ABSTRACT
Diabetes and poor glycemic control are significant predictors of severity and death in the COVID-19 disease. The perception of this risk in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) could modify coping styles, leading to behaviors associated with better self-care and metabolic control. Theoretically, active coping is associated with better glycemic control in patients with T2D. Nonetheless, information during extreme risk like the COVID-19 pandemic is still limited. Our objective was to evaluate the association between coping styles and risk perception in the COVID-19 pandemic and the change in metabolic parameters. This is a prospective study that included individuals with T2D treated in a tertiary care center during the COVID-19 outbreak who returned to follow-up one year later. We assessed coping styles and risk perception with the Extreme Risk Coping Scale and the risk perception questionnaire. Clinical characteristics and metabolic parameters were registered in both visits. Groups were compared using Kruskal Wallis tests, and changes in metabolic parameters were assessed with Wilcoxon rank sum tests. Our sample included 177 participants at baseline, and 118 concluded the study. Passive coping was more frequent in women. Low-risk perception was associated with higher age, lower psychiatric comorbidities, and lower frequency of psychiatric treatment compared with other risk perception groups. Patients with active coping plus high-risk perception did not have a change in metabolic parameters at follow-up, whereas patients with other coping styles and lower risk perception had an increase in total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, and triglycerides. There were no differences by coping group or by risk perception in glycemic control.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Introduction: the consumption of non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS) has increased. Recent studies have reported possible metabolic effects of NNS, and this may influence the perception regarding their consumption in the general population and health professionals. Objective: to describe and compare the beliefs about NNS in consumers, non-consumers, and health professionals; and to explore the reasons and opinions of health professionals for recommending or not their consumption. Methods: surveys were applied to 100 consumers, 100 non-consumers and 100 health professionals (dietitians and physicians) to evaluate a positive, negative, or neutral attitude towards certain beliefs regarding NNS, including the information they have, safety, price, side effects and taste. In addition, the opinion of health professionals for recommending or not the consumption of NNS and the related reasons was evaluated. Results: statistically significant differences regarding the safety, side effects and taste of NNS were found between the three groups (p < 0.01). The most frequent opinion of health professionals (48 %) is that NNS should be limited, used as a transition and in certain patients. Consumers tend to have a more positive opinion about NNS except for the price, non-consumers have a more neutral position except for taste, and health professionals have a more negative perception of NNS in all aspects. Conclusions: the beliefs regarding NNS differed among the studied groups, which might influence their consumption or recommendation of its use.
Introducción: Introducción: el consumo de edulcorantes no nutritivos (ENN) se ha incrementado. Estudios recientes han reportado posibles efectos metabólicos de los ENN, por lo que la percepción de su consumo podría haber cambiado en población general y profesionales de la salud. Objetivo: describir y comparar las creencias sobre los ENN en consumidores, no consumidores y profesionales de la salud, así como conocer las principales opiniones de los profesionales de la salud para recomendar o no el consumo de ENN. Métodos: se aplicaron encuestas a 100 consumidores, 100 no consumidores y 100 profesionales de la salud (nutriólogos y médicos) para evaluar actitudes positivas, negativas o neutras en torno a ciertas creencias de los ENN, la información que creen tener, seguridad, precio, efectos secundarios y sabor. Además, se evaluó la opinión de los profesionales de la salud para recomendar o no su consumo y las razones asociadas. Resultados: se encontraron diferencias entre los tres grupos en torno a la seguridad, los efectos secundarios y el sabor de los ENN (p < 0.01). La postura más frecuente de los profesionales de la salud (48 %) es que los ENN deben limitarse, utilizarse transitoriamente y en ciertos pacientes. Se observó una postura más positiva con respecto a los ENN en los consumidores excepto por su precio, más neutral en los no consumidores excepto por su sabor y más negativa en los profesionales de la salud en todos los aspectos. Conclusiones: las creencias sobre los ENN difieren entre los grupos estudiados, lo cual puede influir en su consumo o en la recomendación de su uso.
