Colchicine and risk of hospitalization due to COVID-19: A population-based study.

Colchicine is one of the most widely studied and best-known anti-inflammatory treatments. This study aimed to assess the effect of colchicine on risk of hospitalization due to COVID-19; and its effect on susceptibility to and severity of the virus in patients with COVID-19. We carried out a population-based case-control study. The following groups were applied: (1) to assess risk of hospitalization, cases were patients with a positive PCR who were hospitalized due to COVID-19, and controls without a positive PCR; (2) to assess susceptibility to COVID-19, cases were patients with a positive PCR (hospitalized and non-hospitalized), and the same controls; (3) to determine potential severity, cases were subjects with COVID-19 hospitalized, and controls patients with COVID-19 nonhospitalised. Different electronic, linked, administrative health and clinical databases were used to extract data on sociodemographic variables, comorbidities, and medications dispensed. The study covered 3060 subjects with a positive PCR who were hospitalized, 26 757 with a positive PCR who were not hospitalized, and 56 785 healthy controls. After adjustment for sociodemographic variables, comorbidities and other treatments, colchicine did not modify risk of hospitalization due to COVID-19 (adjusted odd ratio [OR] 1.08 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-1.53]), patients' susceptibility to contracting the disease (adjusted OR 1.12 (95% CI 0.91-1.37)) or the severity of the infection (adjusted OR 1.03 [95% CI 0.67-1.59]). Our results would neither support the prophylactic use of colchicine for prevention of the infection or hospitalization in any type of patient, nor justify the withdrawal of colchicine treatment due to a higher risk of contracting COVID-19.

Attitudes of primary care physicians to the prescribing of antibiotics and antimicrobial resistance: a qualitative study from Spain.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Resistance to antibiotics is a public health threat. A number of studies confirm the relationship between antibiotic use and the resistance rate. As a whole, physicians represent a large proportion of the health professionals involved in the use of this therapeutic group. Our study therefore sought to ascertain the opinions and attitudes of GPs in Spain with respect to antibiotics and resistance. METHODS: We used the focus group (FG) method, with each group comprising 4-12 primary care physicians and a moderator. Based on a previous systematic review, we drew up an agenda to be followed during the holding of the sessions. Group proceedings were recorded and the transcriptions then analysed separately by two researchers. RESULTS: Five FGs were formed, including a total of 33 physicians. The factors/attitudes that influenced the prescribing of antibiotics by GPs were fear, complacency, insufficient knowledge and external responsibility of the pharmaceutical industry, patients and over-the-counter antibiotics. The groups felt that antibiotic resistance was not a problem at a community level. CONCLUSIONS: Identification of attitudes/knowledge related with inappropriate antibiotic prescribing will enable specific interventions to be designed, with the aim of targeting these shortcomings to improve antibiotic use and help reduce resistance.

Non-Clinical Factors Determining the Prescription of Antibiotics by Veterinarians: A Systematic Review.

The misuse of antibiotics in humans, animals, and plants is related to the spread of resistant antibiotic strains among humans and animals. In this paper, we carry out a bibliographic search of Medline, Web of Knowledge, and Cab Abstracts with the main objective of ascertaining the available evidence on non-clinical factors and attitudes that could influence the prescription of antibiotics by veterinarians. A total of 34 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Whereas, veterinary health professionals' prescribing habits did not appear to be influenced by their socio-demographic characteristics, they were influenced by different attitudes, such as fear (identified in 19 out of 34 studies), self-confidence (19/34), business factors (19/34), and by complacency (16/34). Certain owner-related factors, such as lack of awareness (16/34) and demand for antibiotics (12/34), were also important, as were concurrent factors, ranging from a lack of appropriate regulations (10/34) to the expense and delays involved in performing culture and sensitivity tests (10/34) and inadequate farm hygiene (8/34). Our results appear to indicate that the non-clinical factors are potentially modifiable. This may be useful for designing interventions targeted at improving antibiotic use in animals, as part of an overall strategy to reduce the global spread of multi-resistant strains.

[Impact of socio-economic inequities on the mortality of the City of Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil during 2007]. / Efecto de las desigualdades socioeconómicas en la mortalidad de la ciudad de Fortaleza, Ceara, Brasil durante el año 2007.

BACKGROUND: Brazil is an important example to study the situation of poverty and its determinants. Brazil owns a great part of the poor population of Latin America and presents great potential to eradicate this situation. The present study tries to show the association between the mortality risk and poverty in the city of Fortaleza. METHODS: Cross-sectional ecological study, the unit of analysis was the districts of the city of Fortaleza. We included any death happened during year 2007. Mortality data were obtained through Unique System of Health, socioeconomic indicators and number of inhabitants was extracted from the Census of Inhabitants and Houses of the Brazilian Institute of Statistics of the year 2000. An index composed from the main simple indicators of deprivation was calculated using a Cluster technique. The deprivation index was divided in five groups, group 1 presented the best socio-economic conditions and group 5 the worst ones. Correlation analysis was done to evaluate the association between socioeconomic level and mortality. RESULTS: We observed a significant association of the socioeconomic level with total mortality (p < 0.001), circulatory disease (p < 0.001) and external causes (p < 0.001). In addition, 86% of the cases of aggression happened in groups 4 and 5. CONCLUSIONS: The results show a relation between socioeconomic conditions and mortality by any cause, by circulatory causes and by external causes.