Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 1.011.354
J. Health NPEPS ; 6(1)jun. 2021.
Artículo en Portugués | LILACS | ID: biblio-1147344


Objetivo: analisar a letalidade da COVID-19 por sexo e idade entre os profissionais de saúde do Estado Pará, Brasil. Método: estudo epidemiológico e observacional, com utilização de dados secundários públicos sobre casos e óbitos acumulados por COVID-19 e dados demográficos, entre março e outubro de 2020. O número de casos e óbitos por COVID-19 ocorridos entre profissionais de saúde foram comparados em relação à idade e ao sexo pelo teste qui-quadrado, seguido por regressão logística pelo método Backward Stepwise de Wald. Resultados: entre os 15.332 casos confirmados de COVID-19, 70,3% eram do sexo feminino e 61,3% com idade entre 30 a 49 anos (39,2±11,6 anos). Registraram-se 97 óbitos, com uma taxa de letalidade de 0,6%. A probabilidade de óbito foi 52,8 vezes (20,7-134,5) e 4,0 vezes (2,5-6,2) maior entre jovens e homens quando comparados às demais notificações. Conclusão: a taxa de letalidade entre os profissionais de saúde é alta, especialmente entre homens jovens. Este é um alerta sobre os impactos da doença entre os trabalhadores da saúde e suscita ao poder público, especificamente ao setor saúde melhores condições de trabalho e políticas de saúde do trabalhador.(AU)

Objective: to analyze the lethality of COVID-19 by sex and age among health professionals in the state of Pará, Brazil. Method: epidemiological and observational study, using public secondary data on cases and deaths accumulated by COVID-19 and demographic data, between March and October 2020. The number of cases and deaths by COVID-19 that occurred among health professionals were compared in relation to age and sex using the chi-square test, followed by logistic regression using Wald's Backward Stepwise method. Results: among the 15,332 confirmed cases of COVID-19, 70.3% were female and 61.3% aged between 30 and 49 years (39.2 ± 11.6 years). 97 deaths were recorded, with a fatality rate of 0.6%. The probability of death was 52.8 times (20.7-134.5) and 4.0 times (2.5-6.2) higher among young men and men when compared to other reports. Conclusion: the lethality rate among health professionals is high, especially among young men. This is an alert about the impacts of the disease among health workers and raises the public authorities, specifically the health sector, better working conditions and worker health policies.(AU)

Objetivo: analizar la letalidad de COVID-19 por sexo y edad en profesionales de la salud en el estado de Pará, Brasil. Método: estudio epidemiológico y observacional, utilizando datos secundarios públicos sobre casos y defunciones acumulados por COVID-19 y datos demográficos, entre marzo y octubre de 2020. Se comparó el número de casos y defunciones por COVID-19 ocurridos entre profesionales de la salud en relación con edad y sexo usando la prueba de chi-cuadrado, seguida de regresión logística usando el método de Wald Backward Stepwise. Resultados: entre los 15.332 casos confirmados de COVID-19, el 70,3% eran mujeres y el 61,3% tenían entre 30 y 49 años (39,2 ± 11,6 años). Se registraron 97 muertes, con una tasa de letalidad del 0,6%. La probabilidad de muerte fue 52,8 veces (20,7-134,5) y 4,0 veces (2,5-6,2) más grande entre hombres y jóvenes en comparación con otros informes. Conclusión: la tasa de letalidad entre los profesionales de la salud es alta, especialmente entre los hombres jóvenes. Se trata de una alerta sobre los impactos de la enfermedad entre los trabajadores de la salud y plantea a las autoridades públicas, específicamente al sector salud, mejores condiciones laborales y políticas de salud laboral.(AU)

Humanos , Salud Laboral , Personal de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Infecciones por Coronavirus/mortalidad , Política de Salud , Brasil , Estudios Epidemiológicos
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(13): 473-477, 2021 Apr 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33793457


Incarcerated and detained persons are at increased risk for acquiring COVID-19. However, little is known about their willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccination. During September-December 2020, residents in three prisons and 13 jails in four states were surveyed regarding their willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccination and their reasons for COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy or refusal. Among 5,110 participants, 2,294 (44.9%) said they would receive a COVID-19 vaccination, 498 (9.8%) said they would hesitate to receive it, and 2,318 (45.4%) said they would refuse to receive it. Willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccination was lowest among Black/African American (Black) (36.7%; 510 of 1,390) persons, participants aged 18-29 years (38.5%; 583 of 1,516), and those who lived in jails versus prisons (43.7%; 1,850 of 4,232). Common reasons reported for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy were waiting for more information (54.8%) and efficacy or safety concerns (31.0%). The most common reason for COVID-19 vaccination refusal was distrust of health care, correctional, or government personnel or institutions (20.1%). Public health interventions to improve vaccine confidence and trust are needed to increase vaccination acceptance by incarcerated or detained persons.

/administración & dosificación , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/psicología , Prisioneros/psicología , Vacunación/psicología , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , /prevención & control , Brotes de Enfermedades/prevención & control , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Prisioneros/estadística & datos numéricos , Prisiones , Factores Socioeconómicos , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Adulto Joven
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(13): 490-494, 2021 Apr 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33793459


The spread of disease and increase in deaths during large outbreaks of transmissible diseases is often associated with fear and grief (1). Social restrictions, limits on operating nonessential businesses, and other measures to reduce pandemic-related mortality and morbidity can lead to isolation and unemployment or underemployment, further increasing the risk for mental health problems (2). To rapidly monitor changes in mental health status and access to care during the COVID-19 pandemic, CDC partnered with the U.S. Census Bureau to conduct the Household Pulse Survey (HPS). This report describes trends in the percentage of adults with symptoms of an anxiety disorder or a depressive disorder and those who sought mental health services. During August 19, 2020-February 1, 2021, the percentage of adults with symptoms of an anxiety or a depressive disorder during the past 7 days increased significantly (from 36.4% to 41.5%), as did the percentage reporting that they needed but did not receive mental health counseling or therapy during the past 4 weeks (from 9.2% to 11.7%). Increases were largest among adults aged 18-29 years and among those with less than a high school education. HPS data can be used in near real time to evaluate the impact of strategies that address mental health status and care of adults during the COVID-19 pandemic and to guide interventions for groups that are disproportionately affected.

Ansiedad/epidemiología , Ansiedad/terapia , Trastorno Depresivo/epidemiología , Trastorno Depresivo/terapia , Servicios de Salud Mental/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Factores de Riesgo , Factores Socioeconómicos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Adulto Joven
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(13): 461-466, 2021 Apr 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33793461


Clinical preventive services play an important role in preventing deaths, and Healthy People 2020 has set national goals for using clinical preventive services to improve population health (1). The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires many health plans to cover certain recommended clinical preventive services without cost-sharing when provided in-network (covered clinical preventive services).* To ascertain prevalence of the use of selected recommended clinical preventive services among persons aged ≥18 years, CDC analyzed data from the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), a state-based annual nationwide survey conducted via landline and mobile phones in the United States, for 10 clinical preventive services covered in-network with no cost-sharing pursuant to the ACA. The weighted prevalence of colon, cervical, and breast cancer screening, pneumococcal and tetanus vaccination, and diabetes screening ranged from 66.0% to 79.2%; the prevalence of the other four clinical preventive services were <50%: 16.5% for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, 26.6% for zoster (shingles) vaccination, 33.2% for influenza vaccination, and 45.8% for HIV testing. Prevalence of HIV testing had the widest variation (3.1-fold differences) across states among the 10 services included in this report. The prevalence of use of clinical preventive services varied by insurance status, income level, and rurality, findings that are consistent with previous studies (2-6). The use of nine of the 10 services examined was lower among the uninsured, those with lower income, and those living in rural communities. Among those factors examined, insurance status was the dominant factor strongly associated with use of clinical preventive services, followed by income-level and rurality. Understanding factors influencing use of recommended clinical preventive services can potentially help decision makers better identify policies to increase their use including strategies to increase insurance coverage.

Utilización de Instalaciones y Servicios/estadística & datos numéricos , Servicios Preventivos de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Sistema de Vigilancia de Factor de Riesgo Conductual , Femenino , Reforma de la Atención de Salud , Humanos , Cobertura del Seguro/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , Factores Socioeconómicos , Estados Unidos , Adulto Joven
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(13): 495-500, 2021 Apr 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33793460


Messenger RNA (mRNA) BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccines have been shown to be effective in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 in randomized placebo-controlled Phase III trials (1,2); however, the benefits of these vaccines for preventing asymptomatic and symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) infection, particularly when administered in real-world conditions, is less well understood. Using prospective cohorts of health care personnel, first responders, and other essential and frontline workers* in eight U.S. locations during December 14, 2020-March 13, 2021, CDC routinely tested for SARS-CoV-2 infections every week regardless of symptom status and at the onset of symptoms consistent with COVID-19-associated illness. Among 3,950 participants with no previous laboratory documentation of SARS-CoV-2 infection, 2,479 (62.8%) received both recommended mRNA doses and 477 (12.1%) received only one dose of mRNA vaccine.† Among unvaccinated participants, 1.38 SARS-CoV-2 infections were confirmed by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) per 1,000 person-days.§ In contrast, among fully immunized (≥14 days after second dose) persons, 0.04 infections per 1,000 person-days were reported, and among partially immunized (≥14 days after first dose and before second dose) persons, 0.19 infections per 1,000 person-days were reported. Estimated mRNA vaccine effectiveness for prevention of infection, adjusted for study site, was 90% for full immunization and 80% for partial immunization. These findings indicate that authorized mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are effective for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection, regardless of symptom status, among working-age adults in real-world conditions. COVID-19 vaccination is recommended for all eligible persons.

/inmunología , Socorristas , Personal de Salud , Enfermedades Profesionales/prevención & control , Ocupaciones/clasificación , Adolescente , Adulto , /administración & dosificación , Socorristas/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Personal de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Vacunas Sintéticas/inmunología , Adulto Joven
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(13): 478-482, 2021 Apr 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33793462


SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, can spread rapidly in prisons and can be introduced by staff members and newly transferred incarcerated persons (1,2). On September 28, 2020, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services (DHS) contacted CDC to report a COVID-19 outbreak in a state prison (prison A). During October 6-20, a CDC team investigated the outbreak, which began with 12 cases detected from specimens collected during August 17-24 from incarcerated persons housed within the same unit, 10 of whom were transferred together on August 13 and under quarantine following prison intake procedures (intake quarantine). Potentially exposed persons within the unit began a 14-day group quarantine on August 25. However, quarantine was not restarted after quarantined persons were potentially exposed to incarcerated persons with COVID-19 who were moved to the unit. During the subsequent 8 weeks (August 14-October 22), 869 (79.4%) of 1,095 incarcerated persons and 69 (22.6%) of 305 staff members at prison A received positive test results for SARS-CoV-2. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) of specimens from 172 cases among incarcerated persons showed that all clustered in the same lineage; this finding, along with others, demonstrated that facility spread originated with the transferred cohort. To effectively implement a cohorted quarantine, which is a harm reduction strategy for correctional settings with limited space, CDC's interim guidance recommendation is to serial test cohorts, restarting the 14-day quarantine period when a new case is identified (3). Implementing more effective intake quarantine procedures and available mitigation measures, including vaccination, among incarcerated persons is important to controlling transmission in prisons. Understanding and addressing the challenges faced by correctional facilities to implement medical isolation and quarantine can help reduce and prevent outbreaks.

/epidemiología , Brotes de Enfermedades , Prisioneros/estadística & datos numéricos , Prisiones , /prevención & control , Humanos , Cuarentena , Wisconsin/epidemiología
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(13): 483-489, 2021 Apr 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33793463


Long-standing systemic social, economic, and environmental inequities in the United States have put many communities of color (racial and ethnic minority groups) at increased risk for exposure to and infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, as well as more severe COVID-19-related outcomes (1-3). Because race and ethnicity are missing for a proportion of reported COVID-19 cases, counties with substantial missing information often are excluded from analyses of disparities (4). Thus, as a complement to these case-based analyses, population-based studies can help direct public health interventions. Using data from the 50 states and the District of Columbia (DC), CDC identified counties where five racial and ethnic minority groups (Hispanic or Latino [Hispanic], non-Hispanic Black or African American [Black], non-Hispanic Asian [Asian], non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native [AI/AN], and non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander [NH/PI]) might have experienced high COVID-19 impact during April 1-December 22, 2020. These counties had high 2-week COVID-19 incidences (>100 new cases per 100,000 persons in the total population) and percentages of persons in five racial and ethnic groups that were larger than the national percentages (denoted as "large"). During April 1-14, a total of 359 (11.4%) of 3,142 U.S. counties reported high COVID-19 incidence, including 28.7% of counties with large percentages of Asian persons and 27.9% of counties with large percentages of Black persons. During August 5-18, high COVID-19 incidence was reported by 2,034 (64.7%) counties, including 92.4% of counties with large percentages of Black persons and 74.5% of counties with large percentages of Hispanic persons. During December 9-22, high COVID-19 incidence was reported by 3,114 (99.1%) counties, including >95% of those with large percentages of persons in each of the five racial and ethnic minority groups. The findings of this population-based analysis complement those of case-based analyses. In jurisdictions with substantial missing race and ethnicity information, this method could be applied to smaller geographic areas, to identify communities of color that might be experiencing high potential COVID-19 impact. As areas with high rates of new infection change over time, public health efforts can be tailored to the needs of communities of color as the pandemic evolves and integrated with longer-term plans to improve health equity.

/epidemiología , Grupos de Población Continentales/estadística & datos numéricos , Grupos Étnicos/estadística & datos numéricos , Grupos Minoritarios/estadística & datos numéricos , /etnología , Monitoreo Epidemiológico , Disparidades en el Estado de Salud , Humanos , Incidencia , Medición de Riesgo , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
s.l; Organización Panamericana de la Salud; abr. 6, 2021. 31 p.
No convencional en Español | LILACS | ID: biblio-1152192


A la fecha, se reportan 4.329 pacientes (1,2%) en aislamiento domiciliario, 493 pacientes (0,1%) se encuentran hospitalizados (430 en sala general y 63 en Unidades de Cuidado Intensivo -UCI). Se informan 345.120 (96,9%) casos como recuperados

Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Pandemias/estadística & datos numéricos , Panamá/epidemiología
Arch. prev. riesgos labor. (Ed. impr.) ; 24(1): 20-33, ene.-mar. 2021. tab, graf
Artículo en Español | IBECS | ID: ibc-197118


INTRODUCCIÓN: La promoción de la salud en el trabajo integra las iniciativas en salud y seguridad en ámbito ocupacional, con mejoras personales, incremento de productividad y menores riesgos y gastos sociales, especialmente en migraña, como enfermedad neurológica con prevalencia estimada en el 11% de la población. El objetivo de este trabajo fue conocer las condiciones preventivas de los trabajadores con migraña y las opciones de gestión preventiva en sus empresas. MÉTODO: Estudio observacional transversal realizado en 3.342 pacientes de España, Italia, Francia, Portugal, Irlanda, Reino Unido, Alemania y otros países de la UE mediante encuesta anónima en la web de la European Migraine & Headache Alliance (EMHA-web), entre septiembre de 2018 y enero de 2019. RESULTADOS: Estrés laboral y uso de PVD son los riesgos más referidos por los trabajadores con migraña. El 43.71% de trabajadores desconoce el tipo de Servicio de Prevención de su empresa, 49.06% no dispone de servicio médico; el 67.67% no ha tenido impedimentos de acceso laboral por migraña, ni despido o no renovación del contrato, pero el 42,14% tuvo algún conflicto por pérdida de productividad; el 26,54% desconoce el concepto de especial sensibilidad o no lo ha solicitado por migraña; un 55,42% no se ha sentido comprendido ni apoyado por su empresa en sus limitaciones por migraña, pero sí por los compañeros. CONCLUSIÓN: Se observa una deficiente información preventiva y escaso uso de las opciones de gestión adaptativa en las empresas para personas con migraña

INTRODUCTION: Workplace health promotion integrates initiatives in health and safety in the occupational field, with personal improvements, increased productivity and lower risks and social cost, especially with respect to migraine headaches, a neurological disorder affecting approximately 11% of the population. The objective of this study was to know the preventive resources available to workers with migraine headaches and the preventive management options in their companies. METHOD: Cross-sectional observational study of 3,342 patients from Spain, Italy, France, Portugal, Ireland, United Kingdom, Germany and other European Union countries, conducted through an anonymous survey on the web of the European Migraine & Headache Alliance (EMHA-web), from September 2018 to January 2019. RESULTS: Occupational stress (77.65%) and use of computer monitors (63.87%) are the most common risks described by workers with migraine. About. 43.71% of workers are not familiar with the type of occupational health service present in their company, 49.06% do not have a medical service; 67.67% reported no work-related limitations due to migraine, neither dismissal nor non-renewal of their contract (88.29%), but 42.14% had experienced some conflict due to decreased productivity; 26.54% were unaware of the concept of vulnerable workers or had not requested this status because of their migraine (63.8%), nor had they demanded job accommodations (67.64%) or job change (80.89%); 55.42% did not feel understood or supported by their company in their limitations due to migraine, although they did feel they were supported by their colleagues (63.07%). CONCLUSION: We found that preventive resources and information were deficient, and that there was little use of adaptive management options for workers with migraine in their companies

Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Trastornos Migrañosos/prevención & control , Servicios de Salud del Trabajador/estadística & datos numéricos , Trastornos Migrañosos/epidemiología , Estudios Transversales , Encuestas Epidemiológicas , Salud Laboral/estadística & datos numéricos , Riesgos Laborales , Lugar de Trabajo , Europa (Continente)/epidemiología
Arch. prev. riesgos labor. (Ed. impr.) ; 24(1): 62-73, ene.-mar. 2021. graf
Artículo en Español | IBECS | ID: ibc-197121


La comercialización del amianto en Europa de la segunda mitad del siglo XX supuso un consumo de millones de toneladas. La exposición laboral se ha controlado a partir de la Directiva de 2009 y, en la actualidad, mediante vigilancia epidemiológica, se registran las patologías, mesoteliomas fundamentalmente, por exposiciones pasadas. Después de prohibida su utilización, aún permanecen cantidades ingentes en edificios, infraestructuras y vehículos, entre otros. El camino hacia su eliminación se inició con una Resolución del Parlamento Europeo, de 2013 y el Dictamen del Comité Económico y Social Europeo (2015/C 251/03). Con el objetivo de conocer las dificultades de estos planes se ha revisado el de Polonia, único país que hasta la fecha, ha implementado un plan de acción con un gran respaldo financiero y las actuaciones llevadas a cabo en relación con la exposición a amianto en España y, Navarra en concreto por contar con un registro exhaustivo de trabajadores expuestos. El enorme esfuerzo económico que precisan estos planes y los riesgos medioambientales que suponen, merecen una precisa planificación, que exige conocer el no alcance hasta la fecha actual de los objetivos planteados en Polonia, país referente

The commercialization of asbestos in Europe in the second half of the 20th century translated into consumption of millions of tons of this material. Occupational exposure to asbestos is controlled under the 2009 European Union Directive. Currently, through epidemiological surveillance and pathology registries (mainly mesotheliomas), it is possible to record past exposures. Despite prohibiting its use, large amounts of asbestos remain in buildings, infrastructures and vehicles, among others. The road to elimination of existing asbestos began with a 2013 European Parliament Resolution and the Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee (2015 / C 251/03). To better understand barriers to implementing these plans, we reviewed the experience in Poland the only country that to date has implemented an action plan with great financial support, together with actions carried out in Spain generally, and Navarre specifically, given the latter's exhaustive registry of exposed workers. The enormous economic effort required to implement these plans, along with the environmental risks associated with asbestos abatement, require detailed planning, which should consider understanding why the objectives set by Poland, a benchmark country, have not been achieved to date

Humanos , Asbestos , Exposición Profesional/legislación & jurisprudencia , Exposición Profesional/prevención & control , Asbestos/efectos adversos , Exposición Profesional/economía , Exposición Profesional/estadística & datos numéricos , Evaluación de Programas y Proyectos de Salud , Polonia , España
Bogotá; Organización Panamericana de la Salud; mar. 2, 2021. 31 p.
No convencional en Español | LILACS | ID: biblio-1151050
Bogotá; Organización Panamericana de la Salud; mar. 9, 2021. 31 p.
No convencional en Español | LILACS | ID: biblio-1151051
Bogotá; Organización Panamericana de la Salud; mar. 16, 2021. 31 p.
No convencional en Español | LILACS | ID: biblio-1151052
s.l; Organización Panamericana de la Salud; mar. 11, 2021. 5 p.
No convencional en Español | LILACS | ID: biblio-1151105
s.l; Organización Panamericana de la Salud; mar. 11, 2021. 5 p.
No convencional en Español | LILACS | ID: biblio-1151106
s.l; Organización Panamericana de la Salud; mar. 11, 2021. 5 p.
No convencional en Español | LILACS | ID: biblio-1151107
s.l; Organización Panamericana de la Salud; mar. 11, 2021. 5 p.
No convencional en Español | LILACS | ID: biblio-1151108


Reporte de Situación COVID-19 Cuba No. 51 (1 de febrero de 2021).

Humanos , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Pandemias/estadística & datos numéricos , Cuba/epidemiología
s.l; Organización Panamericana de la Salud; mar. 11, 2021. 6 p.
No convencional en Español | LILACS | ID: biblio-1151109


Reporte de Situación COVID-19 Cuba No. 52 (8 de febrero de 2021).

Humanos , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Pandemias/estadística & datos numéricos , Cuba/epidemiología
s.l; Organización Panamericana de la Salud; mar. 11, 2021. 5 p.
No convencional en Español | LILACS | ID: biblio-1151111


Reporte de Situación COVID-19 Cuba No. 53 (15 de febrero de 2021).

Humanos , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Pandemias/estadística & datos numéricos , Cuba/epidemiología