Evaluating the implementation of Nuevo Amanecer-II in rural community settings using mixed methods and equity frameworks.

BACKGROUND: The 10-week Nuevo Amanecer-II intervention, tested through a randomized controlled trial, reduced anxiety and improved stress management skills among Spanish-speaking Latina breast cancer survivors. This paper describes the implementation and equity evaluation outcomes of the Nuevo Amanecer-II intervention delivered in three California rural communities. METHODS: Using implementation and equity frameworks, concurrent convergent mixed methods were applied to evaluate implementation (feasibility, fidelity, acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, and sustainability) and equity (shared power and capacity building) outcomes. Quantitative data were collected using tracking forms, fidelity rating forms, and program evaluation surveys; qualitative data were collected using semi-structured in-depth interviews. Respondents included community-based organization (CBO) administrators, recruiters, compañeras (interventionists), and program participants. RESULTS: Of 76 women randomized to the intervention, 65 (86%) completed at least 7 of 10 sessions. Participants' knowledge (85% correct of 7 questions) and skills mastery were high (85% able to correctly perform 14 skills). Mean fidelity ratings across compañeras ranged from 3.8 (modeled skills) to 5.0 (used supportive/caring communication); 1-5 scale. The program was rated as very good/excellent by 90% of participants. Participants and compañeras suggested including family members; compañeras suggested expanding content on managing thoughts and mood and healthy living and having access to participant's survivorship care plan to tailor breast cancer information. CBOs adopted the program because it aligned with their priority populations and mission. Building on CBOs' knowledge, resources, and infrastructure, implementation success was due to shared power, learning, responsibility, and co-ownership, resulting in a co-created tailored program for community and organizational contexts. Building intervention capacity prior to implementation, providing funding, and ongoing technical support to CBOs were vital for fidelity and enhancement of recruiter and compañera professional skills. Two of three CBOs created plans for program sustainability beyond the clinical trial; all administrators discussed the need for new funding sources to sustain the program as delivered. CONCLUSIONS: Building on community assets and using equitable participatory research processes were central to the successful implementation of a peer-delivered psychosocial intervention in three rural communities among Spanish-speaking Latinas with breast cancer.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Financial Hardship During the First Year of the Pandemic.

Introduction: The economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has been substantial, yet little is known about the financial effects resulting from lost employment or financial hardship racial-ethnic disparities. Methods: We conducted a nationally representative, online survey of 5500 English- and Spanish-speaking American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black/African American, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Latino, White, and multiracial adults, from December 2020 to February 2021. Six financial hardship domains were measured (lost income, debt, unmet expenses, unmet health care expenses, housing insecurity, and food insecurity). Prevalence of financial hardship among each racial-ethnic group was estimated using multivariable Poisson regression. Results: Overall, 70.3% reported experiencing financial hardship; debt (57.6%), lost income (44.5%), and unmet expenses (33.7%) were most common. American Indian/Alaska Native (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR]=1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.04 to 1.35), Black/African American (aPR=1.18, 95% CI=1.06 to 1.32), Latino (English-speaking: aPR=1.15, 95% CI=1.01 to 1.31; Spanish-speaking: aPR=1.27, 95% CI=1.12 to 1.45), and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (aPR=1.21, 95% CI=1.06 to 1.38) adults were more likely to experience financial hardship, compared with White adults. American Indian/Alaska Native, Black/African American, Spanish-speaking Latino, and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander adults were also more likely to report hardship in almost all hardship domains (e.g., housing insecurity: aPRs=1.37-1.91). Conclusions: Racial/ethnic minorities were more likely to experience financial hardship during the pandemic. The prevalence of lost income was similar across most racial/ethnic groups, suggesting that preexisting wealth disparities led to some groups being less able to handle the economic shocks caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Financial hardship may be underestimated for communities without English or Spanish fluency. Without intervention, financial hardship will likely exacerbate wealth disparities in the United States.

Financial Hardship and Psychological Distress During the Pandemic: A Nationally Representative Survey of Major Racial-Ethnic Groups in the United States.

Introduction: While financial hardship has been consistently linked to psychological distress, little research exists on associations between financial hardship experienced during the pandemic and mental health. Methods: We conducted a nationally representative, online survey of American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black/African American, Latino (English and Spanish speaking), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, White, and multiracial adults, 12/2020-2/2021 (n=5500). Six financial hardship domains were measured (lost income, debt, unmet expenses, unmet health care expenses, housing insecurity, and food insecurity). Psychological distress measures included anxiety-depression symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-4), perceived stress (modified Perceived Stress Scale), and loneliness-isolation ("In the past month, how often have you felt lonely and isolated?"). Associations between financial hardship and psychological distress were estimated using multinomial logistic regression. Results: Overall, 70.3% of participants reported experiencing financial hardship (substantial hardship: 21.3%; some hardship: 27.4%; and a little hardship: 21.6%), with Spanish-speaking Latino (87.3%) and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (79.2%) adults being most likely. Debt (57.6%), lost income (44.5%), and unmet expenses (33.7%) were the most common. There was a dose-response association between financial hardship and moderate/severe anxiety-depression symptoms (a little hardship: adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=1.42, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.12-1.80; some hardship: aOR=3.21, 95% CI=2.58-3.98; and substantial hardship: aOR=8.15, 95% CI=6.45-10.29). Similar dose-response trends were observed with perceived stress and loneliness-isolation. No racial-ethnic difference in the association between financial hardship during the pandemic and psychological distress was seen. Discussion: Financial hardship has had a major impact on psychological distress during the pandemic; moreover, while no racial-ethnic difference in the effect of financial hardship was observed, because racial-ethnic minorities experienced greater hardship, financial hardship may exacerbate psychological distress disparities.

Depression Symptoms, Perceived Stress, and Loneliness During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Diverse US Racial-Ethnic Groups.

Introduction: Studies have reported increases in psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to estimate associations between race-ethnicity and psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic among nationally representative samples of all major racial-ethnic groups in the United States. Methods: We conducted a nationally representative cross-sectional survey between December 2020 and February 2021 of Asian, black/African American, Latino (English and Spanish speaking), American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, white, and multiracial adults (n=5500). Distress measures included: anxiety-depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-4 [PHQ-4]), stress (modified Perceived Stress Scale), and loneliness-isolation (frequency felt lonely and isolated). Multinomial logistic regression models estimated associations between race-ethnicity and psychological distress, adjusting for demographic and health characteristics. Results: Overall, 23.7% reported moderate/severe anxiety-depression symptoms, 34.3% reported moderate/severe stress, and 21.3% reported feeling lonely-isolated fairly/very often. Compared with white adults and adjusting for covariates, the prevalence of moderate/severe anxiety-depression was significantly lower among Asian (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.34-0.58), black (aOR=0.49, 95% CI=0.38-0.63), English-speaking Latino (aOR=0.62, 95% CI=0.45-0.85), Spanish-speaking Latino (aOR=0.31, 95% CI=0.22-0.44), and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (aOR=0.66, 95% CI=0.49-0.90) adults. Similar trends were seen for moderate/severe stress and feeling lonely-isolated fairly/very often. Worse distress profiles of American Indian/Alaska Native and multiracial adults were attenuated after adjustment. Conclusions: Minoritized groups tended to have less distress than white adults. Collective experiences of cumulative disadvantage could engender shared resiliency/normalization among these groups.

Disparities in telehealth access, not willingness to use services, likely explain rural telehealth disparities.

PURPOSE: Although telehealth access and utilization have increased during the pandemic, rural and low-income disparities persist. We sought to assess whether access or willingness to use telehealth differed between rural and non-rural and low-income and non-low-income adults and measure the prevalence of perceived barriers. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study using COVID-19's Unequal Racial Burden (CURB) online survey (December 17, 2020-February 17, 2021), which included 2 nationally representative cohorts of rural and low-income Black/African American, Latino, and White adults. Non-rural and non-low-income participants from the main, nationally representative sample were matched for rural versus non-rural and low-income versus non-low-income comparisons. We measured perceived telehealth access, willingness to use telehealth, and perceived telehealth barriers. FINDINGS: Rural (38.6% vs 44.9%) and low-income adults (42.0% vs 47.4%) were less likely to report telehealth access, compared to non-rural and non-low-income counterparts. After adjustment, rural adults were still less likely to report telehealth access (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.79-0.99); no differences were seen between low-income and non-low-income adults (aPR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.88-1.17). The majority of adults reported willingness to use telehealth (rural = 78.4%; low-income = 79.0%), with no differences between rural and non-rural (aPR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.92-1.08) or low-income versus non-low-income (aPR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.91-1.13). No racial/ethnic differences were observed in willingness to use telehealth. The prevalence of perceived telehealth barriers was low, with the majority reporting no barriers (rural = 57.4%; low-income = 56.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Lack of access (and awareness of access) is likely a primary driver of disparities in rural telehealth use. Race/ethnicity was not associated with telehealth willingness, suggesting that equal utilization is possible once granted access.

Race/ethnicity-specific associations between breastfeeding information source and breastfeeding rates among U.S. women.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence of the impact of breastfeeding information on breastfeeding rates, it is unknown if information sources and impact vary by race/ethnicity, thus this study assessed race/ethnicity-specific associations between breastfeeding information sources and breastfeeding. METHODS: We used data from the 2016-2019 Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System. Race/ethnicity-stratified multinomial logistic regression was used to estimate associations between information source (e.g., family/friends) and breastfeeding rates (0 weeks/none, < 10 weeks, or ≥ 10 weeks; < 10 weeks and ≥ 10 weeks = any breastfeeding). All analyses were weighted to be nationally representative. RESULTS: Among 5,945,018 women (weighted), 88% reported initiating breastfeeding (≥ 10 weeks = 70%). Information from family/friends (< 10 weeks: aORs = 1.58-2.14; ≥ 10 weeks: aORs = 1.63-2.64) and breastfeeding support groups (< 10 weeks: aORs = 1.31-1.76; ≥ 10 weeks: aORs = 1.42-2.77) were consistently associated with breastfeeding and duration across most racial/ethnic groups; effects were consistently smaller among Alaska Native, Black, and Hispanic women (vs White women). Over half of American Indian and one-quarter of Black women reported not breastfeeding/stopping breastfeeding due to return to school/work concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Associations between breastfeeding information source and breastfeeding rates vary across race/ethnicity. Culturally tailored breastfeeding information and support from family/friends and support groups could help reduce breastfeeding disparities. Additional measures are needed to address disparities related to concerns about return to work/school.

Effect of Stay-at-Home orders and other COVID-related policies on trauma hospitalization rates and disparities in the USA: a statewide time-series analysis.

BACKGROUND: To combat the coronavirus pandemic, states implemented several public health policies to reduce infection and transmission. Increasing evidence suggests that these prevention strategies also have had a profound impact on non-COVID healthcare utilization. The goal of this study was to determine the impact of a statewide Stay-at-Home order and other COVID-related policies on trauma hospitalizations, stratified by race/ethnicity, age, and sex. METHODS: We used the North Carolina Trauma Registry, a statewide registry of trauma hospitalizations for 18 hospitals across North Carolina, including all North Carolina trauma centers, to calculate weekly rates of assault, self-inflicted, unintentional motor vehicle collision (MVC), and other unintentional injury hospitalizations between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2020. Interrupted time-series design and segmented linear regression were used to estimate changes in hospitalization rates after several COVID-related executive orders, overall and stratified by race/ethnicity, age, and sex. Changes in hospitalization rates were assessed after 1) USA declaration of a public health emergency; 2) North Carolina statewide Stay-at-Home order; 3) Stay-at-Home order lifted with restrictions (Phase 2: Safer-at-Home); and 4) further lifting of restrictions (Phase 2.5: Safer-at-Home). RESULTS: There were 70,478 trauma hospitalizations in North Carolina, 2019-2020. In 2020, median age was 53 years old and 59% were male. Assault hospitalization rates (per 1,000,000 NC residents) increased after the Stay-at-Home order, but substantial increases were only observed among Black/African American residents (weekly trend change = 1.147, 95% CI = 0.634 to 1.662) and 18-44-year-old males (weekly trend change = 1.708, 95% CI = 0.870 to 2.545). After major restrictions were lifted, assault rates decreased but remained elevated compared to pre-COVID levels. Unintentional non-MVC injury hospitalizations decreased after the USA declared a public health emergency, especially among women ≥ 65 years old (weekly trend change = -4.010, 95% CI = -6.166 to -1.855), but returned to pre-pandemic levels within several months. CONCLUSIONS: Statewide Stay-at-Home orders placed Black/African American residents at higher risk of assault hospitalizations, exacerbating pre-existing disparities. Males 18-44 years old were also at higher risk of assault hospitalization. Fear of COVID-19 may have led to decreases in unintentional non-MVC hospitalization rates, particularly among older females. Policy makers must anticipate policy-related harms that may disproportionately affect already disadvantaged communities and develop mitigation approaches.

Perceived general, mental, and physical health of Latinos in the United States following adoption of immigrant-inclusive state-level driver's license policies: a time-series analysis.

BACKGROUND: In the United States (U.S.), several states have laws that allow individuals to obtain driver's licenses regardless of their immigration status. Possession of a driver's license can improve an individual's access to social programs, healthcare services, and employment opportunities, which could lead to improvements in perceived mental and physical health among Latinos living in the U.S. METHODS: Using Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data (2011-2019) for Latinos living in the U.S. overall (immigration status was not available), we compared the average number of self-reported perceived poor mental and physical health days/month, and general health status (single-item measures) before (January 2011-June 2013) and after implementation (July 2015-December 2019) of immigrant-inclusive license policies using interrupted time-series analyses and segmented linear regression, and a control group of states in which such policies were not implemented. We also compared the average number of adults reporting any perceived poor mental or physical health days (≥ 1 day/month) using a similar approach. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-three thousand eight hundred seven Latino adults were included; 66,805 lived in states that adopted immigrant-inclusive license policies. After implementation, average number of perceived poor physical health days significantly decreased from 4.30 to 3.80 days/month (immediate change = -0.64, 95% CI = -1.10 to -0.19). The proportion reporting ≥ 1 perceived poor physical and mental health day significantly decreased from 41 to 34% (OR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.80-1.00) and from 40 to 33% (OR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.74-0.94), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among all Latinos living in the U.S., immigrant-inclusive license policies were associated with fewer perceived poor physical health days per month and fewer adults experiencing poor physical and mental health. Because anti-immigrant policies can harm Latino communities regardless of immigration status and further widen health inequities, implementing state policies that do not restrict access to driver licenses based on immigrant status documentation could help address upstream drivers of such inequities.

Effect of Stay-at-Home Orders and Other COVID-Related Policies on Trauma Hospitalization Rates and Disparities in the United States: A Statewide Time-Series Analysis.

Background: To combat the coronavirus pandemic, states implemented several public health policies to reduce infection and transmission. Increasing evidence suggests that these prevention strategies also have had a profound impact on non-COVID healthcare utilization. The goal of this study was to determine the impact of a statewide Stay-at-Home and other COVID-related policies on trauma hospitalizations, stratified by race/ethnicity, age, and sex. Methods: We used the North Carolina Trauma Registry, a statewide registry of trauma hospitalizations to 18 hospitals across North Carolina, including all North Carolina trauma centers, to calculate weekly assault, self-inflicted, unintentional motor vehicle collision (MVC), and other unintentional injury hospitalization rates between January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2020. Interrupted time-series design and segmented linear regression were used to estimate changes in hospitalizations rates after several COVID-related executive orders, overall and stratified by race/ethnicity, age, and gender. Hospitalization rates were compared after 1) U.S. declaration of a public health emergency; 2) North Carolina statewide Stay-at-Home order; 3) Stay-at-Home order lifted with restrictions (Phase 2: Safer-at-Home); and 4) further lifting of restrictions (Phase 2.5: Safer-at-Home). Results: There were 70,478 trauma hospitalizations in North Carolina from 2019-2020. In 2020, median age was 53 years old and 59% were male. Assault hospitalization rates (per 1,000,000 NC residents) increased after the Stay-at-Home order, but only among Black/African American residents (incidence rate difference [IRD]=7.9; other racial/ethnic groups' IRDs ranged 0.9 to 1.7) and 18-44 year-old males (IRD=11.9; other sex/age groups' IRDs ranged -0.5 to 3.6). After major restrictions were lifted, assault rates returned to pre-COVID levels. Unintentional injury hospitalizations decreased after the public health emergency, especially among older adults, but returned to 2019 levels within several months. Conclusions: Statewide Stay-at-Home orders put Black/African American residents at higher risk for assault hospitalizations, exacerbating pre-existing disparities. Fear of COVID-19 may have also led to decreases in unintentional non-MVC hospitalization rates, particularly among older adults. Policy makers must anticipate possible negative effects and develop approaches for mitigating harms that may disproportionately affect already disadvantaged communities.

Lung lymphatic thrombosis and dysfunction caused by cigarette smoke exposure precedes emphysema in mice.

The lymphatic vasculature is critical for lung function, but defects in lymphatic function in the pathogenesis of lung disease is understudied. In mice, lymphatic dysfunction alone is sufficient to cause lung injury that resembles human emphysema. Whether lymphatic function is disrupted in cigarette smoke (CS)-induced emphysema is unknown. In this study, we investigated the effect of CS on lung lymphatic function. Analysis of human lung tissue revealed significant lung lymphatic thrombosis in patients with emphysema compared to control smokers that increased with disease severity. In a mouse model, CS exposure led to lung lymphatic thrombosis, decreased lymphatic drainage, and impaired leukocyte trafficking that all preceded the development of emphysema. Proteomic analysis demonstrated an increased abundance of coagulation factors in the lymph draining from the lungs of CS-exposed mice compared to control mice. In addition, in vitro assays demonstrated a direct effect of CS on lymphatic endothelial cell integrity. These data show that CS exposure results in lung lymphatic dysfunction and a shift in thoracic lymph towards a prothrombic state. Furthermore, our data suggest that lymphatic dysfunction is due to effects of CS on the lymphatic vasculature that precede emphysema. These studies demonstrate a novel component of CS-induced lung injury that occurs early in the pathogenesis of emphysema.

COVID-19-Related Discrimination Among Racial/Ethnic Minorities and Other Marginalized Communities in the United States.

Objectives. To determine the prevalence of COVID-19-related discrimination among major US racial/ethnic groups and estimate associations between discrimination, race/ethnicity, and other sociodemographic characteristics. Methods. We conducted a nationally representative online survey of 5500 American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black/African American, Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Latino (English and Spanish speaking), White, and multiracial adults from December 2020 to February 2021. Associations between sociodemographic characteristics and COVID-19-related discrimination were estimated via multinomial logistic regression. Results. A total of 22.1% of the participants reported experiencing discriminatory behaviors, and 42.7% reported that people acted afraid of them. All racial/ethnic minorities were more likely than White adults to experience COVID-19-related discrimination, with Asian and American Indian/Alaska Native adults being most likely to experience such discrimination (discriminatory behaviors: adjusted odd ratio [AOR] = 2.59; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.73, 3.89; and AOR = 2.67; 95% CI = 1.76, 4.04; people acting afraid: AOR = 1.54; 95% CI = 1.15, 2.07; and AOR = 1.84; 95% CI = 1.34, 2.51). Limited English proficiency, lower education, lower income, and residing in a big city or the East South Central census division also increased the prevalence of discrimination. Conclusions. COVID-19-related discrimination is common, and it appears that the pandemic has exacerbated preexisting resentment against racial/ethnic minorities and marginalized communities. Efforts are needed to minimize and discredit racially driven language and discrimination around COVID-19 and future epidemics. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(3):453-466. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306594).

Racial/ethnic disparities in intent to obtain a COVID-19 vaccine: A nationally representative United States survey.

Black, Latino, Pacific Islander, and American Indian/Alaska Native adults are more likely than White adults to experience SARS-CoV-2-related infections, hospitalizations, and mortality. We assessed intent to be vaccinated and concerns among 7 U.S. racial/ethnic groups (1,000 Black/African American, 500 American Indian/Alaska Native, 1,000 Asian, 1,000 Latino (500 English- and 500 Spanish-speaking), 500 Pacific Islander, 500 multiracial, and 1,000 White adults) in a cross-sectional online survey conducted December 2020-February 2021, weighted to be nationally representative within groups. Intent to be vaccinated was ascertained with: "If a COVID-19 vaccine becomes available, how likely are you to get vaccinated?" (not at all/slightly/moderately/very/extremely likely). Respondents identified which concerns would keep them from being vaccinated: cost, not knowing where, safety, effectiveness, side-effects, and other. Multinomial logistic regression models assessed associations of race/ethnicity with odds of being extremely/very/moderately, slightly likely to be vaccinated (ref = not at all), controlling for demographics and health. Overall, 30% were extremely likely, 22% not at all likely, and 48% unsure. Compared to White respondents, American Indian/Alaska Native (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) = 0.66, 95% CI, 0.47-0.92) and Black/African American (AOR = 0.54, 95% CI, 0.41-0.72) respondents were less likely, and Asian (AOR = 2.21, 95% CI, 1.61-3.02) and Spanish-speaking Latino respondents (AOR = 3.74, 95% CI, 2.51-5.55) were more likely to report being extremely likely to be vaccinated. Side-effects (52%) and safety (45%) were overriding concerns. Intent and vaccination rates are changing rapidly; these results constitute a comprehensive baseline for ongoing vaccination efforts among U.S. racial and ethnic groups.

Prevalencia de fibrilación auricular en pacientes hospitalizados por Medicina interna / Prevalence of atrial fibrillation in patients admitted by Internal Medicine

Resumen Introducción: La fibrilación auricular es la arritmia más frecuente en el mundo y conlleva importantes consecuencias clínicas. Sin embargo, son pocos los datos de prevalencia o incidencia en Latinoamérica, específicamente en Colombia. Métodos: Estudio de corte transversal en el que se revisaron las historias clínicas electrónicas de pacientes hospitalizados por Medicina interna en el año 2016 en tres hospitales universitarios de Colombia, excluyendo pacientes de la Unidad de Cuidado Intensivo o que tenían soporte vasoactivo/inotrópico. Se calculó prevalencia global y por grupos de edad; además, se estimó la diferencia de prevalencias entre grupos etarios mediante el cálculo de la razón de prevalencias. Resultados: Se evaluaron 6.882 historias clínicas; se encontró una prevalencia global de fibrilación auricular de 4,8% (331 pacientes), más alta en mujeres (2,64%). La mediana de edad global fue 65 años con un rango intercuartílico (RIC) entre 49-78; para los pacientes con fibrilación auricular fue de 79 años (RIC 71-86). El 93,96% de los casos tenían una o más comorbilidades asociadas y, de éstas la más frecuente fue la hipertensión arterial crónica, con un 74,32%. Al pasar los 70 años, aumentó la prevalencia de fibrilación auricular 3.3 veces en comparación con los menores de este rango (razón de prevalencias 3.3). Conclusiones: La fibrilación auricular en las tres instituciones estudiadas, tiene una prevalencia global del 4,8%, y aumenta 3.3 veces al pasar los 70 años, hecho que demuestra que en Colombia esta enfermedad crece a mayor rango etario, datos útiles para sustentar políticas de tamizaje, que mejoren la calidad y el cubrimiento en salud.

Abstract Introduction: Atrial fibrillation is the most common arrhythmia in the world, and has significant clinical consequences. However, there are few data on the prevalence or incidence in Latin America, particularly in Colombia. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed, in which a review was made of the computerised clinical records of patients admitted by Internal Medicine into three University Hospitals in Colombia. Patients admitted to Intensive Care or had vasoactive/ inotropic support were excluded. The overall prevalence was calculated, as well as by age group. The difference in prevalence between age groups was also calculated using the prevalence rates. Results: A total of 6,882 clinical records were reviewed, finding an overall prevalence of atrial fibrillation of 4.8% (331 patients), and was higher in women (2.64%). The overall median age was 65 years with an interquartile range (IQR) between 49 and 78 years. This increased to 79 years (IQR 71-86) for patients with atrial fibrillation. One or more associated comorbidities were found in 93.96% of cases, and of these the most common was chronic arterial hypertension in 74.32%. At greater than 70 years, atrial fibrillation increased 3.3 times more compared to those below this age range (prevalence ratio, 3.3). Conclusions: Atrial fibrillation in the three sites studied had an overall prevalence of 4.8%. This increased by 3.3 times in those patients over 70 years-old. This fact shows that the disease increases with increased age, making this useful data to maintain a screening policy that could improve health quality and coverage in Colombia.