years and 48·6%; (95%CI:35·0-59·3) for individuals aged ≥90 years. Post-vaccination daily cumulative incidence curves for all outcomes showed increased risk from younger to elder decades of life. There was no increase in the incidence of hospitalisation for individuals <60 years vaccinated during the same period as those aged ≥90 years. INTERPRETATION: Although both vaccines have been effective in protecting against infection, hospitalization and death; Vaxzevria and CoronaVac demonstrated high effectiveness against severe outcomes for individuals up to 79 years of age. Our results reinforce the idea that booster doses should be carefully considered in elders. FUNDING: This study was partially supported by a donation from the "Fazer o bem faz bem" program.

6.
Cien Saude Colet ; 26(4): 1441-1456, 2021 Apr.
Article in Portuguese | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1197440

ABSTRACT

Even in the period when the Covid-19 pandemic was on the rise in the Northeast of Brazil, the relaxation of social distancing measures was introduced. The scope of the study is to assess, in the light of the epidemiological-sanitary situation in the region, the suitability of relaxation of social distancing measures. Based on the WHO guidelines for relaxation of social distancing, operational indicators were created and analyzed for each guideline in the context of the Northeast. To analyze the behavior of the epidemic, according to selected indicators, Joinpoint trend analysis techniques, heat maps, rate ratios and time trends between capitals and the state interior were compared. The weekly growth peak of the epidemic occurred in May-July 2020 (epidemiological weeks 19 to 31). In most capitals, there was no simultaneous downward trend in the number of cases and deaths in the 14 days prior to flexibilization. In all states the number of tests performed was insufficient. In epidemiological week 24, the state percentages of ICU/Covid-19 bed occupancy were close to or above 70%. The epidemiological situation of the nine Northeastern state capitals analyzed here did not meet criteria and parameters recommended by the World Health Organization for the relaxation of social distancing measures.


Mesmo no período em que a pandemia de Covid-19 encontrava-se em crescimento no Nordeste do Brasil, iniciou-se a adoção de medidas de flexibilização do distanciamento social. O objetivo do estudo é o de avaliar a pertinência das propostas de flexibilização, tomando-se em conta a situação da pandemia em cada local e o momento em que foram adotadas. Tendo como referência as diretrizes da OMS, foram construídos e analisados indicadores operacionais para cada diretriz, no contexto da região Nordeste. Para análise do comportamento da epidemia, conforme indicadores selecionados, foram usadas técnicas de Joinpoint Trend Analysis, mapas de calor, razão de taxas e comparação da tendência temporal entre capitais e interior dos estados. O pico do crescimento semanal ocorreu em maio-julho/2020 (semanas epidemiológicas 19 a 31). Na maioria das capitais não se observou tendência decrescente simultânea do número de casos e óbitos nos 14 dias prévios à flexibilização. Em todos os estados o quantitativo de testes realizados foi insuficiente. Na semana epidemiológica 24 os percentuais estaduais de ocupação de leitos de UTI/Covid-19 foram próximos ou superiores 70%. A situação epidemiológica das nove capitais dos estados do Nordeste, no momento em que a decisão de flexibilização foi tomada, mostra que nenhuma delas atendia aos critérios e parâmetros recomendados pela OMS.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Physical Distancing , Bed Occupancy/statistics & numerical data , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control , Humans , World Health Organization
7.
Ciênc. Saúde Colet ; 25(supl.2):4099-4120, 2020.
Article in Portuguese | LILACS (Americas) | ID: grc-741522

ABSTRACT

Resumo No Brasil, a pandemia da COVID-19 tem sido severa nos estados das regiões mais pobres, como o Nordeste. A falta de políticas nacionais para controle da pandemia levou as autoridades estaduais e municipais a implementarem medidas de saúde pública. O objetivo deste estudo é mostrar o efeito dessas medidas na epidemia. A maior incidência da COVID-19 entre os nove estados do Nordeste foi registrada em Sergipe, Paraíba e Ceará. O Piauí, a Paraíba e Ceará foram os que mais testaram. Muitos estados apresentavam alta proporção de pessoas em trabalho informal. Estados com aeroportos internacionais tiveram importante papel na entrada e disseminação inicial do vírus, em especial o Ceará. Todos os estados aplicaram medidas de distanciamento social, proibição de eventos públicos e fechamento de unidades de ensino. As respostas foram o aumento significativo de distanciamento social, em especial Ceará e Pernambuco, a queda do número de reprodução (Rt) e a separação da curva dos casos observados da curva dos casos esperados sem as intervenções não medicamentosas em todos os estados. A pobreza, a desigualdade e as altas taxas de trabalho informal fornecem pistas do porquê da intensidade da COVID-19 na região. Por outro lado, as medidas de mitigação tomadas precocemente pelos governantes amenizaram os efeitos da pandemia. The COVID-19 pandemic has been most severe in the poorest regions of Brazil, such as the states of the Northeast Region. The lack of national policies for pandemic control forced state and municipal authorities to implement public health measures. The aim of this study is to show the effect of these measures on the epidemic. The highest incidence of COVID-19 among the nine states in the Northeast was recorded in Sergipe, Paraíba and Ceará. Piauí, Paraíba and Ceará were the states that most tested. Factors associated with transmission included the high proportion of people in informal work. States with international airports played an important role in the entry of the virus and the initial spread, especially Ceará. All states applied social distancing measures, banned public events and closed schools. The response was a significant increase in social distancing, especially in Ceará and Pernambuco, a decline in the reproduction rate (Rt), and a separation of the curve of observed cases versus expected cases if the non-pharmacological interventions had not been implemented in all states. Poverty, inequality, and the high rates of informal work provide clues to the intensity of COVID-19 in the region. On the other hand, the measures taken early by the governments mitigated the effects of the pandemic.

8.
Cien Saude Colet ; 25(suppl 2): 4099-4120, 2020 Oct.
Article in Portuguese, English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-836007

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has been most severe in the poorest regions of Brazil, such as the states of the Northeast Region. The lack of national policies for pandemic control forced state and municipal authorities to implement public health measures. The aim of this study is to show the effect of these measures on the epidemic. The highest incidence of COVID-19 among the nine states in the Northeast was recorded in Sergipe, Paraíba and Ceará. Piauí, Paraíba and Ceará were the states that most tested. Factors associated with transmission included the high proportion of people in informal work. States with international airports played an important role in the entry of the virus and the initial spread, especially Ceará. All states applied social distancing measures, banned public events and closed schools. The response was a significant increase in social distancing, especially in Ceará and Pernambuco, a decline in the reproduction rate (Rt), and a separation of the curve of observed cases versus expected cases if the non-pharmacological interventions had not been implemented in all states. Poverty, inequality, and the high rates of informal work provide clues to the intensity of COVID-19 in the region. On the other hand, the measures taken early by the governments mitigated the effects of the pandemic.


No Brasil, a pandemia da COVID-19 tem sido severa nos estados das regiões mais pobres, como o Nordeste. A falta de políticas nacionais para controle da pandemia levou as autoridades estaduais e municipais a implementarem medidas de saúde pública. O objetivo deste estudo é mostrar o efeito dessas medidas na epidemia. A maior incidência da COVID-19 entre os nove estados do Nordeste foi registrada em Sergipe, Paraíba e Ceará. O Piauí, a Paraíba e Ceará foram os que mais testaram. Muitos estados apresentavam alta proporção de pessoas em trabalho informal. Estados com aeroportos internacionais tiveram importante papel na entrada e disseminação inicial do vírus, em especial o Ceará. Todos os estados aplicaram medidas de distanciamento social, proibição de eventos públicos e fechamento de unidades de ensino. As respostas foram o aumento significativo de distanciamento social, em especial Ceará e Pernambuco, a queda do número de reprodução (Rt) e a separação da curva dos casos observados da curva dos casos esperados sem as intervenções não medicamentosas em todos os estados. A pobreza, a desigualdade e as altas taxas de trabalho informal fornecem pistas do porquê da intensidade da COVID-19 na região. Por outro lado, as medidas de mitigação tomadas precocemente pelos governantes amenizaram os efeitos da pandemia.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Public Policy , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Poverty/statistics & numerical data , Quarantine , SARS-CoV-2 , State Government , Water Supply
9.
Respir Res ; 21(1): 178, 2020 Jul 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-639735

ABSTRACT

Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccination is routine and near-universal in many low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). It has been suggested that BCG can have a protective effect on COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. This commentary discusses the limitations of the evidence around BCG and COVID-19. We argue that higher-quality evidence is necessary to understand the protective effect of the BCG vaccine from existing, secondary data, while we await results from clinical trials currently conducted in different settings.


Subject(s)
BCG Vaccine/immunology , BCG Vaccine/therapeutic use , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/therapy , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/therapy , Quality Control , COVID-19 , Clinical Trials as Topic , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , Humans , Male , Needs Assessment , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Poverty , Primary Prevention/methods , Role , Socioeconomic Factors , Survival Analysis , Vaccination/methods , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data
10.
Public Health And Safety Covid-19 Distanciamento Social Coronavírus Nordeste Brasil Epidemia Social Distancing Coronavirus Northeast Brazil Epidemic Indicators Trend analysis Trends Coronaviruses Epidemiology Disease control Epidemics Occupancy Brazil ; 2021(Ciência & Saúde Coletiva)
Article in Portuguese | Apr 2021 2021-05-05 | ID: covidwho-1216975

ABSTRACT

Mesmo no período em que a pandemia de Covid-19 encontrava-se em crescimento no Nordeste do Brasil, iniciou-se a adoção de medidas de flexibilização do distanciamento social. O objetivo do estudo é o de avaliar a pertinência das propostas de flexibilização, tomando-se em conta a situação da pandemia em cada local e o momento em que foram adotadas. Tendo como referência as diretrizes da OMS, foram construídos e analisados indicadores operacionais para cada diretriz, no contexto da região Nordeste. Para análise do comportamento da epidemia, conforme indicadores selecionados, foram usadas técnicas de Joinpoint Trend Analysis, mapas de calor, razão de taxas e comparação da tendência temporal entre capitais e interior dos estados. O pico do crescimento semanal ocorreu em maio-julho/2020 (semanas epidemiológicas 19 a 31). Na maioria das capitais não se observou tendência decrescente simultânea do número de casos e óbitos nos 14 dias prévios à flexibilização. Em todos os estados o quantitativo de testes realizados foi insuficiente. Na semana epidemiológica 24 os percentuais estaduais de ocupação de leitos de UTI/Covid-19 foram próximos ou superiores 70%. A situação epidemiológica das nove capitais dos estados do Nordeste, no momento em que a decisão de flexibilização foi tomada, mostra que nenhuma delas atendia aos critérios e parâmetros recomendados pela OMS.Alternate abstract:Even in the period when the Covid-19 pandemic was on the rise in the Northeast of Brazil, the relaxation of social distancing measures was introduced. The scope of the study is to assess, in the light of the epidemiological-sanitary situation in the region, the suitability of relaxation of social distancing measures. Based on the WHO guidelines for relaxation of social distancing, operational indicators were created and analyzed for each guideline in the context of the Northeast. To analyze the behavior of the epidemic, according to selected indicators, Joinpoint trend analysis techniques, heat maps, rate ratios and time trends between capitals and the state interior were compared. The weekly growth peak of the epidemic occurred in May-July 2020 (epidemiological weeks 19 to 31). In most capitals, there was no simultaneous downward trend in the number of cases and deaths in the 14 days prior to flexibilization. In all states the number of tests performed was insufficient. In epidemiological week 24, the state percentages of ICU/Covid-19 bed occupancy were close to or above 70%. The epidemiological situation of the nine Northeastern state capitals analyzed here did not meet criteria and parameters recommended by the World Health Organization for the relaxation of social distancing measures.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL