Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo de estudio
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Arch Gynecol Obstet ; 309(5): 1925-1933, 2024 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37231277

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: After living with the COVID-19 pandemic for more than 2 years, the impact of lockdown measures on preterm birth rates is inconsistent according to data from different countries. In this study, rates of preterm-born infants during the time of COVID-19-related lockdowns were analyzed in a tertiary perinatal center at Munich University, Germany. METHODS: We analyzed the number of preterm births, infants, and stillbirths before 37 weeks of gestation during the German COVID-19 lockdown period compared to the same time periods in the years 2018 and 2019 combined. Additionally, we expanded the analysis to Pre- and Post-Lockdown Periods in 2020 compared to the respective control periods in the years 2018 and 2019. RESULTS: Our database shows a reduction in the rate of preterm infants during the COVID-19 lockdown period (18.6%) compared to the combined control periods in 2018 and 2019 (23.2%, p = 0.027). This was mainly based on a reduced rate of preterm multiples during the lockdown period (12.8% vs. 28.9%, p = 0.003) followed by a reversed effect showing a threefold rise in multiple births after the lockdown. In singletons, the rate of preterm births was not reduced during the lockdown. The rate of stillbirths was not affected by the lockdown measures as compared to the control period (0.9% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.750). CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown period, we found a reduced rate of preterm-born infants compared to a combined control period in the years 2018 and 2019 in our large tertiary University Center in Germany. Due to the predominant reduction in preterm multiples, we postulate that less physical activity might have led to the protective effect by lockdown measures.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Nacimiento Prematuro , Embarazo , Lactante , Femenino , Recién Nacido , Humanos , Recien Nacido Prematuro , Nacimiento Prematuro/epidemiología , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Pandemias/prevención & control , Universidades , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles , Mortinato/epidemiología
2.
Vaccine ; 41(5): 1161-1168, 2023 01 27.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36624011

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Vaccination refusal exacerbates global COVID-19 vaccination inequities. No studies in East Africa have examined temporal trends in vaccination refusal, precluding addressing refusal. We assessed vaccine refusal over time in Kenya, and characterized factors associated with changes in vaccination refusal. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Kenya Rapid Response Phone Survey (RRPS), a household cohort survey representative of the Kenyan population including refugees. Vaccination refusal (defined as the respondent stating they would not receive the vaccine if offered to them at no cost) was measured in February and October 2021. Proportions of vaccination refusal were plotted over time. We analyzed factors in vaccination refusal using a weighted multivariable logistic regression including interactions for time. FINDINGS: Among 11,569 households, vaccination refusal in Kenya decreased from 24 % in February 2021 to 9 % in October 2021. Vaccination refusal was associated with having education beyond the primary level (-4.1[-0.7,-8.9] percentage point difference (ppd)); living with somebody who had symptoms of COVID-19 in the past 14 days (-13.72[-8.9,-18.6]ppd); having symptoms of COVID-19 in the past 14 days (11.0[5.1,16.9]ppd); and distrusting the government in responding to COVID-19 (14.7[7.1,22.4]ppd). There were significant interactions with time and: refugee status and geography, living with somebody with symptoms of COVID-19, having symptoms of COVID-19, and believing in misinformation. INTERPRETATION: The temporal reduction in vaccination refusal in Kenya likely represents substantial strides by the Kenyan vaccination program and possible learnt lessons which require examination. Going forward, there are still several groups which need specific targeting to decrease vaccination refusal and improve vaccination equity, including those with lower levels of education, those with recent COVID-19 symptoms, those who do not practice personal COVID-19 mitigation measures, refugees in urban settings, and those who do not trust the government. Policy and program should focus on decreasing vaccination refusal in these populations, and research focus on understanding barriers and motivators for vaccination.


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Humanos , Kenia/epidemiología , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , África Oriental , Vacunación , Negativa a la Vacunación
3.
PLOS Glob Public Health ; 2(8): e0000917, 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36962839

RESUMEN

Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (which we define as refusal to be vaccinated when asked, resulting in delayed or non- vaccination) are poorly studied in sub-Saharan Africa and among refugees, particularly in Kenya. Using survey data from wave five (March to June 2021) of the Kenya Rapid Response Phone Survey (RRPS), a household survey representative of the population of Kenya, we estimated the self-reported rates and factors associated with vaccine hesitancy among non-refugees and refugees in Kenya. Non-refugee households were recruited through sampling of the 2015/16 Kenya Household Budget Survey and random digit dialing. Refugee households were recruited through random sampling of registered refugees. Binary response questions on misinformation and information were transformed into a scale. We performed a weighted (to be representative of the overall population of Kenya) multivariable logistic regression including interactions for refugee status, with the main outcome being if the respondent self-reported that they would not take the COVID-19 vaccine if available at no cost. We calculated the marginal effects of the various factors in the model. The weighted univariate analysis estimated that 18.0% of non-refugees and 7.0% of refugees surveyed in Kenya would not take the COVID-19 vaccine if offered at no cost. Adjusted, refugee status was associated with a -13.1[95%CI:-17.5,-8.7] percentage point difference (ppd) in vaccine hesitancy. For the both refugees and non-refugees, having education beyond the primary level, having symptoms of COVID-19, avoiding handshakes, and washing hands more often were also associated with a reduction in vaccine hesitancy. Also for both, having used the internet in the past three months was associated with a 8.1[1.4,14.7] ppd increase in vaccine hesitancy; and disagreeing that the government could be trusted in responding to COVID-19 was associated with a 25.9[14.2,37.5]ppd increase in vaccine hesitancy. There were significant interactions between refugee status and some variables (geography, food security, trust in the Kenyan government's response to COVID-19, knowing somebody with COVID-19, internet use, and TV ownership). These relationships between refugee status and certain variables suggest that programming between refugees and non-refugees be differentiated and specific to the contextual needs of each group.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA