Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Basic and Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology ; 130(SUPPL 2):33, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1916055

ABSTRACT

Objective: • To describe the most reported menstrual alterations to the SEFV in relation to vaccination against COVID-19. • To stratify cases by age, type of vaccine and reporter. • To collect the latencies of adverse events. Material and/or methods: Review of the notifications uploaded to the FEDRA database with the following search criteria: the suspected drug is a vaccine against COVID-19, the adverse drug reaction (ADR) is part of the Meddra HLGT “alterations of menstrual flow” and the upload date is between the date of authorisation of the first vaccine (22/12/20) and the cut-off date established by protocol (3/11/2021). Also, those cases corresponding to Canary Islands have been selected for a detailed analysis. Results: There are 2275 notifications in Spain that meet the search criteria. The SEFV is the source of 98% of the notifications, being the pharmaceutical industry the source of the 2% left. In Canary Islands, there have been 80 notifications that meet the criteria. Of these, 87.5% come from female users (patients). The average age is 36 years. The most reported menstrual disorders were “intermenstrual bleeding,” “menstrual disorder” and “irregular menstruation.” The latencies described have a mean of 12.5 days with a median of 6 days and a mode of 3 days, appearing after the first dose in most cases. Conclusions: Most of the reports are from female users. Coding is complex due to the difficulty of the terms, which complicates data analysis. Reported reactions are diverse, being the most frequent terms non-specific. Menstrual disturbances interfere with daily life, are underreported and under-diagnosed.

4.
Radiotherapy and Oncology ; 161:S1248-S1249, 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1492825

ABSTRACT

Purpose or Objective: Cancer diagnostics and surgery have been disrupted by the response of health care services to the coronavirus disease pandemic. With the COVID-19 irruption in 2020, some radiotherapy treatments were omitted, delayed, changed intent or shifted to a hypofractionated scheme. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect, direct or indirect, that COVID-19 has had on radiotherapy treatments in comparison with previous years. Materials and Methods: All treatments from 2018 (1521), 2019 (1498) and 2020 (1613) were analysed. Treatments were separated into two categories regarding treatment intent: curative or palliative. Moreover curative treatments were classified by site or pathology: H&N, lung, rectum, prostate, breast, central nervous system (CNS), gynaecological, SBRT and other sites. Percentage of hypofractionated treatments per year (for those with curative intent) was also taken into account. Results: Regarding treatment intent, we have found that the number of palliative treatments was similar to previous years: 38% in 2020, 37 % in 2018 and 35% in 2019. Figure I shows the percentage of hypofractionated treatments. During 2020 there were 10% hypofractionated treatments more than 2019, which is more than a threefold increase compared to the growth between 2018 and 2019 (3%). (Figure Presented) Conclusion: On one side, reasons related directly or indirectly with COVID-19 do not had an effect on the treatment intent in our department: similar number of palliative treatments was reported during 2020. On the other side, the use of hypofractionated schemes was accelerated during the pandemic, following national and international recommendations. This has allowed reducing treatment time bringing more comfort to the patients. To resume, it is difficult to assess whether the pandemic had a negative effect on cancer treatments based on treatment intent. Deeper analysis of cancer staging could reveal a different result related to collateral damage to the pandemic.

5.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 9(4):14, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1209558

ABSTRACT

We developed an agent-based stochastic model, based on P Systems methodology, to decipher the effects of vaccination and contact tracing on the control of COVID-19 outbreak at population level under different control measures (social distancing, mask wearing and hand hygiene) and epidemiological scenarios. Our findings suggest that without the application of protection social measures, 56.1% of the Spanish population would contract the disease with a mortality of 0.4%. Assuming that 20% of the population was protected by vaccination by the end of the summer of 2021, it would be expected that 45% of the population would contract the disease and 0.3% of the population would die. However, both of these percentages are significantly lower when social measures were adopted, being the best results when social measures are in place and 40% of contacts traced. Our model shows that if 40% of the population can be vaccinated, even without social control measures, the percentage of people who die or recover from infection would fall from 0.41% and 56.1% to 0.16% and 33.5%, respectively compared with an unvaccinated population. When social control measures were applied in concert with vaccination the percentage of people who die or recover from infection diminishes until 0.10% and 14.5%, after vaccinating 40% of the population. Vaccination alone can be crucial in controlling this disease, but it is necessary to vaccinate a significant part of the population and to back this up with social control measures.

6.
European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy. Science and Practice ; 28(Suppl 1):A25-A26, 2021.
Article in English | ProQuest Central | ID: covidwho-1136084

ABSTRACT

Background and importanceDirect oral anticoagulants (DOAC) were moderately used in the primary care (PC) setting due to their associated risks in elderly and their high cost. In contrast, acenocumarol was much more common in Catalonia, even though it requires intense monitoring. During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the use of DOAC has been encouraged to reduce patient medical visits.Aim and objectivesTo analyse the change in DOAC use in our area and to evaluate prescription appropriateness.Material and methodsThis cross sectional study analysed the use of DOAC in a PC population in Barcelona in September 2020. The results were compared with historical data from December 2018. Demographic variables (age, gender), pharmacotherapeutic data (drugs, dose, frequency) and clinical data (glomerular filtration (GF), international normalised ratio (INR), CHA2DS2-VASc score) were obtained from the electronic medical record (September 2020). Prescription appropriateness was evaluated according to the drugs’ summary of product characteristics.ResultsThe study included 351 732 patients in 2018 and 364 350 in 2020;9194 (2.65%) and 10 017 (2.75%) of the patients were treated with oral anticoagulants (OA), respectively.Prevalence of OA use:2018: acenocumarol 5734 (62.4%), warfarin 133 (2.3%), apixaban 1006 (10.9%), edoxaban 309 (3.4%), dabigatran 532 (5.8%) and rivaroxaban 1480 (16.1%).2020: acenocumarol 3804 (38.0%), warfarin 157 (1.6%), apixaban 1875 (18.7%), edoxaban 959 (9.6%), dabigatran 712 (7.1%) and rivaroxaban 2510 (25.1%).Comparison of prevalence between 2018 and 2020:Decrease in acenocumarol (62.4% vs 38.0%, p<0.0001).No change in warfarin (1.45% vs 1.6%, p<0.05).Increase in DOAC (36.2% vs 60.5%, p<0.0001), specifically: increase in edoxaban (9.3% vs 15.8%, p<0.0001), no change in apixaban (30.2% vs 31.0%, p<0.05) and decrease in dabigatran and rivaroxaban (16.0% vs 11.8% and 44.5% vs 41.5%, respectively, p<0.05).DOAC prescription appropriateness in 2020 (among 6056 patients):The main indication was atrial fibrillation (5881 patients, 97.1%).373 men had CHA2DS2–VASc <2 and 240 women had CHA2DS2–VASc <3.Frequency of contraindications: peptic ulcer (1603;26.5%), valvulopathy (1060;17.5%) and renal failure (76;1.3%).2433 (40.2%) patients had at least one contraindication.Dose was not appropriately reduced in 526 patients (8.7%).Conclusion and relevanceDOAC use increased notably in our PC area during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.We found that 40.2% of patients treated with DOAC had at least one contraindication for the treatment. Interventions should be done to improve DOAC prescription and ensure patient safety.References and/or acknowledgementsConflict of interestNo conflict of interest

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL