Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
PLoS One ; 17(5): e0267625, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1833661

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine the factors associated with prevention practices against COVID-19 in the Peruvian population according to rural vs. urban locations. METHODS: Analytical cross-sectional study, secondary analysis based on a previously collected database. A sample of individuals over 18 years of age, residing in Peru and with no history of COVID-19was evaluated. Factors associated with prevention practices were evaluated using Poisson regressions with variance adjustment by region cluster and stratified by rurality. RESULTS: Of 3231 participants included, 2741 (84.8%) were from urban areas and 490 (15.2%) from rural areas. The frequency of good prevention practices against COVID-19 was 27.8% in our total sample. In urban areas the frequency of good prevention practices was 28.8% and in rural areas it was 22.5%. Factors associated with prevention practices against COVID-19 in both urban and rural areas were male sex (urban: aPR 0.64, 95%CI 0.55-0.75; rural: aPR 0.66, 95%CI 0.54-0.80) and self-considering adequately carrying out prevention practices (urban: aPR 2.48, 95%CI 2.13-2.89; rural: aPR 2.70, 95%CI 2.27-3.19). CONCLUSION: The frequency of good prevention practices against COVID-19 was less than 30% in both urban and rural areas. There are differences in the factors associated with good preventive practice against COVID-19. Only sex and considering that preventive measures were adequately carried out were associated with good prevention practices in both areas. In view of this, prevention measures should be promoted taking into account cultural principles and considering geographical location in the face of present and future outbreaks or pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics/prevention & control , Peru/epidemiology , Rural Population , Urban Population
2.
Vaccine ; 40(26): 3566-3572, 2022 Jun 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1778489

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the factors associated with the intention to participate in COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials in the Peruvian population. METHODS: Cross-sectional study and secondary analysis of a database that involved Peruvian population during September 2020. The Poisson regression model was used to estimate the associated factors. RESULTS: Data from 3231 individuals were analyzed, 44.1% of whom intended to participate in COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials. Factors associated with the outcome were being male (RPa: 1.25; 95% CI: 1.15-1.35), being from the highlands region (RPa: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.09-1.28) or jungle (RPa: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.15-1.47), having a relative that is a healthcare professional (PRa: 1.16; 95% CI: 1.06-1.28), using a medical source of information (PRa: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.17-1.41), and trusting in the possible effectiveness of vaccines (PRa: 1.40; 95% CI: 1.29-1.51). The main reason for not participating in the trial was the possibility of developing side effects (69.80%). CONCLUSION: There is an urgent need to generate a perception of safety in COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, to increase the population's intention to participate in these studies, and to provide evidence-based information about the vaccine.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , Clinical Trials as Topic , Intention , Patient Participation , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Patient Participation/psychology , Peru/epidemiology
3.
J Neurol ; 269(7): 3482-3494, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1739322

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis (TB) is the second most common cause of death due to a single infectious agent worldwide after COVID-19. Up to 15% of the cases are extrapulmonary, and if it is located in the central nervous system (CNS-TB), it presents high morbidity and mortality. Still, the global epidemiology of CNS-TB remains unknown. AIM: To estimate the global prevalence and incidence of CNS-TB based on the available literature. METHODS: We systematically searched in MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, Scopus, and LILACS databases (April 2020) and included observational studies evaluating the epidemiology of CNS-TB. Two independent researchers selected and assessed the quality of the studies and extracted relevant data. We performed random-effects model meta-analysis of proportions to estimate the pooled prevalence. The protocol of this study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD 42018103946). RESULTS: We included 53 studies from 28 countries, representing 12,621 patients with CNS-TB. The prevalence of CNS-TB was 2 per 100,000 inhabitants. According to the clinical setting, the prevalence of CNS-TB represented the 13.91% of all cases of meningitis and 4.55% of all cases of TB. The mortality was calculated by tuberculous meningitis due to the lack of data of other presentation, and it rose up to 42.12% in hospitalized patients. The burden of countries' TB, Human Development Index (HDI), and the prevalence of HIV were the most important prevalence moderators, especially in patients with TB. No data on incidence were found. CONCLUSION: The prevalence and mortality of CNS-TB remain high, and TB meningitis is the most frequent presentation. The highest prevalence was reported in developing countries, and its main moderators were the countries' HDI and HIV infection. Our study was limited by high heterogeneity, risk of bias, and potential data under registration from developing countries. The integration of CNS-TB early detection and management into national TB programs and population-based studies from developing countries are needed for better global estimation and response.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , HIV Infections , Mycobacterium tuberculosis , Tuberculosis, Central Nervous System , Tuberculosis, Meningeal , Humans , Morbidity , Sensitivity and Specificity , Tuberculosis, Central Nervous System/epidemiology , Tuberculosis, Meningeal/epidemiology
4.
Rev. Cuerpo Méd. Hosp. Nac. Almanzor Aguinaga Asenjo ; 14(Supl. 1): 13-21, oct. 21, 2021.
Article in Spanish, English | WHO COVID, LILACS (Americas) | ID: covidwho-1529100

ABSTRACT

Objetivo: Describir las prácticas de prevención y control para la infección por SARS-CoV2 en la población peruana. Material y Métodos: Estudio observacional de tipo descriptivo. Se evaluó una muestra no probabilística de adultos residentes en algún departamento de Perú. Las prácticas preventivas fueron evaluadas en personas sin antecedente de COVID-19 y las prácticas de control en personas que lo habían padecido. Resultados: Se evaluó un total de 3630 peruanos (edad media 25,4 ± 9,5) de los cuales el 3231 no indicaban el antecedente de COVID-19 y 399 refirieron haberlo padecido. Las medidas de prevención y control que se realizaron a menudo o siempre con mayor frecuencia fueron el utilizar mascarilla al salir de casa (97,9% vs 87,7), cubrirse su nariz y boca al estornudar o toser (95,4% vs 89,9%), guardar distancia de los demás en la calle (91,4% vs 74,7%), realizar el lavado de manos con agua y jabón al volver a casa (92,5% vs 88,7%), y desinfectar las superficies de objetos y lugares personales (82,6% vs 77,4%). El 22,1% y 83,7%, el 59,7% y 80,2, y el 8,0% y 16,8% consumieron algún tipo de medicamento, planta medicinal y dióxido de cloro para la prevención y control de la infección de COVID-19, respectivamente. Conclusiones: En general, menos del 50% de los participantes realizaron prácticas de prevención y control frente a la COVID-19 a menudo o siempre.


Objective: To describe prevention and control practices for SARS-CoV2 infection in the Peruvian population. Material and Methods: Observational descriptive study. A non-probabilistic sample of adults residing in a Peruvian department was evaluated. Preventive practices were evaluated in people with no history of COVID-19 and control practices in people who had had COVID-19. Results: A total of 3630 Peruvians were evaluated (mean age 25.4 ± 9.5) of whom 3231 did not indicate a history of COVID-19 and 399 reported having suffered from it. The prevention and control measures most frequently or always performed were using a mask when leaving home (97.9% vs 87.7%), covering their nose and mouth when sneezing or coughing (95.4% vs 89.9%), keeping their distance from others in the street (91.4% vs 74.7%), washing hands with soap and water when returning home (92.5% vs 88.7%), and disinfecting surfaces of objects and personal places (82.6% vs 77.4%). 22.1% and 83.7%, 59.7% and 80.2, and 8.0% and 16.8% consumed some type of medication, medicinal plant, and chlorine dioxide for prevention and control of COVID-19 infection, respectively. Conclusions: Overall, less than 50% of the participants performed prevention and control practices against COVID-19 often or always.

5.
BMC Public Health ; 21(1): 2109, 2021 11 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1523299

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Chlorine dioxide has been promoted as an alternative for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19, especially in Peru, despite the lack of evidence to support its efficacy. This study aimed to evaluate the factors associated with chlorine dioxide consumption in the Peruvian population. METHODS: Analytical cross-sectional study. An adult Peruvian population was evaluated where chlorine dioxide consumption was divided into two groups according to the purpose of use: as prevention (individuals without COVID-19 history) and as treatment (individuals with COVID-19 history). The associated factors in each group were evaluated using Poisson regressions with the bootstrapping resampling method. RESULTS: Of 3610 participants included, 3213 reported no history of COVID-19, and 397 had been infected. The prevalence of chlorine dioxide consumption to prevent or treat COVID-19 was 8 and 16%, respectively. Factors either positively or negatively associated with chlorine dioxide consumption for prevention were male sex (aPR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.09-1.71), being an adult or older adult (aPR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.35-0.82), having a health sciences student within the family unit (aPR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.02-1.87), using medical information as the main source of information of COVID-19 (aPR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.40-0.80), having comorbidities for COVID-19 (aPR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.01-1.82), considering COVID-19 dangerous and deadly (aPR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.45-0.74), using medications (aPR: 1.59; 95% CI: 1.25-2.06) and plants to prevent COVID-19 (aPR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.21-2.36), considering chlorine dioxide ineffective (aPR: 0.18; 95% CI: 0.18-0.24), and being uninformed of its efficacy (aPR: 0.21; 95% CI: 0.16-0.28). In addition, factors associated with chlorine dioxide consumption for treatment were considering COVID-19 dangerous and deadly (aPR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.33-0.96), considering chlorine dioxide ineffective (aPR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.12-0.42), and being uninformed of its efficacy (aPR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.07-0.32). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of chlorine dioxide consumption to treat COVID-19 was higher than prevent. It is important to apply information strategies, prioritizing population groups with certain characteristics that are associated with a higher consumption pattern.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , Chlorine Compounds , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Male , Oxides , Peru/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL