The Weight Problem: Overview of the Most Common Concepts for Body Mass and Fat Distribution and Critical Consideration of Their Usefulness for Risk Assessment and Practice.

The prevalence of obesity already reached epidemic proportions many years ago and more people may die from this pandemic than from COVID-19. However, the figures depend on which measure of fat mass is used. The determination of the associated health risk also depends on the applied measure. Therefore, we will examine the most common measures for their significance, their contribution to risk assessment and their applicability. The following categories are reported: indices of increased accumulation of body fat; weight indices and mortality; weight indices and risk of disease; normal weight obesity and normal weight abdominal obesity; metabolically healthy obesity; the obesity paradox. It appears that BMI is still the most common measure for determining weight categories, followed by measures of abdominal fat distribution. Newer measures, unlike BMI, take fat distribution into account but often lack validated cut-off values or have limited applicability. Given the high prevalence of obesity and the associated risk of disease and mortality, it is important for a targeted approach to identify risk groups and determine individual risk. Therefore, in addition to BMI, a measure of fat distribution should always be used to ensure that less obvious but risky manifestations such as normal weight obesity are identified.

[Psychological stress caused by epidemics among health care workers and implications for coping with the corona crisis: a literature review]. / Psychische Belastungen durch Epidemien bei Beschäftigten im Gesundheitswesen und Implikationen für die Bewältigung der Corona-Krise: eine Literaturübersicht.

Psychological stress caused by epidemics among health care workers and implications for coping with the corona crisis: a literature review Objectives: COVID-19 has significantly changed the working and living conditions within a short period. Despite the milder course of the disease in comparison to other countries, employees in the German health care system are particularly affected by the massive impact of the disease on their professional and private lives. From a scientific point of view, summarized empirical evidence made during other epidemics and at the beginning of the COVID-19-pandemic is largely missing. Methods: Narrative review article, literature search on PubMed database. Results: A total of 56 studies were included, 35 of them on the SARS epidemic and seven on COVID-19; included studies reported overall increased stress levels, anxiety and PTSD symptoms due to health care work during various epidemics. Direct contact with patients, quarantine experiences and perceived health risks were further stress factors in epidemics. Participation in intervention studies enabled better management of epidemic-related situations. Conclusions: Healthcare workers are exposed to high workloads because of epidemics, which can have a variety of adverse effects. Recommendations are made for dealing with periods of high exposure during the COVID-19-pandemic.