RESUMO
Objective: Recent health policy changes have prioritized providing insurance for more Americans, often through Medicaid expansion (ME). The effectiveness of ME as it relates to expanding access to heart transplantation can be gauged by comparing the volume of Medicaid beneficiaries undergoing heart transplantation volume in states with and without ME. Our objective is to determine whether or not ME increased access to heart transplantation. Methods: The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database was used for US transplant data. Difference-in-differences (DiD), an econometric method to estimate causality, was performed between states with ME and bordering states without ME, to minimize geographic variability. For states with multiple bordering nonexpanded states, DiD values were averaged. Unpaired 2-tailed t tests, Mann-Whitney U test, 1-way-analysis of variance, and Poisson regressions, where appropriate, compared insurance cohorts, sexes, and ethnicities. Results: Although publicly insured patients comprised only 36.7% of heart transplant volume in 2000, they comprised 53.4% of heart transplant volume in 2020 (P = .229); significant differences did not exist between public and private transplant volume (P = .583), but exist among forms of public insurance (P < .001). ME yielded 1.028 more transplants per state per year, and a total of 113.9 more transplants. Transplant volume was significantly different between ME states and non-ME states (31.4% vs 58.4%; P < .001). ME yielded 106 more heart transplants in men cumulatively (DiD = 0.956), compared with 10.23 more transplants in women cumulatively (DiD = 0.090); this sex DiD difference was not significant (P = .749). Heart transplant volumes were significantly different for both men and women across ME and non-ME states (P < .001 for both). Since 2014, ME yielded 25.67 more transplants in Whites (DiD = 0.079), 55.78 more transplants in Blacks (DiD = 0.510), 2.85 fewer transplants in Hispanics (DiD = -0.038), 37.33 more transplants in Asians (DiD = 0.316), 14.5 fewer transplants in Native Americans (DiD = -0.105), 17.38 fewer transplants in Pacific Islanders (DiD = -0.131), and 12.85 more transplants in multiracial individuals (DiD = 0.134); these ethnic DiD differences were not significant (P = .957). Conclusions: Heart transplant volume is no longer skewed toward patients with private insurance, suggesting expanding public insurance increased access to heart transplantation, according to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database. Through a national DiD model, ME increased heart transplant volume for Medicaid beneficiaries, largely through male, Black, and Asian patients. These benefits were dissimilar across demographic characteristics and do not benefit all groups, suggesting ME should be remodeled if the policy aim is to equitably increase volume across sexes and ethnicities.
RESUMO
Long-term stability of microbubbles is crucial to their effectiveness. Using a new microfluidic device connecting three T-junction channels of 100 µm in series, stable monodisperse SiQD-loaded bovine serum albumin (BSA) protein microbubbles down to 22.8 ± 1.4 µm in diameter were generated. Fluorescence microscopy confirmed the integration of SiQD on the microbubble surface, which retained the same morphology as those without SiQD. The microbubble diameter and stability in air were manipulated through appropriate selection of T-junction numbers, capillary diameter, liquid flow rate, and BSA and SiQD concentrations. A predictive computational model was developed from the experimental data, and the number of T-junctions was incorporated into this model as one of the variables. It was illustrated that the diameter of the monodisperse microbubbles generated can be tailored by combining up to three T-junctions in series, while the operating parameters were kept constant. Computational modeling of microbubble diameter and stability agreed with experimental data. The lifetime of microbubbles increased with increasing T-junction number and higher concentrations of BSA and SiQD. The present research sheds light on a potential new route employing SiQD and triple T-junctions to form stable, monodisperse, multi-layered, and well-characterized protein and quantum dot-loaded protein microbubbles with enhanced stability for the first time.
Assuntos
Microbolhas , Pontos Quânticos , Dispositivos Lab-On-A-Chip , Microfluídica , Soroalbumina Bovina , SilícioRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Aortic and mitral valve replacement are commonly performed by cardiovascular surgeons, but little data quantitatively analyzes the etiology and prevalence of medical malpractice litigations involving these operations. This study aims to analyze incidence, cause, and resolution of medical malpractice lawsuits involving aortic and mitral valve replacements, alone and in combination with coronary artery bypass and/or aortic procedures. METHODS: The Westlaw legal database was utilized to compile relevant litigations across the United States from 1994-2019. Clinical data, verdict data, demographic data, and litigation attributes were compiled. Fisher's Exact Tests and Mann-Whitney tests were performed for statistical analyses. One hundred four malpractice litigations involving aortic valve replacement and 55 litigations involving mitral valve replacement were included in this analysis. The mean age of patients was 55.2 years and proportion of female patients was 32.7% in aortic valve replacements litigations, compared to a mean age of 54.1 years and female patients in 61.8% of mitral valve replacements litigations. RESULTS: Significant relationships exist between an alleged failure to monitor the patient and defendant verdicts (P=0.01), delayed treatment and defendant verdicts (P=0.04), and incidence of infective endocarditis and plaintiff verdicts (P=0.04) in aortic valve replacement litigations. Similarly, significant relationships exist between an alleged failure to diagnose and settlement verdicts (P=0.047), and stroke incidence and defendant verdicts (P=0.03) in mitral valve replacement litigations. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to excellent surgeon patient/family communication, administering surgical treatment in a timely manner, diagnosing acting on concomitant medical conditions, and close patient monitoring may diminish medical malpractice litigation involving aortic and mitral valve replacement operations.
Assuntos
Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Doenças das Valvas Cardíacas/cirurgia , Implante de Prótese de Valva Cardíaca/legislação & jurisprudência , Seguro de Responsabilidade Civil/legislação & jurisprudência , Imperícia/legislação & jurisprudência , Erros Médicos/legislação & jurisprudência , Valva Mitral/cirurgia , Bases de Dados Factuais , Feminino , Implante de Prótese de Valva Cardíaca/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Masculino , Erros Médicos/efeitos adversos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Dano ao Paciente/legislação & jurisprudência , Má Conduta Profissional/legislação & jurisprudência , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados UnidosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Cardiothoracic surgery is one of the more highly litigated medical specialties, and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) constitutes a substantial portion of cardiothoracic surgery cases. Therefore, understanding litigations relating to CABG would be of benefit to surgeons working to uphold the standards of care that their patients seek and minimize their own legal liability. This study analyzed CABG litigations to identify predictive factors of litigation and verdict type. METHODS: This study utilized the Westlaw legal database to compile litigations from 1994-2019 across the United States, and resulted in 307 total litigations. After individual screening, 211 litigations met the criteria for inclusion, and were analyzed for demographic, clinical, chronological, and verdict characteristics. RESULTS: Litigations were present in 33 US states, with California, New York, and Florida having the most litigations. Defendant verdicts were reached in 67.78% of litigations, followed by 20.38% of plaintiff verdicts, and 11.85% of settlements. Plaintiff verdicts were associated with the incidence of myocardial infarction during hospitalization. The winter season had the most litigations (42.18%), and the most defendant verdicts (37.76%). Patient mortality occurred in 47.39% of litigations. The most common alleged reason for litigation was a procedural error (55.45%). CONCLUSIONS: Defendant verdicts were significantly associated with an alleged reason of procedural errors, an alleged reason of a failure to monitor, and congestive heart failure present in patients. The common nature of defendant verdicts, and the significantly greater occurrence of defendant verdicts during the highly litigated winter season, suggest that surgeons frequently satisfy the legal standard of care.
Assuntos
Ponte de Artéria Coronária/legislação & jurisprudência , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/cirurgia , Imperícia/legislação & jurisprudência , Cirurgiões/legislação & jurisprudência , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Bases de Dados Factuais , Feminino , Humanos , Islândia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Medical malpractice litigation arises when a discrepancy exists between a patient's expectation of acceptable medical care and the care the patient receives. Aortic dissection is a frequently misdiagnosed and often-fatal condition. The purpose of this study was to characterize trends of medical malpractice litigations arising from aortic dissection, investigate the etiology, and analyze predictive factors regarding the verdict. METHODS: The Westlaw legal database was used to compile relevant litigations from 1994 to 2019 across the United States. Each litigation was screened individually for inclusion, and after inclusion, descriptive factors were compiled, including patient data, litigation data, verdict data, and clinical outcomes data. The Fisher exact test was used to evaluate the significance of association between parameters and verdict type. RESULTS: In total, 135 unique litigations met criteria for inclusion, with a defendant verdict in 57% (n = 77), plaintiff verdict in 20% (n = 27), and settlements in 23% (n = 31). Plaintiffs most commonly cited a failure to diagnose as their reason for litigation in 64% (n = 87). Patient mortality was associated with a lower average plaintiff award, $1,892,781 versus $5,944,983, and a lower average settlement, $1,230,923 versus $2,250,000, than their surviving counterparts. California, Illinois, and Pennsylvania had the most cases filed. An alleged failure to test, failure to refer, failure to consult, incidence of a stroke, and incidence of an autopsy diagnosis were significantly associated with defendant verdicts and a failure to diagnose was significantly associated with plaintiff verdicts (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Plaintiffs frequently cited a failure to timely diagnose, order diagnostic tests, and interpret diagnostic tests as reasons for litigations. Defendant verdicts were common, suggesting judicially acceptable standards of care are commonly satisfied.
Assuntos
Dissecção Aórtica , Imperícia , Dissecção Aórtica/diagnóstico , Bases de Dados Factuais , Humanos , Pennsylvania , Estados UnidosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Heart transplantation is a unique clinical intervention because it involves two separate parties, the donor and the recipient. This increases the potential for the legal liability of heart teams involved with heart transplantation, but there is no research that exists to date that analyzes the etiology of medical malpractice litigations relating to heart transplantation. METHODS: The Westlaw legal database was queried for all medical malpractice litigations concerning heart transplantation from 1994 to 2019 in the United States. Individual litigations were reviewed for inclusion, resulting in 41 included cases, and then analyzed for legal and clinical data. Statistical analyses were performed with the Fisher exact test and Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: The mean age of patients involved in these litigations was 38.88 years, with female patients being younger on average. Female patients received a significantly larger average award than male counterparts (p = .03). Alleged failure to diagnose was significantly associated with settlements (p = .047). An alleged failure to obtain informed consent as presented by the plaintiff was significantly associated with defendant verdicts (p = .03). Incidence of stroke and infection were each significantly associated with nondefendant verdicts (p = .02 and p = .02). CONCLUSIONS: There should be an emphasis on documenting informed consent from all involved parties in heart transplantation to limit litigations filed against clinicians. As technologies and growing donor pools increase the prevalence of heart transplantation, clinicians would be well-served to be aware of legally tenable practices that will allow them to adopt a higher transplant volume without simultaneously adopting added legal exposure.
Assuntos
Transplante de Coração , Imperícia , Adulto , Bases de Dados Factuais , Feminino , Humanos , Consentimento Livre e Esclarecido , Masculino , Estados Unidos/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Medical malpractice litigations are common for cardiac surgeons, and congenital cardiac surgeons are uniquely held accountable by patients, who are minors, and their families. Therefore, it is imperative for physicians to be cognizant of clinically effective and legally tenable practices. METHODS: The Westlaw legal research service was utilized to collect medical malpractice litigations from 1994 to 2019 pertaining to congenital cardiac surgery, inclusive, in the United States. Court documents were manually screened, with 177 litigations satisfying criteria for inclusion. Data collection included patient demographics, verdict and litigation characteristics, and clinical data. Fisher's exact test was used to assess the significance of association. RESULTS: Across the 177 litigations, 44% had defendant verdicts, 30% had plaintiff verdicts, and 26% had settlements. The average plaintiff award was $9,363,710, and the average settlement was $4,141,825. Patient mortality occurred in 87 cases (49.2%), and wrongful death claims were argued in 71 cases (40%). The most common reason for litigation were procedural errors (79 cases, 45%). The most frequent clinical event was cardiac arrest (95 cases, 54%). California recorded the most litigations (34 cases, 19.2%). Defendant verdicts were significantly associated with cardiac arrest, procedural errors, and permanent neurological injury (p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Defendant's verdicts were more common in cases with patient mortality, which had lower average plaintiff awards and settlements, since future healthcare expenses are inapplicable to this cohort. Future litigations can be minimized with an emphasis on reducing procedural errors, treating and diagnosing patients timely, and monitoring patients sufficiently.
Assuntos
Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Cardíacos , Imperícia , Cirurgiões , Bases de Dados Factuais , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologiaRESUMO
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals' March 13, 2020 decision in Williams v. Dimension Health Corporation reintroduced scrutiny on the lesser-known mandate of The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) concerning good faith admission to the hospital. EMTALA was enacted by Congress in 1986 to prevent patient dumping by prohibiting hospitals with emergency departments from refusing to provide emergency medical treatment to patients unable to pay for treatment, and prohibiting the transfer of those patients before their emergency medical conditions are stabilized. The reach of EMTALA ends when a patient is admitted and consequently becomes an inpatient, because then the hospital believes the patient would benefit from admission, and discharge and transfer would not occur as outlined in EMTALA. This paper examines the analysis of this mandate in Williams v. Dimension Health Corporation, and closely investigates one particular aspect of it: that admission must be made in good faith; otherwise, application of EMTALA's screening and stabilization requirements has not yet terminated, and hospitals can still be found culpable.
Assuntos
Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/legislação & jurisprudência , Hospitalização/legislação & jurisprudência , Transferência de Pacientes/legislação & jurisprudência , Recusa em Tratar/legislação & jurisprudência , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/organização & administração , Humanos , Estados UnidosRESUMO
Italy and South Korea have two distinctly different healthcare systems, causing them to respond to public health crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic in markedly different ways. Differences exist in medical education for both countries, allowing South Korean medical graduates to have a more holistic education in comparison to their Italian counterparts, who specialize in medical education earlier on. Additionally, there are fewer South Korean physicians per 1000 people in South Korea compared to Italian physicians per 1000 people in Italy. However, both countries have a national healthcare system with universal healthcare coverage. Despite this underlying similarity, the two countries addressed COVID-19 in nearly opposite manners. South Korea employed technology and the holistic education of its physician community, despite having a smaller proportion of physicians in society, to its advantage by implementing efficacious drive-through centers that test suspected individuals rapidly and with little to no contact with healthcare staff, decreasing the possibility of transmission of COVID-19. Conversely, Italy is presently considered the epicenter of the outbreak in Europe and has recorded the highest death toll of any country outside of mainland China. This is partially due to the reactionary nature of Italy's public health measures compared to South Korea's proactive response. The different healthcare responses of South Korea and Italy can inform decisions made by public health bodies in other countries, especially in countries across the Americas, which can selectively adopt policies that have worked in curtailing the spread of COVID-19 and learn from mistakes made by both countries.
Italia y Corea del Sur tienen dos sistemas de atención sanitaria claramente diferentes, lo que hace que respondan a crisis de salud pública como la pandemia por COVID-19 de maneras marcadamente distintas. Existen diferencias en la educación médica de ambos países, lo que permite a los graduados de medicina de Corea del Sur tener una educación más holística en comparación con sus homólogos italianos, que siguen una especialización médica de manera más temprana. Además, en Corea del Sur hay menos médicos por cada 1 000 personas en comparación con Italia. Sin embargo, ambos países tienen un sistema nacional de salud con cobertura universal. A pesar de esta similitud subyacente, los dos países abordaron la COVID-19 de maneras casi opuestas. A pesar de contar con una proporción menor de médicos en la sociedad, Corea del Sur empleó la tecnología y la educación holística de su comunidad médica a su favor al implementar centros de examen de personas con sospecha de infección sin descender del automóvil, que permitían una atención rápida y con poco o ningún contacto con el personal de salud, lo que disminuyó la posibilidad de transmisión de la enfermedad. Por el contrario, Italia es considerada actualmente el epicentro del brote en Europa y ha registrado el mayor número de muertes que cualquier otro país fuera de la China continental. Esto se debe en parte a la naturaleza reactiva de las medidas de salud pública de Italia en comparación con la respuesta proactiva de Corea del Sur. Las diferentes respuestas sanitarias de Corea del Sur e Italia pueden orientar las decisiones que deben tomar los organismos de salud pública de otros países, especialmente en la Región de las Américas, que pueden adoptar selectivamente políticas que han funcionado para reducir la propagación de la COVID-19 y aprender de los errores cometidos por ambos países.
A Itália e a Coreia do Sul têm dois sistemas de saúde distintos, o que os leva a responder a crises de saúde pública, como a pandemia COVID-19, de formas marcadamente diferentes. Existem diferenças na educação médica dos dois países, permitindo que os médicos sul-coreanos tenham uma educação mais holística em comparação com os seus homólogos italianos, que seguem uma especialização médica mais cedo. Além disso, há menos médicos por 1 000 pessoas na Coreia do Sul do que em Itália. No entanto, ambos os países têm um sistema nacional de saúde com cobertura de saúde universal. Apesar desta semelhança subjacente, os dois países abordaram a COVID-19 de maneiras quase opostas. Apesar de ter uma proporção menor de médicos na sociedade, a Coreia do Sul utilizou a tecnologia e a educação holística de sua comunidade médica a seu favor, implementando centros de rastreio para pessoas com suspeita de infecção sem sair do carro, o que permitiu cuidados imediatos e pouco ou nenhum contacto com o pessoal de saúde, diminuindo assim a possibilidade de transmissão da COVID-19. Por outro lado, a Itália é atualmente considerada o epicentro do surto na Europa e tem registrado o maior número de mortes de qualquer país fora da China continental. Isto deve-se em parte à natureza reactiva das medidas de saúde pública da Itália em comparação com a resposta pró-ativa da Coreia do Sul. As diferentes respostas de saúde da Coreia do Sul e da Itália podem informar as decisões das agências de saúde pública de outros países, especialmente da Região das Américas, que podem adoptar seletivamente políticas que tenham funcionado na redução da disseminação da COVID-19 e aprender com os erros cometidos por ambos os países.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Cerebral protection for aortic arch surgery has been widely studied, but comparisons of all the available strategies have rarely been performed. We performed direct and indirect comparisons of antegrade cerebral perfusion, retrograde cerebral perfusion, and deep hypothermic circulatory arrest in a network meta-analysis. METHODS: After a systematic literature search, studies comparing any combination of antegrade cerebral perfusion, retrograde cerebral perfusion, and deep hypothermic circulatory arrest were included, and a frequentist network meta-analysis was performed using the generic inverse variance method. The primary outcomes were postoperative stroke and operative mortality. Secondary outcomes were postoperative transient neurologic deficits, myocardial infarction, respiratory complications, and renal failure. RESULTS: A total of 68 studies were included with a total of 26,968 patients. Compared with deep hypothermic circulatory arrest, both antegrade cerebral perfusion and retrograde cerebral perfusion were associated with significantly lower postoperative stroke and operative mortality rates: antegrade cerebral perfusion (odds ratio [OR], 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51-0.75; and OR, 0.63, 95% CI, 0.51-0.76, respectively) and retrograde cerebral perfusion (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.54-0.82; and OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.45-0.71, respectively). Antegrade cerebral perfusion and retrograde cerebral perfusion were associated with similar incidence of primary outcomes. No difference among the 3 techniques was found in secondary outcomes. At meta-regression, circulatory arrest duration correlated with the neuroprotective effect of antegrade cerebral perfusion and retrograde cerebral perfusion compared with deep hypothermic circulatory arrest. Unilateral or bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion and arrest temperature did not influence the results. CONCLUSIONS: Antegrade cerebral perfusion and retrograde cerebral perfusion are associated with better postoperative outcomes compared with deep hypothermic circulatory arrest, and the relative benefit increases with the duration of the circulatory arrest. No differences between antegrade cerebral perfusion and retrograde cerebral perfusion were found for all the explored outcomes.
RESUMO
Italy and South Korea have two distinctly different healthcare systems, causing them to respond to public health crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic in markedly different ways. Differences exist in medical education for both countries, allowing South Korean medical graduates to have a more holistic education in comparison to their Italian counterparts, who specialize in medical education earlier on. Additionally, there are fewer South Korean physicians per 1000 people in South Korea compared to Italian physicians per 1000 people in Italy. However, both countries have a national healthcare system with universal healthcare coverage. Despite this underlying similarity, the two countries addressed COVID-19 in nearly opposite manners. South Korea employed technology and the holistic education of its physician community, despite having a smaller proportion of physicians in society, to its advantage by implementing efficacious drive-through centers that test suspected individuals rapidly and with little to no contact with healthcare staff, decreasing the possibility of transmission of COVID-19. Conversely, Italy is presently considered the epicenter of the outbreak in Europe and has recorded the highest death toll of any country outside of mainland China. This is partially due to the reactionary nature of Italy's public health measures compared to South Korea's proactive response. The different healthcare responses of South Korea and Italy can inform decisions made by public health bodies in other countries, especially in countries across the Americas, which can selectively adopt policies that have worked in curtailing the spread of COVID-19 and learn from mistakes made by both countries.(AU)
Italia y Corea del Sur tienen dos sistemas de atención sanitaria claramente diferentes, lo que hace que respondan a crisis de salud pública como la pandemia por COVID-19 de maneras marcadamente distintas. Existen diferencias en la educación médica de ambos países, lo que permite a los graduados de medicina de Corea del Sur tener una educación más holística en comparación con sus homólogos italianos, que siguen una especialización médica de manera más temprana. Además, en Corea del Sur hay menos médicos por cada 1 000 personas en comparación con Italia. Sin embargo, ambos países tienen un sistema nacional de salud con cobertura universal. A pesar de esta similitud subyacente, los dos países abordaron la COVID-19 de maneras casi opuestas. A pesar de contar con una proporción menor de médicos en la sociedad, Corea del Sur empleó la tecnología y la educación holística de su comunidad médica a su favor al implementar centros de examen de personas con sospecha de infección sin descender del automóvil, que permitían una atención rápida y con poco o ningún contacto con el personal de salud, lo que disminuyó la posibilidad de transmisión de la enfermedad. Por el contrario, Italia es considerada actualmente el epicentro del brote en Europa y ha registrado el mayor número de muertes que cualquier otro país fuera de la China continental. Esto se debe en parte a la naturaleza reactiva de las medidas de salud pública de Italia en comparación con la respuesta proactiva de Corea del Sur. Las diferentes respuestas sanitarias de Corea del Sur e Italia pueden orientar las decisiones que deben tomar los organismos de salud pública de otros países, especialmente en la Región de las Américas, que pueden adoptar selectivamente políticas que han funcionado para reducir la propagación de la COVID-19 y aprender de los errores cometidos por ambos países.(AU)
A Itália e a Coreia do Sul têm dois sistemas de saúde distintos, o que os leva a responder a crises de saúde pública, como a pandemia COVID-19, de formas marcadamente diferentes. Existem diferenças na educação médica dos dois países, permitindo que os médicos sul-coreanos tenham uma educação mais holística em comparação com os seus homólogos italianos, que seguem uma especialização médica mais cedo. Além disso, há menos médicos por 1 000 pessoas na Coreia do Sul do que em Itália. No entanto, ambos os países têm um sistema nacional de saúde com cobertura de saúde universal. Apesar desta semelhança subjacente, os dois países abordaram a COVID-19 de maneiras quase opostas. Apesar de ter uma proporção menor de médicos na sociedade, a Coreia do Sul utilizou a tecnologia e a educação holística de sua comunidade médica a seu favor, implementando centros de rastreio para pessoas com suspeita de infecção sem sair do carro, o que permitiu cuidados imediatos e pouco ou nenhum contacto com o pessoal de saúde, diminuindo assim a possibilidade de transmissão da COVID-19. Por outro lado, a Itália é atualmente considerada o epicentro do surto na Europa e tem registrado o maior número de mortes de qualquer país fora da China continental. Isto deve-se em parte à natureza reactiva das medidas de saúde pública da Itália em comparação com a resposta pró-ativa da Coreia do Sul. As diferentes respostas de saúde da Coreia do Sul e da Itália podem informar as decisões das agências de saúde pública de outros países, especialmente da Região das Américas, que podem adoptar seletivamente políticas que tenham funcionado na redução da disseminação da COVID-19 e aprender com os erros cometidos por ambos os países.(AU)
Assuntos
Sistemas de Saúde/tendências , Infecções por Coronavirus/prevenção & controle , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Acesso Universal aos Serviços de Saúde , Pandemias , República da Coreia , ItáliaRESUMO
: Adolescents/young adults, and especially men, are high-risk key populations that have been systematically missed by HIV services in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Because these groups are also more likely to suffer injuries in LMICs, there are significant opportunities to engage these hard-to-reach persons via integrated HIV-injury programming provided during commonly sought acute/emergency care treatments of injuries. However, current facilities based HIV testing and treatment programs have failed to adequately capture these high-risk individuals. As such, research to address the knowledge gaps in HIV care delivery among the injured is needed and has great potential to inform interventions that would identify and treat adolescents/young adults, many of whom have the greatest individual and societal margins for long-term benefits with HIV care globally.