Understanding the Burden of Respiratory Syncytial Virus in Older Adults in Latin America: An Expert Perspective on Knowledge Gaps.

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a significant global health concern and major cause of hospitalization, particularly among infants and older adults. The clinical impact of RSV is well characterized in infants; however, in many countries, the burden and risk of RSV in older populations are overlooked. In Latin America, there are limited data on RSV epidemiology and disease management in older adults. Therefore, the impact of RSV in this region needs to be addressed. Here, current insights on RSV infections in older populations in Latin America, including those with underlying health conditions, are discussed. We also outline the key challenges limiting our understanding of the burden of RSV in Latin America in a worldwide context and propose an expert consensus to improve our understanding of the burden of RSV in the region. By so doing, we aim to ultimately improve disease management and outcomes of those at risk and to alleviate the impact on healthcare systems.A graphical plain language summary is available with this article.

Alliance for the development of the Argentinian Hip Fracture Registry.

Age expectancy has significantly increased over the last 50 years, as well as some age-related health conditions such as hip fractures. The development of hip fracture registries has shown enhanced patient outcomes through quality improvement strategies. The development of the Argentinian Hip Fracture Registry is going in the same direction. INTRODUCTION: Age expectancy has increased worldwide in the last 50 years, with the population over 64 growing from 4.9 to 9.1%. As fractures are an important problem in this age group, specific approaches such as hip fracture registries (HFR) are needed. Our aim is to communicate the Argentinian HFR (AHFR) development resulting from an alliance between Fundación Trauma, Fundación Navarro Viola, and the Argentinian Network of Hip Fracture in the elderly. METHODS: Between October 2020 and May 2021, an iterative consensus process involving 5 specialty-focused meetings and 8 general meetings with more than 20 specialists was conducted. This process comprised inclusion criteria definitions, dataset proposals, website deployment with data protection and user validation, the definition of hospital-adjusted registry levels, implementation planning, and sustainability strategies. RESULTS: By June 2021, we were able to (1) outline data fields, including epidemiological, clinical, and functional dimensions for the pre-admission, hospitalization, discharge, and follow-up stages; (2) define three levels: basic (53 fields), intermediate (85), and advanced (99); (3) identify 21 benchmarking indicators; and (4) make a correlation scheme among fracture classifications. Simultaneously, we launched a fundraising campaign to implement the AHFR in 30 centers, having completed 18. CONCLUSION: AHFR development was based on four pillars: (1) representativeness and support, (2) solid definitions from onset, (3) committed teams, and (4) stable funding. This tool may contribute to the design of evidence-based health policies to improve patient outcomes, and we hope this experience will help other LMICs to develop their own tailored-to-their-needs registries.

[Ethical guides, criteria for admission in intensive care, palliative care. Multi-society recommendations for allocation of resources during the COVID-19 pandemic]. / Guías éticas para la atención durante la pandemia COVID-19. Recomendaciones multisocietarias para asignación de recursos.

Guidelines on resource allocation, ethics, triage processes with admission and discharge criteria from critical care and palliative care units during the pandemia are here presented. The interdisciplinary and multi-society panel that prepared these guidelines represented by bioethicists and specialists linked to the end of life: clinicians, geriatricians, emergentologists, intensivists, and experts in palliative care and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The available information indicates that approximately 80% of people with COVID-19 will develop mild symptoms and will not require hospital care, while 15% will require intermediate or general room care, and the remaining 5% will require assistance in intensive care units. The need to think about justice and establish ethical criteria for allocation patients arise in conditions of exceeding available resources, such as outbreaks of diseases and pandemics, with transparency being the main criterion for allocation. These guides recommend general criteria for the allocation of resources relies on bioethical considerations, rooted in Human Rights and based on the value of the dignity of the human person and substantial principles such as solidarity, justice and equity. The guides are recommendations of general scope and their usefulness is to accompany and sustain the technical and scientific decisions made by the different specialists in the care of critically ill patients, but given the dynamic nature of the pandemic, a process of permanent revision and adaptation of recommendations must be ensured.

Se presentan las guías sobre ética de asignación de recursos, procesos de triaje con criterios de ingreso y egreso de unidades de cuidados críticos y atención paliativa durante la pandemia. El panel interdisciplinario y multisocietario que las preparó estuvo representado por bioeticistas y por especialistas vinculados al fin de la vida: clínicos, geriatras, emergentólogos, intensivistas, expertos en cuidados paliativos y en reanimación cardiopulmonar. La información disponible indica que aproximadamente 80% de las personas con COVID-19 desarrollarán síntomas leves y no requerirán asistencia hospitalaria, mientras que 15% precisará cuidados intermedios o en salas generales, y el 5% restante requerirá de asistencia en unidades de cuidados intensivos. La necesidad de pensar en justicia y establecer criterios éticos de asignación surgen en condiciones de superación de los recursos disponibles, como en brotes de enfermedades y pandemias, siendo la transparencia el principal criterio para la asignación. Estas guías recomiendan criterios generales de asignación de recursos en base a consideraciones bioéticas, enraizadas en los Derechos Humanos y sustentadas en el valor de la dignidad de la persona humana y principios sustanciales como la solidaridad, la justicia y la equidad. Las guías son recomendaciones de alcance general y su utilidad consiste en acompañar y sostener las decisiones técnicas y científicas que tomen los distintos especialistas en la atención del paciente crítico, pero dado el carácter dinámico de la pandemia, debe asegurarse un proceso de revisión y readaptación permanente de las recomendaciones.

Guías éticas para la atención durante la pandemia COVID-19: Recomendaciones multisocietarias para asignación de recursos / Ethical guides, criteria for admission in intensive care, palliative care. Multi-society recommendations for allocation of resources during the COVID-19 pandemic

Se presentan las guías sobre ética de asignación de recursos, procesos de triaje con criterios de ingreso y egreso de unidades de cuidados críticos y atención paliativa durante la pandemia. El panel interdisciplinario y multisocietario que las preparó estuvo representado por bioeticistas y por especialistas vinculados al fin de la vida: clínicos, geriatras, emergentólogos, intensivistas, expertos en cuidados paliativos y en reanimación cardiopulmonar. La información disponible indica que aproximadamente 80% de las personas con COVID-19 desarrollarán síntomas leves y no requerirán asistencia hospitalaria, mientras que 15% precisará cuidados intermedios o en salas generales, y el 5% restante requerirá de asistencia en unidades de cuidados intensivos. La necesidad de pensar en justicia y establecer criterios éticos de asignación surgen en condiciones de superación de los recursos disponibles, como en brotes de enfermedades y pandemias, siendo la transparencia el principal criterio para la asignación. Estas guías recomiendan criterios generales de asignación de recursos en base a consideraciones bioéticas, enraizadas en los Derechos Humanos y sustentadas en el valor de la dignidad de la persona humana y principios sustanciales como la solidaridad, la justicia y la equidad. Las guías son recomendaciones de alcance general y su utilidad consiste en acompañar y sostener las decisiones técnicas y científicas que tomen los distintos especialistas en la atención del paciente crítico, pero dado el carácter dinámico de la pandemia, debe asegurarse un proceso de revisión y readaptación permanente de las recomendaciones.

Guidelines on resource allocation, ethics, triage processes with admission and discharge criteria from critical care and palliative care units during the pandemia are here presented. The interdisciplinary and multi-society panel that prepared these guidelines represented by bioethicists and specialists linked to the end of life: clinicians, geriatricians, emergentologists, intensivists, and experts in palliative care and cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The available information indicates that approximately 80% of people with COVID-19 will develop mild symptoms and will not require hospital care, while 15% will require intermediate or general room care, and the remaining 5% will require assistance in intensive care units. The need to think about justice and establish ethical criteria for allocation patients arise in conditions of exceeding available resources, such as outbreaks of diseases and pandemics, with transparency being the main criterion for allocation. These guides recommend general criteria for the allocation of resources relies on bioethical considerations, rooted in Human Rights and based on the value of the dignity of the human person and substantial principles such as solidarity, justice and equity. The guides are recommendations of general scope and their usefulness is to accompany and sustain the technical and scientific decisions made by the different specialists in the care of critically ill patients, but given the dynamic nature of the pandemic, a process of permanent revision and adaptation of recommendations must be ensured.