Asthma prevalence among United States population insights from NHANES data analysis.

Asthma is a prevalent respiratory condition that poses a substantial burden on public health in the United States. Understanding its prevalence and associated risk factors is vital for informed policymaking and public health interventions. This study aims to examine asthma prevalence and identify major risk factors in the U.S. POPULATION: Our study utilized NHANES data between 1999 and 2020 to investigate asthma prevalence and associated risk factors within the U.S. POPULATION: We analyzed a dataset of 64,222 participants, excluding those under 20 years old. We performed binary regression analysis to examine the relationship of demographic and health related covariates with the prevalence of asthma. The study found that asthma affected 8.7% of the U.S. POPULATION: Gender emerged as a significant factor, with 36.0% of asthma patients being male and 64.0% female (p < 0.001). Individuals aged 60 and older having the highest asthma prevalence at 34.0%. Non-Hispanic whites had the highest prevalence at 46.4%, followed by non-hispanic blacks at 26.0%. In contrast, Mexican Americans and other hispanic individuals had lower rates, at 9.6% and 9.0%, respectively. Females were 1.76 times more likely to have asthma than males (p < 0.001). Obese individuals had a 1.74 times higher likelihood of current asthma compared to underweight individuals (p < 0.001). Notably, both Non-Hispanic Whites and Non-Hispanic Blacks showed higher odds of current asthma compared to Mexican Americans (with adjusted odds ratios of 2.084 and 2.096, respectively, p < 0.001). The research findings indicate that asthma is prevalent in 8.7% of the U.S. POPULATION: Our study highlights that individuals who are female, have low income, are obese, and smoke have the highest likelihood of being affected by asthma. Therefore, public health policies should prioritize addressing these risk factors in their preventive strategies.

The effect of influenza vaccine in reducing the severity of clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Recent evidence suggests that vaccination against influenza may reduce the clinical outcomes of COVID-19. This study looked at the link between influenza vaccination and the severity of COVID-19 infection. We searched five databases until August 2021. We included studies that reported the relationship between influenza vaccination and COVID-19 outcomes. We pooled the data as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), the data pooled using fixed and random effects models according to the heterogeneity of results. Sixteen observational studies with 191,496 COVID-19 patients were included. In terms of mechanical ventilation, our analysis showed a significant favor for the influenza vaccinated group over the non-vaccinated group (RR = 0.72, 95% CI [0.54, 0.96], P = 0.03). However, the analysis indicated no statistically significant differences between vaccinated and non-vaccinated groups in the term of mortality rate (RR = 1.20, 95% CI [0.71, 2.04], P = 0.50), hospital admissions (RR = 1.04, 95% CI [0.84, 1.29], P = 0.75), intensive care admissions (RR = 0.84, 95% CI [0.44, 1.62], P = 0.60). There were no significant differences between those who had received the influenza vaccine and those who had not in COVID-19 clinical outcomes, except for mechanical ventilation which showed a significantly lower risk in the influenza vaccinated group compared to the non-vaccinated one. However, future research is encouraged as our data have limitations, and the influenza vaccine is regularly updated. Also, this does not exclude the importance of the influenza vaccine during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Safety and efficacy of omecamtiv mecarbil for heart failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: To assess the safety and efficacy of omecamtiv mecarbil compared with placebo in heart failure (HF) patients. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS until August 15th, 2021. We included all randomized controlled studies comparing omecamtiv mecarbil with placebo in heart failure patients. The meta-analysis was carried out using Rev Man software V5.4. RESULTS: A total of eight studies were included in our systematic review. Pooled analysis showed that omecamtiv mecarbil is not associated with increased incidence of death, any adverse events, hypotension, heart failure, ventricular tachyarrhythmia, dyspnea, dizziness, and serious adverse events. Regarding the efficacy, omecamtiv mecarbil significantly reduced heart rate with some studies demonstrating its significant improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction and systolic function. CONCLUSION: Omecamtiv mecarbil is a well-tolerated drug in heart failure patients. The limited data regarding the efficacy suggested that it may improve ejection fraction and systolic function.