RESUMO
Resumen: Introducción: La obesidad es una enfermedad con impacto negativo en la sobrevida; se hace referencia al término «paradoja de la obesidad¼ utilizado como un efecto protector en la mortalidad. Objetivo: Determinar si la obesidad es un factor de protección en el paciente crítico. Material y métodos: Se realizó un estudio de cohorte. Se obtuvo información de expedientes de Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos (UCI) del Hospital Regional Monterrey del Instituto de Seguridad y Servicios Sociales para los Trabajadores del Estado (ISSSTE) Monterrey durante 2018. Se hizo análisis bivariado para asociación χ2 y U de Mann-Whitney para correlación fórmula de Pearson y análisis de supervivencia con curva de Kaplan-Meier. Resultados: Se analizaron 151 expedientes de pacientes, 73 obesos y 78 no obesos, se observó que la obesidad es un factor protector para mortalidad (p = 0.044, OR 0.431 (IC 0.187-0.992). El IMC no se correlaciona con el Acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II (p = 0.066); sin embargo, con un impacto en la curva de supervivencia (p = 0.42). Conclusiones: Se detecta la obesidad como factor protector; sin embargo, su asociación con enfermedades crónicas degenerativas, estancia prolongada en UCI y sus complicaciones no dejan de tener impacto negativo en la supervivencia fuera de la unidad.
Abstract: Introduction: Obesity is a disease with a negative impact on survival; the prognosis of these patients is has controversial results. The term «obesity paradox¼ refers as a protective effect on mortality. Objective: To determine whether obesity is a protective factor in the critically ill patient. Material y methods: A cohort study was conducted. Data was obtained from ICU records of the ISSSTE Monterrey Regional Hospital during 2018, bivariate analysis was performed for χ2 and Mann Whitney's U association, for Pearson's formula correlation and survival analysis with Kaplan-Meier curve. Results: 151 records of 73 obese and 78 non-obese patients were analyzed, it was observed that obesity is a protective factor for mortality (p = 0.044, OR 0.431(IC 0.187-0.992), BMI does not correlate with APACHE II (p = 0.066), however, an impact on the survival curve was observed (p = 0.42). Conclusions: According to the results obtained, it matches with the term «obesity paradox¼, however, its association with chronic degenerative diseases, prolonged stay in the ICU and its complications do not cease to have a negative impact on survival outside the unit.
Resumo: Introdução: A obesidade é uma doença com impacto negativo na sobrevida; O termo «paradoxo da obesidade¼ refere-se a um efeito protetor sobre a mortalidade. Objetivo: Determinar se a obesidade é um fator protetor em pacientes críticos. Material e métodos: Foi realizado um estudo de coorte. As informações foram obtidas dos registros da UTI do ISSSTE Monterrey Regional Hospital durante o ano de 2018, foi realizada análise bivariada para associação χ2 eU Mann-Whitney, para correlação da fórmula de Pearson e análise de sobrevida com curva de Kaplan-Meier. Resultados: Foram analisados 151 prontuários de 73 pacientes obesos e 78 não obesos, observou-se que a obesidade é fator protetor para mortalidade (p = 0.044, OR 0.431(IC 0.187-0.992), IMC não se correlaciona com APACHE II (p = 0.066), porém, com impacto na curva de sobrevida (p = 0.42). Conclusões: A obesidade é encontrada como fator de proteção, porém, sua associação com doenças crônico-degenerativas, permanência prolongada na UTI e suas complicações não deixam de ter impacto negativo na sobrevida fora da unidade.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: To investigate and contrast the prevalence of dry eye symptoms in construction workers and office workers using the OSDI questionnaire. METHODS: A cross-sectional, observational study was conducted using the OSDI questionnaire to evaluate dry eye symptoms and associated risk factors. Sampled size calculation with a power of 80% and a 95% degree of confidence suggested the inclusion of 298 participants. RESULTS: We studied 304 subjects (149 construction workers and 155 office workers). More than half (55%) of the participants presented dry eye symptoms (OSDI > 12). The average OSDI score was 21.30 ± 22.20 points, being lower in the group of construction workers (12.45 ± 17.50) than in-office workers (28.51 ± 22.99) (p < 0.001). Considering participants who had moderate and severe symptoms (23 to 100 points in OSDI), office workers presented dry eye symptoms 4.15 times more frequently than construction workers (OR 4.15, 95% CI 2.52, 6.85). Women presented statistical evidence of higher OSDI scores than men (32.47 ± 23.72 vs. 14.87 ± 18.48, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: construction workers have four times less risk of presenting dry eye symptoms than people working in the average office space. This highlights the pernicious effects on the ocular surface of the office environment, which poses a significant risk for the development or worsening of dry eye symptoms.
