RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To update the recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. METHODS: Experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. RESULTS: Twenty-one recommendations were generated, including strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen and conditional recommendations for the use of tocilizumab and baricitinib for patients on supplemental oxygen or on noninvasive ventilation and anticoagulants to prevent thromboembolism. Due to suspension of use authorization, it was not possible to make recommendations regarding the use of casirivimab + imdevimab. Strong recommendations against the use of azithromycin in patients without suspected bacterial infection, hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, and lopinavir + ritonavir and conditional recommendations against the use of ivermectin and remdesivir were made. CONCLUSION: New recommendations for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were generated, such as those for tocilizumab and baricitinib. Corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are still recommended, the latter with conditional recommendation. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource economy.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Tromboembolia , Humanos , Brasil/epidemiologia , Soroterapia para COVID-19 , Corticosteroides , OxigênioRESUMO
ABSTRACT Objective: To update the recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. Methods: Experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. Results: Twenty-one recommendations were generated, including strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen and conditional recommendations for the use of tocilizumab and baricitinib for patients on supplemental oxygen or on noninvasive ventilation and anticoagulants to prevent thromboembolism. Due to suspension of use authorization, it was not possible to make recommendations regarding the use of casirivimab + imdevimab. Strong recommendations against the use of azithromycin in patients without suspected bacterial infection, hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, and lopinavir + ritonavir and conditional recommendations against the use of ivermectin and remdesivir were made. Conclusion: New recommendations for the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were generated, such as those for tocilizumab and baricitinib. Corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are still recommended, the latter with conditional recommendation. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource economy.
RESUMO Objetivo: Atualizar as recomendações para embasar as decisões para o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. Métodos: A elaboração desta diretriz foi feita por especialistas, incluindo representantes do Ministério da Saúde e metodologistas. O método utilizado para o desenvolvimento rápido de diretrizes baseou-se na adoção e/ou adaptação de diretrizes internacionais existentes (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) e contou com o apoio da plataforma e-COVID-19 RecMap. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o método GRADE. Resultados: Chegaram-se a 21 recomendações, incluindo recomendações fortes quanto ao uso de corticosteroides em pacientes em uso de oxigênio suplementar e recomendações condicionais para o uso de tocilizumabe e baricitinibe, em pacientes com oxigênio suplementar ou ventilação não invasiva, e de anticoagulantes, para prevenção de tromboembolismo. Devido à suspensão da autorização de uso, não foi possível fazer recomendações para o tratamento com casirivimabe + imdevimabe. Foram feitas recomendações fortes contra o uso de azitromicina em pacientes sem suspeita de infecção bacteriana, hidroxicloroquina, plasma convalescente, colchicina e lopinavir + ritonavir, além de recomendações condicionais contra o uso de ivermectina e rendesivir. Conclusão: Foram criadas novas recomendações para o tratamento de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19, como as recomendações de tocilizumabe e baricitinibe. Ainda são recomendados corticosteroides e profilaxia contra tromboembolismo, esta em caráter condicional. Vários medicamentos foram considerados ineficazes e não devem ser usados, no intuito de proporcionar o melhor tratamento segundo os princípios da medicina baseada em evidências e promover a economia de recursos.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Several therapies are being used or proposed for COVID-19, and many lack appropriate evaluations of their effectiveness and safety. The purpose of this document is to develop recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. METHODS: A group of 27 experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. RESULTS: Sixteen recommendations were generated. They include strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen, the use of anticoagulants at prophylactic doses to prevent thromboembolism and the nonuse of antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection. It was not possible to make a recommendation regarding the use of tocilizumab in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 using oxygen due to uncertainties regarding the availability of and access to the drug. Strong recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, lopinavir + ritonavir and antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection and also conditional recommendations against the use of casirivimab + imdevimab, ivermectin and rendesivir were made. CONCLUSION: To date, few therapies have proven effective in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and only corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are recommended. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and promote economical resource use.
OBJETIVOS: Há diversas terapias sendo utilizadas ou propostas para a COVID-19, muitas carecendo de apropriada avaliação de efetividade e segurança. O propósito deste documento é elaborar recomendações para subsidiar decisões sobre o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. MÉTODOS: Um grupo de 27 membros, formado por especialistas, representantes do Ministério da Saúde e metodologistas, integra essa diretriz. Foi utilizado o método de elaboração de diretrizes rápidas, tomando por base a adoção e/ou a adaptação de recomendações a partir de diretrizes internacionais existentes (GRADE ADOLOPMENT), apoiadas pela plataforma e-COVID-19 RecMap. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o método GRADE. RESULTADOS: Foram geradas 16 recomendações. Entre elas, estão recomendações fortes para o uso de corticosteroides em pacientes em uso de oxigênio suplementar, para o uso de anticoagulantes em doses de profilaxia para tromboembolismo e para não uso de antibacterianos nos pacientes sem suspeita de infecção bacteriana. Não foi possível fazer uma recomendação quanto à utilização do tocilizumabe em pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 em uso de oxigênio, pelas incertezas na disponibilidade e de acesso ao medicamento. Foi feita recomendação para não usar azitromicina, casirivimabe + imdevimabe, cloroquina, colchicina, hidroxicloroquina, ivermectina, lopinavir/ ritonavir, plasma convalescente e rendesivir. CONCLUSÃO: Até o momento, poucas terapias se provaram efetivas no tratamento do paciente hospitalizado com COVID-19, sendo recomendados apenas corticosteroides e profilaxia para tromboembolismo. Diversos medicamentos foram considerados ineficazes, devendo ser descartados, de forma a oferecer o melhor tratamento pelos princípios da medicina baseada em evidências e promover economia de recursos não eficazes.
Assuntos
Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Tromboembolia , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Antibacterianos , Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados , Brasil , COVID-19/terapia , Humanos , Imunização Passiva , Oxigênio , Soroterapia para COVID-19RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Several therapies have been used or proposed for the treatment of COVID-19, although their effectiveness and safety have not been properly evaluated. The purpose of this document is to provide recommendations to support decisions about the drug treatment of outpatients with COVID-19 in Brazil. METHODS: A panel consisting of experts from different clinical fields, representatives of the Brazilian Ministry of Health, and methodologists (37 members in total) was responsible for preparing these guidelines. A rapid guideline development method was used, based on the adoption and/or adaptation of recommendations from existing international guidelines combined with additional structured searches for primary studies and new recommendations whenever necessary (GRADE-ADOLOPMENT). The rating of quality of evidence and the drafting of recommendations followed the GRADE method. RESULTS: Ten technologies were evaluated, and 10 recommendations were prepared. Recommendations were made against the use of anticoagulants, azithromycin, budesonide, colchicine, corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine alone or combined with azithromycin, ivermectin, nitazoxanide, and convalescent plasma. It was not possible to make a recommendation regarding the use of monoclonal antibodies in outpatients, as their benefit is uncertain and their cost is high, with limitations of availability and implementation. CONCLUSION: To date, few therapies have demonstrated effectiveness in the treatment of outpatients with COVID-19. Recommendations are restricted to what should not be used, in order to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource savings by aboiding ineffective treatments.
Assuntos
Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Cardiologia , Doenças Transmissíveis , Medicina de Emergência , Geriatria , Azitromicina , Brasil , COVID-19/terapia , Medicina Comunitária , Humanos , Imunização Passiva , Pacientes Ambulatoriais , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Vasculares , Soroterapia para COVID-19RESUMO
Há diversas terapias sendo utilizadas ou propostas para a COVID-19, muitas carecendo de apropriada avaliação de efetividade e segurança. O propósito deste documento é elaborar recomendações para subsidiar decisões sobre o tratamento farmacológico de pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. Métodos: Um grupo de 27 membros, formado por especialistas, representantes do Ministério da Saúde e metodologistas, integra essa diretriz. Foi utilizado o método de elaboração de diretrizes rápidas, tomando por base a adoção e/ou a adaptação de recomendações a partir de diretrizes internacionais existentes (GRADE ADOLOPMENT), apoiadas pela plataforma e-COVID-19 RecMap. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o método GRADE. Resultados: Foram geradas 16 recomendações. Entre elas, estão recomendações fortes para o uso de corticosteroides em pacientes em uso de oxigênio suplementar, para o uso de anticoagulantes em doses de profilaxia para tromboembolismo e para não uso de antibacterianos nos pacientes sem suspeita de infecção bacteriana. Não foi possível fazer uma recomendação quanto à utilização do tocilizumabe em pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 em uso de oxigênio, pelas incertezas na disponibilidade e de acesso ao medicamento. Foi feita recomendação para não usar azitromicina, casirivimabe + imdevimabe, cloroquina, colchicina, hidroxicloroquina, ivermectina, lopinavir/ ritonavir, plasma convalescente e rendesivir. Conclusão: Até o momento, poucas terapias se provaram efetivas no tratamento do paciente hospitalizado com COVID-19, sendo recomendados apenas corticosteroides e profilaxia para tromboembolismo. Diversos medicamentos foram considerados ineficazes, devendo ser descartados, de forma a oferecer o melhor tratamento pelos princípios da medicina baseada em evidências e promover economia de recursos não eficazes.
Several therapies are being used or proposed for COVID-19, and many lack appropriate evaluations of their effectiveness and safety. The purpose of this document is to develop recommendations to support decisions regarding the pharmacological treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Brazil. Methods: A group of 27 experts, including representatives of the Ministry of Health and methodologists, created this guideline. The method used for the rapid development of guidelines was based on the adoption and/or adaptation of existing international guidelines (GRADE ADOLOPMENT) and supported by the e-COVID-19 RecMap platform. The quality of the evidence and the preparation of the recommendations followed the GRADE method. Results: Sixteen recommendations were generated. They include strong recommendations for the use of corticosteroids in patients using supplemental oxygen, the use of anticoagulants at prophylactic doses to prevent thromboembolism and the nonuse of antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection. It was not possible to make a recommendation regarding the use of tocilizumab in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 using oxygen due to uncertainties regarding the availability of and access to the drug. Strong recommendations against the use of hydroxychloroquine, convalescent plasma, colchicine, lopinavir + ritonavir and antibiotics in patients without suspected bacterial infection and also conditional recommendations against the use of casirivimab + imdevimab, ivermectin and rendesivir were made. Conclusion: To date, few therapies have proven effective in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, and only corticosteroids and prophylaxis for thromboembolism are recommended. Several drugs were considered ineffective and should not be used to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and promote economical resource use.
Assuntos
Humanos , SARS-CoV-2/efeitos dos fármacos , COVID-19/tratamento farmacológico , Oxigenoterapia , Tromboembolia/prevenção & controle , Imunização Passiva , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Lopinavir/uso terapêutico , Diretrizes para o Planejamento em Saúde , Hidroxicloroquina , Antibacterianos/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
ABSTRACT Background Several therapies have been used or proposed for the treatment of COVID-19, although their effectiveness and safety have not been properly evaluated. The purpose of this document is to provide recommendations to support decisions about the drug treatment of outpatients with COVID-19 in Brazil. Methods A panel consisting of experts from different clinical fields, representatives of the Brazilian Ministry of Health, and methodologists (37 members in total) was responsible for preparing these guidelines. A rapid guideline development method was used, based on the adoption and/or adaptation of recommendations from existing international guidelines combined with additional structured searches for primary studies and new recommendations whenever necessary (GRADE-ADOLOPMENT). The rating of quality of evidence and the drafting of recommendations followed the GRADE method. Results Ten technologies were evaluated, and 10 recommendations were prepared. Recommendations were made against the use of anticoagulants, azithromycin, budesonide, colchicine, corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine alone or combined with azithromycin, ivermectin, nitazoxanide, and convalescent plasma. It was not possible to make a recommendation regarding the use of monoclonal antibodies in outpatients, as their benefit is uncertain and their cost is high, with limitations of availability and implementation. Conclusion To date, few therapies have demonstrated effectiveness in the treatment of outpatients with COVID-19. Recommendations are restricted to what should not be used, in order to provide the best treatment according to the principles of evidence-based medicine and to promote resource savings by aboiding ineffective treatments.
RESUMO
Monitoring trends of contraceptive use and identifying the groups with less coverage are needed to guide public policies and make them more efficient. But, in Brazil, recent data about these aspects are limited. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of contraceptive use and its inequalities during adolescence and early adulthood. Data from the 1993 Pelotas birth cohort, Rio Grande do Sul State, Brazil, were used. At 15, 18 and 22 years, respectively, 335, 1,458 and 1,711 women reported having started their sexual lives and were included in analysis. Prevalence and 95% confidence intervals were obtained to describe the most used contraceptive methods. Inequalities in modern contraceptive use were evaluated according to wealth index, scholastic backwardness and ethnicity. In all follow-ups, more than 80% of women used at least one modern method. The use of barrier methods decreased with age; at 22 this prevalence was 36.3%. Such use concomitant with other modern methods was lower than 50% in all follow-ups. We observed inequalities in the use of modern contraceptive methods, mainly in barrier methods used with other modern methods. These findings may contribute and improve the public policies in family planning.
Assuntos
Coorte de Nascimento , Anticoncepcionais , Adolescente , Adulto , Brasil , Anticoncepção , Feminino , Humanos , Prevalência , Adulto JovemRESUMO
Monitoring trends of contraceptive use and identifying the groups with less coverage are needed to guide public policies and make them more efficient. But, in Brazil, recent data about these aspects are limited. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of contraceptive use and its inequalities during adolescence and early adulthood. Data from the 1993 Pelotas birth cohort, Rio Grande do Sul State, Brazil, were used. At 15, 18 and 22 years, respectively, 335, 1,458 and 1,711 women reported having started their sexual lives and were included in analysis. Prevalence and 95% confidence intervals were obtained to describe the most used contraceptive methods. Inequalities in modern contraceptive use were evaluated according to wealth index, scholastic backwardness and ethnicity. In all follow-ups, more than 80% of women used at least one modern method. The use of barrier methods decreased with age; at 22 this prevalence was 36.3%. Such use concomitant with other modern methods was lower than 50% in all follow-ups. We observed inequalities in the use of modern contraceptive methods, mainly in barrier methods used with other modern methods. These findings may contribute and improve the public policies in family planning.
É necessário monitorar as tendências no uso de métodos contraceptivos e identificar os grupos com menor cobertura, a fim de orientar as políticas públicas e torná-las mais eficientes. Entretanto, no Brasil, são limitados os dados recentes sobre a cobertura dos métodos contraceptivos. O estudo buscou investigar a prevalência do uso de métodos contraceptivos e as desigualdades no uso durante a adolescência e início da vida adulta. Foram usados dados da coorte de nascimentos de Pelotas de 1993, Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil. Aos 15, 18 e 22 anos, respectivamente, 335, 1.458 e 1.711 mulheres informaram já terem iniciado a vida sexual e foram incluídas na análise. Foram obtidas as prevalências e intervalos de 95% de confiança para descrever os métodos contraceptivos mais utilizados. As desigualdades no uso de métodos contraceptivos modernos foram avaliadas de acordo com o índice de riqueza, atraso escolar e cor da pele. Em todos os seguimentos, mais de 80% das mulheres informavam usar pelo menos um método moderno. O uso de métodos de barreira diminuiu com a idade (prevalência de 36,3% aos 22 anos). Esse uso junto com outro método moderno era menos de 50% em todos os seguimentos. Foram observadas desigualdades no uso de métodos contraceptivos modernos, principalmente no uso de método de barreira junto com outro método moderno. Os achados podem contribuir para melhorar as políticas públicas em planejamento familiar.
Es necesario monitorizar las tendencias en el uso de métodos contraceptivos e identificar los grupos con menor cobertura, a fin de orientar las políticas públicas y hacerlas más eficientes. Sin embargo, en Brasil, son limitados los datos recientes sobre la cobertura de los métodos contraceptivos. El estudio buscó investigar la prevalencia del uso de métodos contraceptivos y las desigualdades en su uso, durante la adolescencia e inicio de la vida adulta. Se usaron datos de la cohorte de nacimientos de 1993 en Pelotas, Río Grande do Sul, Brasil. A los 15, 18 y 22 años, respectivamente, 335, 1.458 y 1.711 mujeres informaron ya haber iniciado la vida sexual y fueron incluidas en el análisis. Se obtuvieron las prevalencias e intervalos de 95% de confianza para describir los métodos contraceptivos más utilizados. Las desigualdades en el uso de métodos contraceptivos modernos fueron evaluadas de acuerdo con el índice de riqueza, atraso escolar y color de piel. En todos los seguimientos, más de un 80% de las mujeres informaban usar por lo menos un método moderno. El uso de métodos de barrera disminuía con la edad (prevalencia de 36,3% a los 22 años). Ese uso junto con otro método moderno era menos de un 50% en todos los seguimientos. Se observaron desigualdades en el uso de métodos contraceptivos modernos, principalmente en el uso del método de barrera junto a otro método moderno. Los hallazgos pueden contribuir a mejorar las políticas públicas en la planificación familiar.
Assuntos
Humanos , Feminino , Adolescente , Adulto , Adulto Jovem , Anticoncepcionais , Parto , Brasil , Prevalência , AnticoncepçãoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe the clinical characteristics and predictors of mechanical ventilation of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in a single center. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed and included adult inpatients hospitalized from March 17th to May 3rd, 2020, who were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Clinical and demographic characteristics were extracted from electronic medical records. RESULTS: Overall, 88 consecutive patients were included in this study. The median age of the patients was 63 years (IQR 49 - 71); 59 (67%) were male, 65 (86%) had a college degree and 67 (76%) had at least one comorbidity. Twenty-nine (33%) patients were admitted to the intensive care unit, 18 (20%) patients needed mechanical ventilation, and 9 (10.2%) died during hospitalization. The median length of stay in the intensive care unit and the median duration of mechanical ventilation was 23 and 29.5 days, respectively. An age ≥ 65 years was an independent risk factor for mechanical ventilation (OR 8.4 95%CI 1.3 - 55.6 p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Our findings describe the first wave of Brazilian patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Age was the strongest predictor of respiratory insufficiency and the need for mechanical ventilation in our population.
OBJETIVO: Descrever as características clínicas e os preditores de ventilação mecânica em pacientes adultos internados com COVID-19. MÉTODOS: Conduziu-se um estudo de coorte retrospectiva com inclusão de pacientes hospitalizados entre 17 de março e 3 de maio de 2020, que tiveram o diagnóstico de infecção pelo SARS-CoV-2. As características clínicas e demográficas foram extraídas de registros em prontuário eletrônico. RESULTADOS: Incluíram-se no estudo 88 pacientes consecutivos. A mediana da idade dos pacientes foi de 63 anos (IQR: 49 - 71); 59 (67%) pacientes eram do sexo masculino, 65 (86%) tinham educação universitária e 67 (76%) tinham, no mínimo, uma comorbidade. Dentre eles, 29 (33%) pacientes foram admitidos à unidade de terapia intensiva, 18 (20%) necessitaram de ventilação mecânica e nove (10,2%) morreram durante a hospitalização. O tempo mediano de permanência na unidade de terapia intensiva e o tempo mediano de ventilação mecânica foram, respectivamente, de 23 e 29,5 dias. Idade acima ou igual a 65 anos foi fator de risco independente para ventilação mecânica (RC: 8,4; IC95% de 1,3 - 55,6; valor de p = 0,02). CONCLUSÃO: Nossos achados descrevem a primeira onda de pacientes brasileiros hospitalizados por COVID-19. Em nossa população, idade foi o maior preditor de insuficiência respiratória e necessidade de ventilação mecânica.
Assuntos
COVID-19/terapia , Hospitalização , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva/estatística & dados numéricos , Respiração Artificial/estatística & dados numéricos , Insuficiência Respiratória/epidemiologia , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Brasil , COVID-19/complicações , COVID-19/fisiopatologia , Estudos de Coortes , Feminino , Humanos , Tempo de Internação , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Insuficiência Respiratória/terapia , Insuficiência Respiratória/virologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
RESUMO Objetivo: Descrever as características clínicas e os preditores de ventilação mecânica em pacientes adultos internados com COVID-19. Métodos: Conduziu-se um estudo de coorte retrospectiva com inclusão de pacientes hospitalizados entre 17 de março e 3 de maio de 2020, que tiveram o diagnóstico de infecção pelo SARS-CoV-2. As características clínicas e demográficas foram extraídas de registros em prontuário eletrônico. Resultados: Incluíram-se no estudo 88 pacientes consecutivos. A mediana da idade dos pacientes foi de 63 anos (IQR: 49 - 71); 59 (67%) pacientes eram do sexo masculino, 65 (86%) tinham educação universitária e 67 (76%) tinham, no mínimo, uma comorbidade. Dentre eles, 29 (33%) pacientes foram admitidos à unidade de terapia intensiva, 18 (20%) necessitaram de ventilação mecânica e nove (10,2%) morreram durante a hospitalização. O tempo mediano de permanência na unidade de terapia intensiva e o tempo mediano de ventilação mecânica foram, respectivamente, de 23 e 29,5 dias. Idade acima ou igual a 65 anos foi fator de risco independente para ventilação mecânica (RC: 8,4; IC95% de 1,3 - 55,6; valor de p = 0,02). Conclusão: Nossos achados descrevem a primeira onda de pacientes brasileiros hospitalizados por COVID-19. Em nossa população, idade foi o maior preditor de insuficiência respiratória e necessidade de ventilação mecânica.
Abstract Objective: This study aims to describe the clinical characteristics and predictors of mechanical ventilation of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in a single center. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed and included adult inpatients hospitalized from March 17th to May 3rd, 2020, who were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Clinical and demographic characteristics were extracted from electronic medical records. Results: Overall, 88 consecutive patients were included in this study. The median age of the patients was 63 years (IQR 49 - 71); 59 (67%) were male, 65 (86%) had a college degree and 67 (76%) had at least one comorbidity. Twenty-nine (33%) patients were admitted to the intensive care unit, 18 (20%) patients needed mechanical ventilation, and 9 (10.2%) died during hospitalization. The median length of stay in the intensive care unit and the median duration of mechanical ventilation was 23 and 29.5 days, respectively. An age ≥ 65 years was an independent risk factor for mechanical ventilation (OR 8.4 95%CI 1.3 - 55.6 p = 0.02). Conclusion: Our findings describe the first wave of Brazilian patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Age was the strongest predictor of respiratory insufficiency and the need for mechanical ventilation in our population.
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Respiração Artificial/estatística & dados numéricos , Insuficiência Respiratória/epidemiologia , COVID-19/terapia , Hospitalização , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva/estatística & dados numéricos , Insuficiência Respiratória/terapia , Insuficiência Respiratória/virologia , Brasil , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Estudos de Coortes , Fatores Etários , COVID-19/complicações , COVID-19/fisiopatologia , Tempo de InternaçãoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Different therapies are currently used, considered, or proposed for the treatment of COVID-19; for many of those therapies, no appropriate assessment of effectiveness and safety was performed. This document aims to provide scientifically available evidence-based information in a transparent interpretation, to subsidize decisions related to the pharmacological therapy of COVID-19 in Brazil. METHODS: A group of 27 experts and methodologists integrated a task-force formed by professionals from the Brazilian Association of Intensive Care Medicine (Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira - AMIB), the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (Sociedad Brasileira de Infectologia - SBI) and the Brazilian Society of Pulmonology and Tisiology (Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia - SBPT). Rapid systematic reviews, updated on April 28, 2020, were conducted. The assessment of the quality of evidence and the development of recommendations followed the GRADE system. The recommendations were written on May 5, 8, and 13, 2020. RESULTS: Eleven recommendations were issued based on low or very-low level evidence. We do not recommend the routine use of hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, azithromycin, lopinavir/ritonavir, corticosteroids, or tocilizumab for the treatment of COVID-19. Prophylactic heparin should be used in hospitalized patients, however, no anticoagulation should be provided for patients without a specific clinical indication. Antibiotics and oseltamivir should only be considered for patients with suspected bacterial or influenza coinfection, respectively. CONCLUSION: So far no pharmacological intervention was proven effective and safe to warrant its use in the routine treatment of COVID-19 patients; therefore such patients should ideally be treated in the context of clinical trials. The recommendations herein provided will be revised continuously aiming to capture newly generated evidence.
Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , COVID-19 , Humanos , PandemiasRESUMO
RESUMO Introdução: Há diversas terapias sendo utilizadas, consideradas ou propostas para o tratamento da COVID-19, muitas carecendo de apropriada avaliação de efetividade e segurança. O propósito deste documento é fornecer recomendações baseadas nas evidências científicas disponíveis e em sua interpretação transparente, para subsidiar decisões sobre o tratamento farmacológico da COVID-19 no Brasil. Métodos: Um grupo de 27 especialistas e metodologistas integraram a força-tarefa formada pela Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira (AMIB), pela Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia (SBI) e pela Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia (SBPT). Foram realizadas revisões sistemáticas rápidas, atualizadas até 28 de abril de 2020. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o sistema GRADE. As recomendações foram elaboradas nos dias 5, 8 e 13 de maio de 2020. Resultados: Foram geradas 11 recomendações, embasadas em evidência de nível baixo ou muito baixo. Não há indicação para uso de rotina de hidroxicloroquina, cloroquina, azitromicina, lopinavir/ritonavir, corticosteroides ou tocilizumabe no tratamento da COVID-19. Heparina deve ser utilizada em doses profiláticas no paciente hospitalizado, mas não deve ser realizada anticoagulação na ausência de indicação clínica específica. Antibacterianos e oseltamivir devem ser considerados somente nos pacientes em suspeita de coinfecção bacteriana ou por influenza, respectivamente. Conclusão: Até o momento, não há intervenções farmacológicas com efetividade e segurança comprovada que justifiquem seu uso de rotina no tratamento da COVID-19, devendo os pacientes serem tratados preferencialmente no contexto de pesquisa clínica. As recomendações serão revisadas continuamente, de forma a capturar a geração de novas evidências.
ABSTRACT Introduction: Different therapies are currently used, considered, or proposed for the treatment of COVID-19; for many of those therapies, no appropriate assessment of effectiveness and safety was performed. This document aims to provide scientifically available evidence-based information in a transparent interpretation, to subsidize decisions related to the pharmacological therapy of COVID-19 in Brazil. Methods: A group of 27 experts and methodologists integrated a task-force formed by professionals from the Brazilian Association of Intensive Care Medicine (Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira - AMIB), the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (Sociedad Brasileira de Infectologia - SBI) and the Brazilian Society of Pulmonology and Tisiology (Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia - SBPT). Rapid systematic reviews, updated on April 28, 2020, were conducted. The assessment of the quality of evidence and the development of recommendations followed the GRADE system. The recommendations were written on May 5, 8, and 13, 2020. Results: Eleven recommendations were issued based on low or very-low level evidence. We do not recommend the routine use of hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, azithromycin, lopinavir/ritonavir, corticosteroids, or tocilizumab for the treatment of COVID-19. Prophylactic heparin should be used in hospitalized patients, however, no anticoagulation should be provided for patients without a specific clinical indication. Antibiotics and oseltamivir should only be considered for patients with suspected bacterial or influenza coinfection, respectively. Conclusion: So far no pharmacological intervention was proven effective and safe to warrant its use in the routine treatment of COVID-19 patients; therefore such patients should ideally be treated in the context of clinical trials. The recommendations herein provided will be revised continuously aiming to capture newly generated evidence.
Assuntos
Humanos , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Pandemias , COVID-19RESUMO
Different therapies are currently used, considered, or proposed for the treatment of COVID-19; for many of those therapies, no appropriate assessment of effectiveness and safety was performed. This document aims to provide scientifically available evidence-based information in a transparent interpretation, to subsidize decisions related to the pharmacological therapy of COVID-19 in Brazil. A group of 27 experts and methodologists integrated a task-force formed by professionals from the Brazilian Association of Intensive Care Medicine (Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira - AMIB), the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (Sociedad Brasileira de Infectologia - SBI) and the Brazilian Society of Pulmonology and Tisiology (Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia - SBPT). Rapid systematic reviews, updated on April 28, 2020, were conducted. The assessment of the quality of evidence and the development of recommendations followed the GRADE system. The recommendations were written on May 5, 8, and 13, 2020. Eleven recommendations were issued based on low or very-low level evidence. We do not recommend the routine use of hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, azithromycin, lopinavir/ritonavir, corticosteroids, or tocilizumab for the treatment of COVID-19. Prophylactic heparin should be used in hospitalized patients, however, no anticoagulation should be provided for patients without a specific clinical indication. Antibiotics and oseltamivir should only be considered for patients with suspected bacterial or influenza coinfection, respectively. So far no pharmacological intervention was proven effective and safe to warrant its use in the routine treatment of COVID-19 patients; therefore such patients should ideally be treated in the context of clinical trials. The recommendations herein provided will be revised continuously aiming to capture newly generated evidence.
Há diversas terapias sendo utilizadas, consideradas ou propostas para o tratamento da COVID-19, muitas carecendo de apropriada avaliação de efetividade e segurança. O propósito deste documento é fornecer recomendações baseadas nas evidências científicas disponíveis e em sua interpretação transparente, para subsidiar decisões sobre o tratamento farmacológico da COVID-19 no Brasil. Um grupo de 27 especialistas e metodologistas integraram a força-tarefa formada pela Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira (AMIB), pela Sociedade Brasileira de Infectologia (SBI) e pela Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia (SBPT). Foram realizadas revisões sistemáticas rápidas, atualizadas até 28 de abril de 2020. A qualidade das evidências e a elaboração das recomendações seguiram o sistema GRADE. As recomendações foram elaboradas nos dias 5, 8 e 13 de maio de 2020. Foram geradas 11 recomendações, embasadas em evidência de nível baixo ou muito baixo. Não há indicação para uso de rotina de hidroxicloroquina, cloroquina, azitromicina, lopinavir/ritonavir, corticosteroides ou tocilizumabe no tratamento da COVID-19. Heparina deve ser utilizada em doses profiláticas no paciente hospitalizado, mas não deve ser realizada anticoagulação na ausência de indicação clínica específica. Antibacterianos e oseltamivir devem ser considerados somente nos pacientes em suspeita de coinfecção bacteriana ou por influenza, respectivamente. Até o momento, não há intervenções farmacológicas com efetividade e segurança comprovada que justifiquem seu uso de rotina no tratamento da COVID-19, devendo os pacientes serem tratados preferencialmente no contexto de pesquisa clínica. As recomendações serão revisadas continuamente, de forma a capturar a geração de novas evidências
Assuntos
Humanos , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Betacoronavirus/efeitos dos fármacos , Heparina/uso terapêutico , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Ritonavir/uso terapêutico , Oseltamivir/uso terapêutico , Lopinavir/uso terapêutico , Aminoquinolinas/uso terapêutico , Antibacterianos/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To describe the sexual behavior of freshmen undergraduate students according to demographic, economic, psychosocial and behavioral characteristics, and evaluate the prevalence of risky sexual behavior and its associated factors. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of the census type with undergraduate students over 18 years old of 80 undergraduate courses of the Universidade Federal de Pelotas (UFPel), in Rio Grande do Sul (RS), who entered in the first semester of 2017 and remained enrolled in the second semester. Undergraduate students who reported having had sex were evaluated. We considered as risky sexual behavior having more than one sexual partner within the last three months and not having used condoms in the last sexual intercourse. RESULTS: The prevalence of risky sexual behavior was 9% (95%CI 7.6-10.5). Men presented more risky behavior than women, with a prevalence of 10.8% and 7.5%, respectively. Of the undergraduate students, 45% did not use condoms in the last sexual intercourse, and 24% had two partners or more within three months before the survey. Smartphone applications for sexual purposes were used by 23% of students within three months before the survey. Risky sexual behavior was associated with gender, age at first sexual intercourse, frequency of alcohol consumption, consumption of psychoactive substances before the last sexual intercourse and use of smartphone applications for sexual purposes. CONCLUSION: Although undergraduate students are expected to be an informed population, the prevalence of risky sexual behavior was important, indicating the need to expand public investment in sexual education and awareness actions.
Assuntos
Censos , Comportamentos de Risco à Saúde , Comportamento Sexual/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudantes/estatística & dados numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Consumo de Bebidas Alcoólicas/epidemiologia , Consumo de Bebidas Alcoólicas/psicologia , Brasil/epidemiologia , Coito/psicologia , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Prevalência , Fatores Sexuais , Comportamento Sexual/psicologia , Parceiros Sexuais/psicologia , Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis/epidemiologia , Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis/psicologia , Fatores Socioeconômicos , Estudantes/psicologia , Adulto JovemRESUMO
ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To describe the sexual behavior of freshmen undergraduate students according to demographic, economic, psychosocial and behavioral characteristics, and evaluate the prevalence of risky sexual behavior and its associated factors. METHODS A cross-sectional study of the census type with undergraduate students over 18 years old of 80 undergraduate courses of the Universidade Federal de Pelotas (UFPel), in Rio Grande do Sul (RS), who entered in the first semester of 2017 and remained enrolled in the second semester. Undergraduate students who reported having had sex were evaluated. We considered as risky sexual behavior having more than one sexual partner within the last three months and not having used condoms in the last sexual intercourse. RESULTS The prevalence of risky sexual behavior was 9% (95%CI 7.6-10.5). Men presented more risky behavior than women, with a prevalence of 10.8% and 7.5%, respectively. Of the undergraduate students, 45% did not use condoms in the last sexual intercourse, and 24% had two partners or more within three months before the survey. Smartphone applications for sexual purposes were used by 23% of students within three months before the survey. Risky sexual behavior was associated with gender, age at first sexual intercourse, frequency of alcohol consumption, consumption of psychoactive substances before the last sexual intercourse and use of smartphone applications for sexual purposes. CONCLUSION Although undergraduate students are expected to be an informed population, the prevalence of risky sexual behavior was important, indicating the need to expand public investment in sexual education and awareness actions.
RESUMO OBJETIVO Descrever o comportamento sexual de ingressantes universitários de acordo com características demográficas, econômicas, psicossociais e comportamentais, e avaliar a prevalência de comportamento sexual de risco e seus fatores associados. MÉTODOS Estudo de delineamento transversal, do tipo censo, com universitários maiores de 18 anos, de 80 cursos de graduação da Universidade Federal de Pelotas (UFPel), no RS, que ingressaram no primeiro semestre de 2017 e que permaneceram matriculados no segundo semestre. Avaliou-se o comportamento sexual de risco entre os estudantes que relataram já ter tido relações sexuais alguma vez na vida, considerado quando relatado mais de um parceiro sexual nos últimos três meses e não ter utilizado preservativo na última relação. RESULTADOS A prevalência de comportamento sexual de risco foi de 9% (IC95% 7,6-10,5). Estudantes do sexo masculino apresentaram mais comportamento de risco do que estudantes do sexo feminino, com prevalência de 10,8% e 7,5%, respectivamente. Dos universitários, 45% não utilizaram preservativo na última relação e 24% tiveram dois parceiros ou mais nos últimos três meses. Os aplicativos de celular para fins sexuais nos últimos três meses foram utilizados por 23% dos estudantes. O comportamento sexual de risco esteve associado com sexo, idade da primeira relação sexual, frequência de consumo de bebidas alcoólicas, consumo de substâncias psicoativas antes da última relação e uso de aplicativos de celular para fins sexuais. CONCLUSÃO Embora se espere que os universitários sejam uma população informada, a prevalência de comportamento sexual de risco foi importante, indicando a necessidade de ampliação do investimento público em ações de educação sexual e conscientização.
Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Adolescente , Adulto , Adulto Jovem , Comportamento Sexual/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudantes/estatística & dados numéricos , Censos , Comportamentos de Risco à Saúde , Comportamento Sexual/psicologia , Fatores Socioeconômicos , Estudantes/psicologia , Brasil/epidemiologia , Consumo de Bebidas Alcoólicas/psicologia , Consumo de Bebidas Alcoólicas/epidemiologia , Parceiros Sexuais/psicologia , Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis/psicologia , Infecções Sexualmente Transmissíveis/epidemiologia , Fatores Sexuais , Prevalência , Estudos Transversais , Coito/psicologiaRESUMO
Several studies have examined neonatal diabetes, a rare disease characterized by hyperglycemia and low insulin levels that is usually diagnosed in the first 6 month of life. Recently, the effects of diabetes on the brain have received considerable attention. In addition, hyperglycemia may perturb brain function and might be associated with neuronal death in adult rats. However, few studies have investigated the damaging effects of neonatal hyperglycemia on the rat brain during central nervous system (CNS) development, particularly the mechanisms involved in the disease. Thus, in the present work, we investigated whether neonatal hyperglycemia induced by streptozotocin (STZ) promoted cell death and altered the levels of proteins involved in survival/death pathways in the rat brain. Cell death was assessed using FluoroJade C (FJC) staining and the expression of the p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase (p38), phosphorylated-c-Jun amino-terminal kinase (p-JNK), c-Jun amino-terminal kinase (JNK), protein kinase B (Akt), phosphorylated-protein kinase B (p-Akt), glycogen synthase kinase-3ß (Gsk3ß), B-cell lymphoma 2 (Bcl2) and Bcl2-associated X protein (Bax) protein were measured by Western blotting. The main results of this study showed that the metabolic alterations observed in diabetic rats (hyperglycemia and hypoinsulinemia) increased p38 expression and decreased p-Akt expression, suggesting that cell survival was altered and cell death was induced, which was confirmed by FJC staining. Therefore, the metabolic conditions observed during neonatal hyperglycemia may contribute to the harmful effect of diabetes on the CNS in a crucial phase of postnatal neuronal development.
