Non-pharmaceutical interventions to combat COVID-19 in the Americas described through daily sub-national data.

This dataset covers national and subnational non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) to combat the COVID-19 pandemic in the Americas. Prior to the development of a vaccine, NPI were governments' primary tools to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. Variation in subnational responses to COVID-19 is high and is salient for health outcomes. This dataset captures governments' dynamic, varied NPI to combat COVID-19 for 80% of Latin America's population from each country's first case through December 2021. These daily data encompass all national and subnational units in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, and Peru. The dataset includes individual and aggregate indices of nine NPI: school closures, work suspensions, public event cancellations, public transport suspensions, information campaigns, local travel restrictions, international travel controls, stay-at-home orders, and restrictions on the size of gatherings. We also collected data on mask mandates as a separate indicator. Local country-teams drew from multiple data sources, resulting in high-quality, reliable data. The dataset thus allows for consistent, meaningful comparisons of NPI within and across countries during the pandemic.

Strengthening Health Systems To Face Pandemics: Subnational Policy Responses To COVID-19 In Latin America.

Nonpharmaceutical interventions such as stay-at-home orders continue to be the main policy response to the COVID-19 pandemic in countries with limited or slow vaccine rollout. Often, nonpharmaceutical interventions are managed or implemented at the subnational level, yet little information exists on within-country variation in nonpharmaceutical intervention policies. We focused on Latin America, a COVID-19 epicenter, and collected and analyzed daily subnational data on public health measures in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, and Peru to compare within- and across-country nonpharmaceutical interventions. We showed high heterogeneity in the adoption of these interventions at the subnational level in Brazil and Mexico; consistent national guidelines with subnational heterogeneity in Argentina and Colombia; and homogeneous policies guided by centralized national policies in Bolivia, Chile, and Peru. Our results point to the role of subnational policies and governments in responding to health crises. We found that subnational responses cannot replace coordinated national policy. Our findings imply that governments should focus on evidence-based national policies while coordinating with subnational governments to tailor local responses to changing local conditions.

A partisan pandemic: state government public health policies to combat COVID-19 in Brazil.

INTRODUCTION: To present an analysis of the Brazilian health system and subnational (state) variation in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, based on 10 non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We collected daily information on implementation of 10 NPI designed to inform the public of health risks and promote distancing and mask use at the national level for eight countries across the Americas. We then analyse the adoption of the 10 policies across Brazil's 27 states over time, individually and using a composite index. We draw on this index to assess the timeliness and rigour of NPI implementation across the country, from the date of the first case, 26 February 2020. We also compile Google data on population mobility by state to describe changes in mobility throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Brazil's national NPI response was the least stringent among countries analysed. In the absence of a unified federal response to the pandemic, Brazilian state policy implementation was neither homogenous nor synchronised. The median NPI was no stay-at-home order, a recommendation to wear masks in public space but not a requirement, a full school closure and partial restrictions on businesses, public transportation, intrastate travel, interstate travel and international travel. These restrictions were implemented 45 days after the first case in each state, on average. Rondônia implemented the earliest and most rigorous policies, with school closures, business closures, information campaigns and restrictions on movement 24 days after the first case; Mato Grosso do Sul had the fewest, least stringent restrictions on movement, business operations and no mask recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: The study identifies wide variation in national-level NPI responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our focus on Brazil identifies subsequent variability in how and when states implemented NPI to contain COVID-19. States' NPIs and their scores on the composite policy index both align with the governors' political affiliations: opposition governors implemented earlier, more stringent sanitary measures than those supporting the Bolsonaro administration. A strong, unified national response to a pandemic is essential for keeping the population safe and disease-free, both at the outset of an outbreak and as communities begin to reopen. This national response should be aligned with state and municipal implementation of NPI, which we show is not the case in Brazil.

Principialismo, bioética personalista y principios de acción en medicina y en servicios de salud / Principlism, Personalist Bioethics and Principles of Action in Medicine and Health Services / Principialismo, bioética personalista e princípios de ação em medicina e serviços de saúde

Resumen Dado que hay una brecha y diferencias entre conceptos bioéticos y otros principios de acción provenientes de la práctica de la medicina moderna, su comparación es razonable. La medicina moderna ha generado principios de acción basados en la evidencia y principios de calidad en medicina, y la argumentación bioética recurre frecuentemente al principialismo, o a la bioética personalista. Este artículo pretende ilustrar las características de las relaciones entre estos conceptos y su potencial enriquecimiento mutuo. Se propone una matriz de comparación simple y práctica, para cotejar la relación entre los principios. Estos conceptos tienen una superposición significativa. Sin embargo, tanto en la historia de las ideas como en su formulación son muy diferentes. Se enfatiza el valor contextual de este análisis dado por las tendencias de la salud global, y algunas implicaciones para la medicina de bioética personalista.

Abstract Since there is a gap and differences between bioethical concepts and other principles of action arising from the practice of modern medicine, their comparison is reasonable. Modern medicine has created principles of action based on evidence and principles of quality in medicine, and bioethical argumentation frequently resorts to principlism or personalist bioethics. This article intends to illustrate the characteristics of the relationships between these concepts and their potential mutual enrichment. A simple, practical comparison matrix is proposed to compare the relationship between principles. These concepts have a significant overlap; however, both in the history of ideas and in their formulation, they are very dissimilar. Emphasis is placed on the contextual value of this analysis given by global health trends and some implications for medicine from personalist bioethics.

Resumo Dado que existe uma brecha e diferenças entre conceitos bioéticos e outros princípios de ação que provêm da prática da medicina moderna, a comparação deles é razoável. A medicina moderna gerou princípios de ação baseados em evidências e princípios de qualidade na medicina, e a argumentação bioética frequentemente recorre ao principialismo ou à bioética personalista. Este artigo tem como objetivo ilustrar as características das relações entre esses conceitos e seu potencial de enriquecimento mútuo. Uma matriz de comparação simples e prática é proposta para comparar a relação entre os princípios. Esses conceitos têm uma sobreposição significativa. No entanto, tanto na história das ideias como na sua formulação, são muito diferentes. O valor contextual, dado pelas tendências globais de saúde, e algumas implicações para a medicina bioética personalista são enfatizados nesta análise.

Reducción de prescripción inapropiada y eventos adversos a medicamentos en ancianos hospitalizados / Reduction of inappropriate prescriptions and adverse effects to medications in hospitalized elderly patients

La combinación de prescripción inapropiada de medicamentos (PIM) y prescripción apropiada omitida (PPO) en ancianos requiere intervenciones múltiples para reducir su magnitud y los subsecuentes eventos adversos. Este estudio tiene como objetivo evaluar la PIM, la PPO, y los eventos adversos a medicamentos (EAM) antes y después de la intervención de un farmacéutico clínico sobre la prescripción del médico. En un estudio de tipo pre-post, se analizó la prescripción de un total de 16 542 fármacos realizada a 1262 pacientes aplicando los criterios STOPP-START (screening tool of older people's prescriptions/screening tool to alert to right treatment). La intervención consistió en la difusión de los criterios STOPP-START en todas las áreas del hospital mediante clases y publicaciones y las sugerencias diarias del farmacéutico clínico al médico responsable sobre la prescripción a cada paciente. Antes de la intervención, la PIM fue 48.9% al ingreso y 46.1% al egreso y luego de la intervención 47.4% al ingreso y 16.7% al egreso. La PPO antes de la intervención fue 10% al ingreso y 7.6% al egreso; después de la intervención fue 12.2% al ingreso y 7.8% al egreso. El porcentaje de pacientes con EAM fue 50.9% antes de la intervención y 34.4% después. Las readmisiones a emergencias fueron 12.2% y 4.7% antes y después de la intervención. La PIM, los EAM, el error de conciliación, la interacción medicamentosa clínicamente grave y el delirio fueron reducidos significativamente. Se concluye que, coincidiendo con buena parte de la literatura internacional, la intervención obtuvo resultados positivos.

Together, potentially inappropriate prescribing of medications (PIP) and appropriate prescribing omission (APO) constitute a problem that requires multiple interventions to reduce its size and the occurrence of adverse drug events (ADE). This study aims to assess PIP, APO, ADE before and after the intervention of a clinical pharmacist over medical prescriptions for elderly hospitalized patients. In a before-after study, a total of 16 542 prescriptions for 1262 patients were analyzed applying the criteria defined in both STOPP- START (screening tool of older people's prescriptions and screening tool to alert to right treatment). The intervention consisted in lectures and publications on STOPP-START criteria made available to all the areas of the hospital and suggestions made by the clinical pharmacist to the physician on each individual prescription. Before intervention, PIM was 48.9% on admission and 46.1% at discharge, while after the intervention it was 47.4% on admission and 16.7% at discharge. APO was 10% on admission and 7.6% at discharge, while after intervention it was 12.2% on admission and 7.9% at discharge. ADE were 50.9% before and 34.4% after intervention. The frequency of return to emergency was 12.2% and 4.7% before and after intervention. PIM, EAM, conciliation error, clinically serious drug interaction, and delirium were reduced to statistically significant levels. In line with various international studies, the intervention showed to attain positive results.

[Reduction of inappropriate prescriptions and adverse effects to medications in hospitalized elderly patients]. / Reducción de prescripción inapropiada y eventos adversos a medicamentos en ancianos hospitalizados.

Together, potentially inappropriate prescribing of medications (PIP) and appropriate prescribing omission (APO) constitute a problem that requires multiple interventions to reduce its size and the occurrence of adverse drug events (ADE). This study aims to assess PIP, APO, ADE before and after the intervention of a clinical pharmacist over medical prescriptions for elderly hospitalized patients. In a before-after study, a total of 16 542 prescriptions for 1262 patients were analyzed applying the criteria defined in both STOPP- START (screening tool of older people's prescriptions and screening tool to alert to right treatment). The intervention consisted in lectures and publications on STOPP-START criteria made available to all the areas of the hospital and suggestions made by the clinical pharmacist to the physician on each individual prescription. Before intervention, PIM was 48.9% on admission and 46.1% at discharge, while after the intervention it was 47.4% on admission and 16.7% at discharge. APO was 10% on admission and 7.6% at discharge, while after intervention it was 12.2% on admission and 7.9% at discharge. ADE were 50.9% before and 34.4% after intervention. The frequency of return to emergency was 12.2% and 4.7% before and after intervention. PIM, EAM, conciliation error, clinically serious drug interaction, and delirium were reduced to statistically significant levels. In line with various international studies, the intervention showed to attain positive results.

[Inappropriate prescription in elderly inpatients]. / Prescripción inapropiada en adultos mayores hospitalizados.

One of the causes of preventable adverse drug events (EAM) in the older adult population is the inappropriate prescription (PIM), i.e. that prescription where risks outweigh clinical benefits. The aim of this study is to determine the incidence of PIM with Beers criteria and Screening Tool of older person's prescriptions (STOPP), Potentially Prescribing Omissions (PPO) with Screening Tool to alert doctors to Right Treatments (START), and the average costs of hospitalization. This is an incidence study on a sample of patients over 64 years hospitalized, from January to July 2014 at a university hospital. According to Beers criteria, PIM incidence was 61.4%, 65.4% with STOPP and 27.6% PPO with START. The EAM rate calculated was 15.2/100 admissions and 18.6 EAM / 1000 patient days. The OR of EAM with PIM according to Beers and STOPP was 1.49 (IC95% 1.68-4.66) and 1.17 (IC95% 0.62-2.24) respectively. The average cost of hospitalization in patients with EAM were higher than without EAM (p = 0.020). PIM results are in line with most of the studies cited, but slightly higher for Beers and STOPP and lower for START, and the rate of EAM is lower than the data found by Kanaan (18.7% vs. 15.2%). PIM contributes to the appearance of EAM. The costs of hospitalizations with EAM are higher than those without EAM, achieving level of significance.

Prescripción inapropiada en adultos mayores hospitalizados / Inappropriate prescription in elderly inpatients

Una de las causas prevenibles de los eventos adversos a medicamentos (EAM) en la población adulta mayor es la prescripción inapropiada, (PIM), es decir aquella prescripción donde los riesgos superan los beneficios clínicos. Se propone conocer la incidencia de PIM con los criterios de Beers, los Screening tool of older person´s prescriptions (STOPP), la omisión de prescripción apropiada (PPO) con Screening tool to alert doctors to right treatment (START) y los costos medios de hospitalización. Es un estudio de incidencia de una muestra de pacientes > 64 años, internados en el periodo enero-julio 2014 en un hospital universitario. Se halló una incidencia de PIM de 61.4% con los criterios de Beers, 65.4% con STOPP y 27.6% de PPO con START. Se calculó una tasa de EAM de 15.2 EAM/100 admisiones y 18.6 EAM/1000 días paciente. El OR de EAM con PIM según Beers y STOPP fue 1.49 (IC95% 1.68-4.66) y 1.17 (IC95% 0.62-2.24) respectivamente. El costo de hospitalización en pacientes con EAM fue mayor que sin EAM (p = 0.020). Los resultados de PIM son similares a la mayoría de los estudios publicados, aunque levemente mayores para Beers y STOPP y menores para START. La tasa de EAM es inferior a la encontrada por Kanaan (18.7% vs. 15.2%). Hay una contribución de PIM a la aparición de EAM.

One of the causes of preventable adverse drug events (EAM) in the older adult population is the inappropriate prescription (PIM), i.e. that prescription where risks outweigh clinical benefits. The aim of this study is to determine the incidence of PIM with Beers criteria and Screening Tool of older person´s prescriptions (STOPP), Potentially Prescribing Omissions (PPO) with Screening Tool to alert doctors to Right Treatments (START), and the average costs of hospitalization. This is an incidence study on a sample of patients over 64 years hospitalized, from January to July 2014 at a university hospital. According to Beers criteria, PIM incidence was 61.4%, 65.4% with STOPP and 27.6% PPO with START. The EAM rate calculated was 15.2/100 admissions and 18.6 EAM / 1000 patient days. The OR of EAM with PIM according to Beers and STOPP was 1.49 (IC95% 1.68-4.66) and 1.17 (IC95% 0.62-2.24) respectively. The average cost of hospitalization in patients with EAM were higher than without EAM (p = 0.020). PIM results are in line with most of the studies cited, but slightly higher for Beers and STOPP and lower for START, and the rate of EAM is lower than the data found by Kanaan (18.7% vs. 15.2%). PIM contributes to the appearance of EAM. The costs of hospitalizations with EAM are higher than those without EAM, achieving level of significance.

Hospitalization costs for heart failure in people with type 2 diabetes: cost-effectiveness of its prevention measured by a simulated preventive treatment.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the cost-consequence of interventions to prevent hospitalizations for heart failure (HF) in people with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: In HF events (63) from type 2 diabetes-related hospitalizations (N = 462) recorded in an Argentine hospital (March 2004-April 2005), we verified 1) the presence of one metabolic HF predictor (glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA1c] value) before hospitalization; and 2) in a simulation model, the resources needed for its prevention controlling such predictor during 6 months before and after the event. Sensitivity analysis of HF risk reduction, hospitalization cost, and cost of different treatments to achieve HbA1c 7% or less was performed with a Monte Carlo simulation (10,000 iterations). RESULTS: HF represented 14% of hospitalizations, with a 44% rehospitalization rate for the same cause. Due to the total estimated cost for an HF hospitalization event was $437.31, the prevention attained using our simulated treatment was $2326.51. The number needed to treat to prevent an HF event under any of the proposed alternatives to reduce HbA1c would be 3.57 (95% confidence interval 2.00-16.67). The additional cost of the simulated treatment versus the real one oscillates between $6423.91 and $8455.68. CONCLUSIONS: HbA1c control to reduce the number of HF events would be economically beneficial for health care payers.

Exposure to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs among older adult patients hospitalized for peptic ulcer disease in Argentina: A case-control study.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the association between exposure to nonselective NSAIDs and hospitalization for peptic ulcer disease (PUD) among older adults in Argentina. METHODS: This was a case-control study based on the medical records of 5 hospitals in Buenos Aires. Cases were patients aged > or =50 years and hospitalized with PUD between 1997 and 2002 who were identified by mode of presentation (acute abdominal pain, vomiting, hematemesis, melena, shock, and asymptomatic anemia, or admission for an unknown reason and a discharge diagnosis related to upper gastrointestinal complications). Controls were hospitalized patients without PUD and were matched to cases (1:1) by age, sex, and admission date. NSAID exposure was defined as the use of NSAIDs during the year before admission. Conditional logistic regression analysis was used to examine the association between exposure to nonselective NSAIDs and hospitalizations for PUD, after adjusting for predictors. Subgroup analyses were conducted on patients with severe PUD, moderate PUD, and those whose PUD was confirmed by endoscopy. RESULTS: The study included 324 cases and 324 matched controls. The mean patient age was 74 years. The discharge diagnoses indicated severe PUD in 46.3% (150/324), moderate PUD in 49.4% (160/324), and mild PUD in 4.3% (14/324) of cases. NSAID exposure was associated with an increased risk of hospitalization for PUD (odds ratio [OR], 5.20; 95% CI, 3.31-8.15). Risk was also increased for severe PUD (OR, 4.24; 95% CI, 2.29-7.87) and moderate PUD (OR, 6.08; 95% CI, 3.09-11.96). A history of upper gastrointestinal complications was independently associated with hospitalization for PUD (OR, 14.62; 95% CI, 6.70-31.91). CONCLUSIONS: Use of nonselective NSAIDs is a significant risk factor for PUD-related hospitalizations among older adults in Argentina. The magnitude of the risk ratio resembles that reported for developed countries.

Análisis de costos médicos y resultados de la cirugía coronaria sin circulación extracorpórea / Assessment of the medical costs and outcome of off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery

Antecedentes: Algunos estudios han sugerido que la cirugía coronaria ¶sin bomba÷ disminuiría la morbimortalidad posoperatoria y reduciría los costos al compararlos con la cirugía tradicional. Una característica regional importante para la Argentina es el alto costo de los insumos, en su mayoría importados, y el relativo bajo costo de internación, lo cual crea condiciones locales diferentes al pretender comparar la relación costo-efectividad de la cirugía sin circulación extracorpórea (CEC). Objetivos: Realizar una evaluación de los costos médicos y los resultados de la cirugía coronaria sin CEC en comparación con la técnica tradicional y estimar a la vez su relación costo-eficacia. Material y métodos: El análisis retrospectivo de costos se realizó a partir de una serie de 200 cirugías coronarias con CEC y sin CEC, efectuadas entre 2004 y 2005. Se empleó la técnica de microcosteo directo para determinar los costos de quirófano y se extrapoló el valor día/cama de la internación, de acuerdo con los datos suministrados por el prestador, para el caso de cirugías sin complicaciones (caso base). La influencia de las complicaciones en el costo final se estimó en forma indirecta mediante el uso de las tasas de complicaciones publicadas en ensayos clínicos controlados y su correspondiente costo incremental por evento, según modelos probabilísticos publicados previamente. Por tratarse de un modelo parcialmente estocástico, se informan sólo los costos netos con uno y otro procedimiento, a fin de obtener la diferencia o beneficio neto entre el uso de cirugía con CEC y sin CEC. Finalmente, se realizó un análisis de sensibilidad de costos por medio de una simulación dinámica computarizada (parámetros predictores: número de usos del estabilizador y tasa de uso de cirugía sin CEC). Resultados: En una cirugía coronaria que evoluciona sin complicaciones, el costo se halló entre $9.340 y $12.540 (mediana = $10.750) para el procedimiento con CEC, y entre $10.100 y $15.300 (median).(AU)

Análisis de costos médicos y resultados de la cirugía coronaria sin circulación extracorpórea / Assessment of the medical costs and outcome of off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery

Antecedentes: Algunos estudios han sugerido que la cirugía coronaria ¶sin bomba÷ disminuiría la morbimortalidad posoperatoria y reduciría los costos al compararlos con la cirugía tradicional. Una característica regional importante para la Argentina es el alto costo de los insumos, en su mayoría importados, y el relativo bajo costo de internación, lo cual crea condiciones locales diferentes al pretender comparar la relación costo-efectividad de la cirugía sin circulación extracorpórea (CEC). Objetivos: Realizar una evaluación de los costos médicos y los resultados de la cirugía coronaria sin CEC en comparación con la técnica tradicional y estimar a la vez su relación costo-eficacia. Material y métodos: El análisis retrospectivo de costos se realizó a partir de una serie de 200 cirugías coronarias con CEC y sin CEC, efectuadas entre 2004 y 2005. Se empleó la técnica de microcosteo directo para determinar los costos de quirófano y se extrapoló el valor día/cama de la internación, de acuerdo con los datos suministrados por el prestador, para el caso de cirugías sin complicaciones (caso base). La influencia de las complicaciones en el costo final se estimó en forma indirecta mediante el uso de las tasas de complicaciones publicadas en ensayos clínicos controlados y su correspondiente costo incremental por evento, según modelos probabilísticos publicados previamente. Por tratarse de un modelo parcialmente estocástico, se informan sólo los costos netos con uno y otro procedimiento, a fin de obtener la diferencia o beneficio neto entre el uso de cirugía con CEC y sin CEC. Finalmente, se realizó un análisis de sensibilidad de costos por medio de una simulación dinámica computarizada (parámetros predictores: número de usos del estabilizador y tasa de uso de cirugía sin CEC). Resultados: En una cirugía coronaria que evoluciona sin complicaciones, el costo se halló entre $9.340 y $12.540 (mediana = $10.750) para el procedimiento con CEC, y entre $10.100 y $15.300 (median).(AU)

Análisis de costos médicos y resultados de la cirugía coronaria sin circulación extracorpórea / Assessment of the medical costs and outcome of off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery

Antecedentes: Algunos estudios han sugerido que la cirugía coronaria “sin bomba” disminuiría la morbimortalidad posoperatoria y reduciría los costos al compararlos con la cirugía tradicional. Una característica regional importante para la Argentina es el alto costo de los insumos, en su mayoría importados, y el relativo bajo costo de internación, lo cual crea condiciones locales diferentes al pretender comparar la relación costo-efectividad de la cirugía sin circulación extracorpórea (CEC). Objetivos: Realizar una evaluación de los costos médicos y los resultados de la cirugía coronaria sin CEC en comparación con la técnica tradicional y estimar a la vez su relación costo-eficacia. Material y métodos: El análisis retrospectivo de costos se realizó a partir de una serie de 200 cirugías coronarias con CEC y sin CEC, efectuadas entre 2004 y 2005. Se empleó la técnica de microcosteo directo para determinar los costos de quirófano y se extrapoló el valor día/cama de la internación, de acuerdo con los datos suministrados por el prestador, para el caso de cirugías sin complicaciones (caso base). La influencia de las complicaciones en el costo final se estimó en forma indirecta mediante el uso de las tasas de complicaciones publicadas en ensayos clínicos controlados y su correspondiente costo incremental por evento, según modelos probabilísticos publicados previamente. Por tratarse de un modelo parcialmente estocástico, se informan sólo los costos netos con uno y otro procedimiento, a fin de obtener la diferencia o beneficio neto entre el uso de cirugía con CEC y sin CEC. Finalmente, se realizó un análisis de sensibilidad de costos por medio de una simulación dinámica computarizada (parámetros predictores: número de usos del estabilizador y tasa de uso de cirugía sin CEC). Resultados: En una cirugía coronaria que evoluciona sin complicaciones, el costo se halló entre $9.340 y $12.540 (mediana = $10.750) para el procedimiento con CEC, y entre $10.100 y $15.300 (median).