Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
1.
Geriatr Gerontol Int ; 20(6): 547-558, 2020 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32365259

RESUMEN

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has casted a huge impact on global public health and the economy. In this challenging situation, older people are vulnerable to the infection and the secondary effects of the pandemic and need special attention. To evaluate the impacts of COVID-19 on older people, it is important to balance the successful pandemic control and active management of secondary consequences. These considerations are particularly salient in the Asian context, with its diversity among countries in terms of sociocultural heritage, healthcare setup and availability of resources. Thus, the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia summarized the considerations of Asian countries focusing on responses and difficulties in each country, impacts of health inequity related to the COVID-19 pandemic and proposed recommendations for older people, which are germane to the Asian context. More innovative services should be developed to address the increasing demands for new approaches to deliver healthcare in these difficult times and to establish resilient healthcare systems for older people. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2020; 9999: n/a-n/a.


Asunto(s)
Envejecimiento/etnología , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles/normas , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Evaluación Geriátrica/métodos , Pandemias/estadística & datos numéricos , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Sarcopenia/epidemiología , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Envejecimiento/fisiología , Asia/epidemiología , COVID-19 , Infecciones por Coronavirus/prevención & control , Atención a la Salud/organización & administración , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Pandemias/prevención & control , Neumonía Viral/prevención & control , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Prevalencia , Salud Pública , Medición de Riesgo , Sarcopenia/diagnóstico
2.
JAMA Oncol ; 2(7): 915-21, 2016 Jul 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27030951

RESUMEN

IMPORTANCE: Different screening strategies for breast cancer are available but have not been researched in quantitative detail. OBJECTIVE: To assess the benefits and the harms of risk-based and universal mammography screening in comparison with annual clinical breast examination (CBE). DESIGN: Population-based cohort study comparing incidences of stage II+ disease and death from breast cancer across 3 breast cancer screening strategies, with adjustment for a propensity score for participation based on risk factors for breast cancer and comparing the 3 strategies for overdetection between January 1999 and December 2009. Asymptomatic women attending outreach screening in the community or undergoing mammography in hospitals were enrolled in the 3 screening programs. INTERVENTIONS: Risk-based biennial mammography, universal biennial mammography, and annual CBE. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Detection rates, stage II+ disease incidence, mortality from breast cancer, and overdiagnosis were compared using a time-dependent Cox proportional hazards regression model. RESULTS: A total of 1 429 890 asymptomatic women attending outreach screening in the community or undergoing mammography in hospitals were enrolled in the 3 screening programs. Detection rates (prevalent screen and subsequent screens per 1000) were the highest for universal biennial mammography (4.86 and 2.98, respectively), followed by risk-based mammography (2.80 and 2.77, respectively), and lowest for annual CBE (0.97 and 0.70, respectively). Universal biennial mammography screening, compared with annual CBE, was associated with a 41% mortality reduction (risk ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.48-0.73) and a 30% reduction of stage II+ breast cancer (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.66-0.74). Risk-based mammography screening was associated with an 8% reduction of stage II+ breast cancer (RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.99) but was not associated with a statistically significant mortality reduction (risk ratio [RR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.73-1.02). Estimates of overdiagnosis were no different from CBE for risk-based screening and 13% higher than CBE for universal mammography. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Compared with population-based screening for breast cancer with annual CBE, universal biennial mammography resulted in a substantial reduction in breast cancer deaths, whereas risk-based biennial mammography resulted in only a modest benefit. Compared with annual CBE, risk-based and universal mammography screening did not result in significant overdiagnosis of breast cancer.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Mamografía , Tamizaje Masivo , Anciano , Neoplasias de la Mama/mortalidad , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Estudios de Cohortes , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Factores de Riesgo
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA