Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 6.594
Filtrar
1.
J Cancer Res Ther ; 16(5): 974-978, 2020 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33004737

RESUMO

The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a major public health threat to the whole world. Although the control of COVID-19 has been in the forefront of interventional practice, most interventional radiologists (IRs) are not equipped adequately to cope with such a crisis. In this review, we share our experience from Chinese IRs' perspective, report on the acute measures instituted within interventional radiology (IR) units, and give recommendations to the prevention and control of COVID-19.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus/isolamento & purificação , Infecções por Coronavirus/prevenção & controle , Controle de Infecções/normas , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Equipamento de Proteção Individual/normas , Pneumonia Viral/prevenção & controle , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Radiologia Intervencionista/métodos , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/transmissão , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Humanos , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/transmissão , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Radiologia Intervencionista/instrumentação
2.
Cien Saude Colet ; 25(9): 3413-3419, 2020 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32876249

RESUMO

When Covid-19 emerged in December last year, there was no vaccine nor was there specific effective treatment for this fast-spreading and life-threatening viral respiratory infection. Clinical trials were planned and are in progress to investigate whether drugs used for influenza, HIV and other viruses, and also anthelmintics (ivermectin, nitazoxanide, niclosamide), and antimalarials (chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine) showing antiviral activity in in vitro assays, are effective and safe for Covid-19. So far there is no convincing evidence that these antiviral and antiparasitic drugs are of any benefit for Covid-19. Notwithsanding the absence of evidence of clinical efficacy, these drugs are widely used outside of clinical trials (off label) for prophylaxis and treatment of this viral infection. The rationale behind the prescription of macrolide antibiotics (azithromycin) for Covid-19 is obscure as well. The widespread prescription and use of drugs of unproven efficacy and safety for Covid-19 is at odds with the rational use of medicines, a cornerstone principle of pharmacotherapy advanced by WHO in 1985. This irrational use of drugs is cause for concern because some of them are associated with serious heart disorders and deaths.


Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Uso Off-Label , Pneumonia Viral/tratamento farmacológico , Antivirais/administração & dosagem , Antivirais/efeitos adversos , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Humanos , Prescrição Inadequada/estatística & dados numéricos , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas
3.
Drug Discov Ther ; 14(4): 171-176, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32908072

RESUMO

The healthcare sector has been overwhelmed by the global rise in the number of COVID-19 cases. The primary care physicians at the forefront of this pandemic are being provided with multiple guidelines (state, national, international). The aim of this review was to examine the existing guidelines for congruence and critically analyze them in light of current evidence. A discordance was noted between the national and state guidelines with respect to indication, duration and dosage of antivirals, steroids/immunomodulators, anticoagulation and convalescent plasma. The lack of concordance between various guidelines mandates the need for a unified national guideline that is regularly updated.


Assuntos
Antivirais/uso terapêutico , Betacoronavirus/efeitos dos fármacos , Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Pneumonia Viral/terapia , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto/normas , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Antivirais/efeitos adversos , Betacoronavirus/patogenicidade , Infecções por Coronavirus/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/imunologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Interações entre Hospedeiro e Microrganismos , Humanos , Imunização Passiva , Fatores Imunológicos/uso terapêutico , Índia/epidemiologia , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/imunologia , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Esteroides/uso terapêutico
4.
Intern Med J ; 50(9): 1123-1131, 2020 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32929818

RESUMO

Rituals may be understood broadly as stereotyped behaviours carrying symbolic meanings, which play a crucial role in defining relationships, legitimating authority, giving meaning to certain life events and stabilising social structures. Despite intense interest in the subject, and an extensive literature, relatively little attention has been given to the nature, role and function of ritual in contemporary medicine. Medicine is replete with ritualistic behaviours and imperatives, which play a crucial role in all aspects of clinical practice. Rituals play multiple, complex functions in clinical interactions and have an important role in shaping interactions, experiences and outcomes. Longstanding medical rituals have been disrupted in the wake of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Medical rituals may be evident or invisible, often overlap with or operate alongside instrumentalised practices, and play crucial roles in establishing, maintaining and guaranteeing the efficacy of clinical practices. Rituals can also inhibit progress and change, by enforcing arbitrary authority. Physicians should consider when they are undertaking a ritual practice and recognise when the exigencies of contemporary practice are affecting that ritual with or without meaning or intention. Physicians should reflect on whether aspects of their ritual interactions are undertaken on the basis of sentiment, custom or evidence-based outcomes, and whether rituals should be defended, continued in a modified fashion or even abandoned in favour of new behaviours suitable for and salient with contemporary practice in the interests of patient care.


Assuntos
Comportamento Ritualístico , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Padrões de Prática Médica/ética , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Betacoronavirus , Cultura , Humanos , Pandemias
5.
J Exp Clin Cancer Res ; 39(1): 171, 2020 Aug 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32854728

RESUMO

The Covid-19 pandemic has challenged hard the national health systems worldwide. According to the national policy issued in March 2020 in response to the evolving Covid-19 pandemic, several hospitals were re-configured as Covid-19 centers and elective surgery procedures were rescheduled according to the most recent recommendations. In addition, Covid-19 protected cancer hubs were established, including the Regina Elena National Cancer Institute of Rome, Central Italy. At our Institute, the Breast Surgery Department continued working under the sign of a multidisciplinary approach. The number of professional figures involved in case evaluation was reduced to a minimum and interactions took place in the full respect of the required safety measures. Treatments for benign disease, pure prophylactic surgery and elective reconstructive procedures were all postponed and priority was assigned to the histologically-proven malignant breast tumors and highly suspicious lesions. From March 15th though April 30th 2020, we treated a total of 79 patients. This number is fully consistent with the average quantitative standards reached by our Department under ordinary circumstances. Patients were mostly discharged the day after surgery and none was readmitted due to surgery-related late complications. More generally, post-operative complications rates were unexpectedly low, particularly in light of the relatively high number of reconstructive procedures performed in this emergency situation. A strict follow up was performed based on the close contact with the surgical staff by telephone, messaging apps and telemedicine.Patients ascertainment for their Covid-19 status prior to hospital admission and hospital discharge allowed to maintain the "no-Covid-19" status at our Institution. In addition, during the aforementioned time window, none of the care providers developed SARS-CoV-2 infection or disease, as shown by the results of anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin M and G profiling. In conclusions, elective breast cancer surgery procedures were successfully performed in a lockdown situation due to a novel viral pandemic. The well-coordinated regional and hospital efforts in terms of medical resource re-allocation and definition of clinical priorities allowed to maintain high quality standards of breast cancer care while ensuring safety to the cancer patients and care providers involved.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus/isolamento & purificação , Neoplasias da Mama/cirurgia , Carcinoma Ductal de Mama/cirurgia , Carcinoma Lobular/cirurgia , Infecções por Coronavirus/prevenção & controle , Mastectomia/estatística & dados numéricos , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Pneumonia Viral/prevenção & controle , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Neoplasias da Mama/patologia , Neoplasias da Mama/virologia , Carcinoma Ductal de Mama/patologia , Carcinoma Ductal de Mama/virologia , Carcinoma Lobular/patologia , Carcinoma Lobular/virologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/transmissão , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Itália/epidemiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/transmissão , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Prognóstico , Receptor ErbB-2/metabolismo , Receptores Estrogênicos/metabolismo , Receptores de Progesterona/metabolismo
6.
JCO Glob Oncol ; 6: 1248-1257, 2020 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32755479

RESUMO

PURPOSE: To understand readiness measures taken by oncologists to protect patients and health care workers from the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) and how their clinical decision making was influenced by the pandemic. METHODS: An online survey was conducted between March 24 and April 29, 2020. RESULTS: A total of 343 oncologists from 28 countries participated. The median age was 43 years (range, 29-68 years), and the majority were male (62%). At the time of the survey, nearly all participants self-reported an outbreak in their country (99.7%). Personal protective equipment was available to all participants, of which surgical mask was the most common (n = 308; 90%). Telemedicine, in the form of phone or video encounters, was common and implemented by 80% (n = 273). Testing patients with cancer for COVID-19 via reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction before systemic treatment was not routinely implemented: 58% reported no routine testing, 39% performed testing in selected patients, and 3% performed systematic testing in all patients. The most significant factors influencing an oncologist's decision making regarding choice of systemic therapy included patient age and comorbidities (81% and 92%, respectively). Although hormonal treatments and tyrosine kinase inhibitors were considered to be relatively safe, cytotoxic chemotherapy and immune therapies were perceived as being less safe or unsafe by participants. The vast majority of participants stated that during the pandemic they would use less chemotherapy, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and steroids. Although treatment in neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and first-line metastatic disease was less affected, most of the participants stated that they would be more hesitant to recommend second- or third-line therapies in metastatic disease. CONCLUSION: Decision making by oncologists has been significantly influenced by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus/patogenicidade , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Infecções por Coronavirus/prevenção & controle , Controle de Infecções/estatística & dados numéricos , Neoplasias/terapia , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Pneumonia Viral/prevenção & controle , Adulto , Idoso , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/transmissão , Infecções por Coronavirus/virologia , Feminino , Humanos , Controle de Infecções/métodos , Controle de Infecções/normas , Transmissão de Doença Infecciosa do Paciente para o Profissional/prevenção & controle , Transmissão de Doença Infecciosa do Profissional para o Paciente/prevenção & controle , Masculino , Oncologia/métodos , Oncologia/normas , Oncologia/estatística & dados numéricos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neoplasias/diagnóstico , Oncologistas/estatística & dados numéricos , Equipamento de Proteção Individual/normas , Equipamento de Proteção Individual/estatística & dados numéricos , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/transmissão , Pneumonia Viral/virologia , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Padrões de Prática Médica/estatística & dados numéricos , Inquéritos e Questionários/estatística & dados numéricos , Telemedicina/estatística & dados numéricos
7.
Québec; INESSS; 14 juil. 2020.
Não convencional em Francês | BRISA/RedTESA | ID: biblio-1103261

RESUMO

CONTEXTE: Le présent document a été rédigé en réponse à une interpellation du ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux (MSSS) dans le contexte de l'urgence sanitaire liée à la maladie à coronavirus (COVID-19) au Québec. L'objectif est de réaliser une recension sommaire des recommandations publiées afin d'appuyer les travaux du MSSS visant à se doter de directives provinciales en matière de prise en charge des patients atteints d'un cancer digestif haut, destinées aux décideurs publics et aux professionnels de la santé et des services sociaux. Vu la nature rapide de cette réponse, les présents travaux ne reposent pas sur un repérage exhaustif des données publiées et une évaluation de la qualité méthodologique des publications avec une méthode systématique. Dans les circonstances d'une telle urgence de santé publique, l'INESSS reste à l'affût de toutes nouvelles publications susceptibles de lui faire modifier cette réponse rapide. PRÉSENTATION DE LA DEMANDE: Dans le présent contexte d'urgence sanitaire, une réorganisation significative des soins destinés aux patients atteints de cancer a été entreprise afin de protéger les patients des risques de contracter la COVID-19 et aussi de permettre une réallocation de certaines ressources à la prise en charge de la COVID-19. Le ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux a entrepris des travaux dans le but d'orienter les équipes de soins sur ce qui devra être maintenu, délesté ou adapté dans un contexte où le système ne permettrait qu'un accès limité à certains services. Une recension sommaire des principales lignes directrices et prises de position par des associations, des sociétés savantes et des consensus d'experts en lien avec la priorisation des soins en contexte d'urgence sanitaire a été effectuée. Un comité d'experts québécois spécialisés en cancers digestifs hauts a par la suite été formé par le MSSS pour discuter des informations extraites de la littérature et formuler, par consensus, des recommandations en lien avec la priorisation des soins propres au contexte québécois. Le document présente la revue de la littérature qui a appuyé les travaux du groupe d'experts. Les recommandations finales sont disponibles sur le site du MSSS au lien suivant : Priorisation des patients. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Question d'évaluation Quels sont les principales lignes directrices et prises de position des associations, des sociétés savantes et des consensus d'experts en lien avec la priorisation des soins pour le traitement des cancers digestifs hauts en contexte d'urgence sanitaire? Revue de littérature Repérage des publications : Littérature scientifique : La revue de la littérature (langue anglaise et française) a été effectuée entre le 29 mars et le 1er avril 2020, dans PubMed avec les mots clés suivant : COVID, COVID-19, coronavirus, neoplasia, digestive cancer, esophageal cancer, pancreatic cancer, gastric cancer, liver cancer, biliary tract cancer. Les listes de références des documents retenues ont été consultées afin de repérer d'autres publications admissibles. Les liens similar articles et cited by de l'interface PubMed ont été consultés pour chacune des publications scientifiques retenues ainsi que des revues narratives pertinentes. Littérature grise: Une recherche dans google a été faite avec les mots-clés suivants : priorisation, adaptation, recommandations, guides, consensus, cancer du pancréas, cancer de l'œsophage, cancer de l'estomac, cancer des voies biliaires, cancer hépatique (langue française et anglaise). Sélection des publications : Les publications pertinentes (lignes directrices, orientations cliniques, éditoriaux, lettres d'opinion, communications scientifiques ou documents de travail) et spécifiques à la priorisation de cas et à la prise en charge des cancers digestifs hauts en contexte de pandémie de COVID-19 ont été retenues. Certains documents ont été transmis à l'INESSS et au MSSS mais ne sont pas disponibles en ligne. Les recommandations d'ordre général quant aux mesures de protection contre le coronavirus n'ont pas été retenues. La sélection des publications a été effectuée par une professionnelle scientifique en cancérologie selon les critères d'inclusion suivants: Population: patients atteints d'un cancer digestif haut (pancréas, œsophage, estomac, voies biliaires, foie, tumeur neuroendocrine, GIST); Intervention: procédure diagnostique, suivi, imagerie, chirurgie, radiothérapie, radio-chimiothérapie, chimiothérapie, thérapie ciblée. oContexte: priorisation des soins (maintien, délestage ou adaptation thérapeutique) en contexte d'urgence sanitaire liée à la pandémie de COVID19. Extraction des données et synthèse: L'extraction des données a été effectuée par une professionnelle scientifique en cancérologie. Les données extraites comprennent, s'il y a lieu (si applicable et selon la disponibilité de l'information): Caractéristiques de la publication : auteur, date de publication ou de diffusion, source des recommandations, type de publication, juridiction; Recommandations: siège tumoral, situation clinique (stade, grade, symptômes, etc.), intervention, risque de progression de la maladie, alternative de prise en charge proposée (maintien, délestage ou adaptation thérapeutique), technique, source des données probantes en appui à la décision (p. ex. une étude clinique), autres particularités. Les recommandations ont été extraites telles que publiées, et celles rédigées en anglais ont été traduites en français (traduction libre). Les recommandations ont été classées selon les sites tumoraux (pancréas, foie, voies biliaires, œsophage thoracique proximal et moyen, œsophage distal et jonction gastro-œsophagienne, estomac, tumeur neuroendocrine, GIST) et la situation clinique considérée. SOMMAIRE DES RÉSULTATS: Positions des sociétés savantes, associations médicales, consensus ou opinions d'experts: Neuf publications rapportant les prises de position et les lignes directrices relatives à la priorisation des soins selon le contexte d'urgence sanitaire ainsi que les alternatives thérapeutiques proposées concernant la prise en charge des cancers digestifs hauts ont été retenues. L'ensemble des recommandations se trouvent dans le tableau suivant.


Assuntos
Humanos , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Assistência Integral à Saúde/normas , Neoplasias do Sistema Digestório/diagnóstico , Avaliação da Tecnologia Biomédica , Avaliação em Saúde
8.
Québec; INESSS; 14 juil. 2020.
Não convencional em Francês | BRISA/RedTESA | ID: biblio-1103266

RESUMO

CONTEXTE: Le présent document a été rédigé en réponse à une interpellation du ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux (MSSS) dans le contexte de l'urgence sanitaire liée à la maladie à coronavirus (COVID-19) au Québec. L'objectif est de réaliser une recension sommaire des recommandations publiées afin d'appuyer les travaux du MSSS visant à se doter de directives provinciales en matière de prise en charge des patients atteints d'un cancer colorectal, destinées aux décideurs publics et aux professionnels de la santé et des services sociaux. Vu la nature rapide de cette réponse, les présents travaux ne reposent pas sur un repérage exhaustif des données publiées et une évaluation de la qualité méthodologique des publications avec une méthode systématique. Dans les circonstances d'une telle urgence de santé publique, l'INESSS reste à l'affût de toutes nouvelles publications susceptibles de lui faire modifier cette réponse rapide. PRÉSENTATION DE LA DEMANDE: Dans le présent contexte d'urgence sanitaire, une réorganisation significative des soins destinés aux patients atteints de cancer a été entreprise afin de protéger les patients des risques de contracter la COVID-19 et aussi de permettre une réallocation de certaines ressources à la prise en charge de la COVID-19. Le ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux a entrepris des travaux dans le but d'orienter les équipes de soins sur ce qui devra être maintenu, délesté ou adapté dans un contexte où le système ne permettrait qu'un accès limité à certains services. Une recension sommaire des principales lignes directrices et prises de position par des associations, des sociétés savantes et des consensus d'experts en lien avec la priorisation des soins en contexte d'urgence sanitaire, liée à la COVID-19, a été effectuée. Un comité d'experts québécois spécialisés en cancers colorectaux a par la suite été formé par le MSSS pour discuter des informations extraites de la littérature et formuler, par consensus, des recommandations en lien avec la priorisation des soins propres au contexte québécois. Le présent document expose la revue de la littérature qui a appuyé les travaux du groupe d'experts. Les recommandations finales sont disponibles sur le site du MSSS au lien suivant : Priorisation des patients. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Question d'évaluation Quels sont les principales lignes directrices et prises de position des associations, des sociétés savantes et des consensus d'experts en lien avec la priorisation des soins pour le traitement de cancers colorectaux en contexte d'urgence sanitaire? Revue de littérature Repérage des publications : Littérature scientifique: La revue de la littérature a été effectuée entre les 29 mars et le 1er avril 2020, dans PubMed avec les mots-clés suivants : COVID, COVID-19, coronavirus, cancer, neoplasia, colorectal cancer, colon cancer, rectal cancer, digestive. Les listes de références des documents retenus ont été consultées afin de repérer d'autres publications admissibles. Les liens similar articles et cited by de l'interface PubMed ont été consultés pour chacune des publications scientifiques retenues ainsi que des revues narratives pertinentes. Littérature grise: Une recherche dans google a été faite avec les mots-clés mentionnés ainsi que les mots suivants : priorisation, priorization, adaptation, recommandations, guidelines et consensus (langue française et anglaise). Sélection des publications: Les publications (lignes directrices, orientations cliniques, éditoriaux, lettres d'opinion, communications scientifiques ou documents de travail) pertinentes et spécifiques à la priorisation des soins et à la prise en charge des patients atteints de cancers digestifs-bas (cancer du côlon, du rectum, du canal anal) en contexte de de pandémie COVID-19 ont été retenues. Les recommandations d'ordre général quant aux mesures de protection contre le coronavirus n'ont pas été retenues. La sélection des publications a été effectuée par une professionnelle scientifique en cancérologie selon les critères d'inclusion suivants: oPopulation : patients atteints d'un cancer digestif-bas (côlon, rectum, colorectal, canal anal, polypes et carcinomes in situ); o Intervention : procédure diagnostique, suivi, imagerie, chirurgie, radiothérapie, radio-chimiothérapie, chimiothérapie, thérapie ciblée; Contexte: priorisation des soins (maintien, délestage ou adaptation thérapeutique) en contexte d'urgence sanitaire liée à la pandémie de COVID19. Extraction des données et synthèse : L'extraction des données a été effectuée par une professionnelle scientifique en cancérologie. Les données extraites comprennent, s'il y a lieu (si applicable et selon la disponibilité de l'information): oCaractéristiques de la publication : auteur, date de publication ou de diffusion, source des recommandations, type de publication, juridiction, localisation; Recommandations : siège tumoral, situation clinique (stade, grade, cas particuliers, etc), intervention, prise de position, alternative de prise en charge proposée, source des données probantes en appui à la décision (p. ex. étude clinique), autres prticularités. Les recommandations ont été extraites telles que publiées et celles rédigées en anglais ont été traduites en français (traduction libre). Les recommandations ont été classées selon les sites tumoraux (cancer du côlon localisé ou avancé, cancer du rectum localisé ou avancé, cancer colorectal métastatique, cancer du canal anal, polypes et carcinomes in situ) et la situation clinique considérée. SOMMAIRE DES RÉSULTATS Positions des sociétés savantes, associations médicales, consensus ou opinions d'experts. Huit publications rapportant les prises de position et les lignes directrices relatives à la priorisation des soins selon le contexte d'urgence sanitaire ainsi que les alternatives thérapeutiques proposées concernant la prise en charge des cancers colorectaux ont été retenues. L'ensemble des recommandations se trouve dans le tableau suivant.


Assuntos
Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Neoplasias Colorretais/diagnóstico , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Assistência Integral à Saúde/normas , Avaliação da Tecnologia Biomédica , Avaliação em Saúde
9.
Québec; INESSS; 14 juil. 2020.
Não convencional em Francês | BRISA/RedTESA | ID: biblio-1103253

RESUMO

CONTEXTE: Le présent document a été rédigé en réponse à une interpellation du ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux (MSSS) dans le contexte de l'urgence sanitaire liée à la maladie à coronavirus (COVID-19) au Québec. L'objectif est de réaliser une recension sommaire des recommandations publiées afin d'appuyer les travaux du MSSS visant à se doter de directives provinciales en matière de prise en charge des patientes atteintes d'un cancer gynécologique, destinées aux décideurs publics et aux professionnels de la santé et des services sociaux. Vu la nature rapide de cette réponse, les présents travaux ne reposent pas sur un repérage exhaustif des données publiées et une évaluation de la qualité méthodologique des publications avec une méthode systématique ou sur un processus de consultation élaboré. Dans les circonstances d'une telle urgence de santé publique, l'INESSS reste à l'affût de toutes nouvelles publications susceptibles de lui faire modifier cette réponse rapide. PRÉSENTATION DE LA DEMANDE: Dans le présent contexte d'urgence sanitaire, une réorganisation significative des soins destinés aux patients atteints de cancer a été entreprise afin de protéger les patients des risques de contracter la COVID-19 et aussi de permettre une réallocation de certaines ressources à la prise en charge de la COVID-19. Le MSSS a entrepris des travaux dans le but d'orienter les équipes de soins sur ce qui devra être maintenu, délesté ou adapté dans un contexte où le système ne permettrait qu'un accès limité à certains services. Une recension sommaire des principales lignes directrices et prises de position par des associations, des sociétés savantes et des consensus d'experts en lien avec la priorisation des soins en contexte d'urgence sanitaire liée à la COVID-19, a été effectuée. Un comité d'experts québécois spécialisés en cancers gynécologiques a par la suite été formé par le MSSS pour discuter des informations extraites de la littérature et formuler, par consensus, des recommandations en lien avec la priorisation des soins propres au contexte québécois. Le document présente la revue de la littérature réalisée dans le but d'appuyer les travaux du groupe d'experts. Les recommandations finales sont disponibles sur le site du MSSS au lien suivant : Priorisation des patients. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Question d'évaluation Quels sont les principales lignes directrices et prises de position des associations, des sociétés savantes et des consensus d'experts en lien avec la priorisation des soins pour le traitement de cancers gynécologiques en contexte d'urgence sanitaire? Revue de littérature Repérage des publications : Littérature scientifique: La revue de la littérature a (langue anglaise et française) été effectuée entre le 27 mars et le 1er avril 2020 dans PubMed avec différentes combinaisons des mots clés suivants (en anglais et en français): COVID-19, coronavirus, gynecologic cancer, ovarian cancer, uterine cancer, cervical cancer, vaginal cancer, vulvar cancer, priority, delay, guidelines. Les listes de références des documents retenus ont été consultées afin de repérer d'autres publications admissibles. Les liens similar articles et cited by de l'interface PubMed ont été consultés pour chacune des publications scientifiques retenues ainsi que des revues narratives pertinentes. Littérature grise : Une recherche dans google a été faite avec les mots-clés mentionnés (langue française et anglaise). Sélection des publications : Les publications pertinentes (lignes directrices, orientations cliniques, éditoriaux, lettres d'opinion, communications scientifiques ou documents de travail) et spécifiques à la priorisation et à la prise en charge des cancers gynécologiques en contexte de pandémie de COVID-19 ont été retenues. Les recommandations en lien avec les mesures de protection contre le coronavirus ainsi que les mesures générales non spécifiques aux cancers gynécologiques n'ont pas été retenues. La sélection des publications a été effectuée par une professionnelle scientifique en cancérologie selon les critères d'inclusion suivants : Population : patientes atteintes d'un cancer gynécologique; o Intervention : diagnostic, imagerie, chirurgie, radiothérapie, chimiothérapie, hormonothérapie et suivi clinique; Contexte : priorisation des soins (maintien, délestage ou adaptation thérapeutique) en contexte d'urgence sanitaire liée à la pandémie de COVID19. Extraction des données et synthèse : L'extraction des données a été effectuée une professionnelle scientifique en cancérologie. Les données extraites comprennent, s'il y a lieu (si applicable et selon la disponibilité de l'information) : Caractéristiques de la publication: auteur, date de publication ou de diffusion, source des recommandations, type de publication; Recommandations: siège tumoral, situation clinique (stade, grade, cas particuliers, etc.), modalité de traitement, risque de récidive ou de progression de la maladie, alternative de prise en charge proposée (maintien, délestage ou adaptation), technique, source des données probantes en appui à la décision (p. ex. une étude clinique) et autres particularités. Les recommandations ont été extraites telles que publiées, et celles rédigées en anglais ont été traduites en français (traduction libre). Les recommandations ont été classées selon le siège tumoral et la modalité de traitement. SOMMAIRE DES RÉSULTATS Positions des sociétés savantes, associations médicales, consensus ou opinions d'experts: Sept publications rapportant les prises de position et les lignes directrices relatives à la priorisation des soins selon le contexte d'urgence sanitaire ainsi que les alternatives thérapeutiques proposées concernant la prise en charge des cancers gynécologiques ont été retenues.


Assuntos
Humanos , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Assistência Integral à Saúde/normas , Neoplasias dos Genitais Femininos/diagnóstico , Avaliação da Tecnologia Biomédica , Avaliação em Saúde
10.
Québec; INESSS; 6 juil. 2020.
Não convencional em Francês | BRISA/RedTESA | ID: biblio-1102730

RESUMO

CONTEXTE: Le présent document a été rédigé en réponse à une interpellation du ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux (MSSS) dans le contexte de l'urgence sanitaire liée à la maladie à coronavirus (COVID-19) au Québec. L'objectif est de réaliser une recension sommaire des recommandations publiées afin d'appuyer les travaux du MSSS visant à se doter de directives provinciales en matière de prise en charge des patients atteints d'un cancer urologique, destinées aux décideurs publics et aux professionnels de la santé et des services sociaux. Vu la nature rapide de cette réponse, les présents travaux ne reposent pas sur un repérage exhaustif des données publiées et une évaluation de la qualité méthodologique des publications avec une méthode systématique ou sur un processus de consultation élaboré. Dans les circonstances d'une telle urgence de santé publique, l'INESSS reste à l'affût de toutes nouvelles publications susceptibles de lui faire modifier cette réponse rapide. PRÉSENTATION DE LA DEMANDE: Dans le présent contexte d'urgence sanitaire, une réorganisation significative des soins destinés aux patients atteints de cancer a été entreprise afin de protéger les patients des risques de contracter la COVID-19 et aussi de permettre une réallocation de certaines ressources à la prise en charge de la COVID-19. Le MSSS a entrepris des travaux dans le but d'orienter les équipes de soins sur ce qui devra être maintenu, délesté ou adapté dans un contexte où le système ne permettrait qu'un accès limité à certains services. Une recension sommaire des principales lignes directrices et prises de position par des associations, des sociétés savantes et des consensus d'experts en lien avec la priorisation des soins en contexte d'urgence sanitaire a été effectuée. Un comité d'experts québécois spécialisés en cancers urologiques (prostate, rein, glande surrénale, voies excrétrices supérieures, vessie, testicule, pénis et urètre) a par la suite été formé par le MSSS pour discuter des informations extraites de la littérature et formuler, par consensus, des recommandations en lien avec la priorisation des soins propre au contexte québécois. Le présent document expose la revue de la littérature réalisée dans le but d'appuyer les travaux du groupe d'experts. Les recommandation finales sont disponibles sur le site du MSSS au lien suivant : Priorisation des patients. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Question d'évaluation. Quels sont les principales lignes directrices et prises de position des associations, des sociétés savantes et des consensus d'experts en lien avec la priorisation des soins pour le traitement de cancers urologiques en contexte d'urgence sanitaire? Revue de littérature Repérage des publications : Littérature scientifique : La revue de la littérature scientifique (langue anglaise et française) a été réalisée entre le 27 mars et le 2 avril 2020 dans PubMed avec différentes combinaisons des mots-clés suivants : « COVID-19 ¼, « coronavirus ¼, « cancer ¼, « oncologie (oncology) ¼, « prise en charge du cancer (cancer management) ¼, « urologie (urology) ¼, « soins en cancérologie (cancer care) ¼, « options thérapeutiques (therapeutic options) ¼, « pratique clinique (clinical practice) ¼, « recommandation (recommendation) ¼, et « priorisation (prioritisation) ¼. Les listes de références des documents retenues ont été consultées afin de repérer d'autres publications admissibles. Les liens similar articles et cited by de l'interface PubMed ont été consultés pour chacune des publications scientifiques retenues ainsi que des revues narratives pertinentes. Littérature grise : Une recherche dans google a été faite avec les mots-clés mentionnés (langue française et anglaise). SOMMAIRE DES RÉSULTATS: Résultat de la recherche documentaire Prises de positions et lignes directrices des sociétés savantes, associations médicales, consensus ou opinions d'experts: Douze publications rapportant des prises de position et des lignes directrices relatives à la priorisation des soins en contexte d'urgence sanitaire ainsi que les alternatives thérapeutiques proposées concernant la prise en charge des cancers urologiques ont été retenues.


Assuntos
Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Neoplasias Urológicas/terapia , Infecções por Coronavirus/prevenção & controle , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Avaliação da Tecnologia Biomédica , Avaliação em Saúde
11.
BMC Infect Dis ; 20(1): 515, 2020 Jul 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32677903

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Procalcitonin is an inflammatory biomarker that is sensitive for bacterial infections and a promising clinical decision aid in antimicrobial stewardship programs. However, there are few studies of physicians' experiences concerning the use of PCT. The objective of this study was to investigate whether hospital physicians' experience with procalcitonin after 18 months of use can inform the PCT implementation in antimicrobial stewardship programs. MATERIALS/METHODS: We deployed a qualitative approach using semi-structured interviews with 14 hospital physicians who had experience with procalcitonin in clinical practice. Interviews were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Physicians reported a knowledge gap, which made them uncertain about the appropriate procalcitonin use, interpretation, and trustworthiness. Simultaneously, the physicians experienced procalcitonin as a useful clinical decision aid but emphasised that their clinical evaluation of the patient was the most important factor when deciding on antibiotic treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Procalcitonin was regarded a helpful clinical tool, but the physicians called for more knowledge about its appropriate uses. Active implementation of unambiguous procalcitonin algorithms and physician education may enhance the utility of the test as an antimicrobial stewardship adjunct.


Assuntos
Gestão de Antimicrobianos , Infecções Bacterianas/diagnóstico , Biomarcadores/sangue , Hospitais/estatística & dados numéricos , Padrões de Prática Médica/estatística & dados numéricos , Pró-Calcitonina/sangue , Adulto , Idoso , Algoritmos , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Gestão de Antimicrobianos/organização & administração , Gestão de Antimicrobianos/normas , Infecções Bacterianas/sangue , Infecções Bacterianas/tratamento farmacológico , Bioensaio/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Fidelidade a Diretrizes/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Entrevistas como Assunto , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Noruega/epidemiologia , Médicos/normas , Médicos/estatística & dados numéricos , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Pró-Calcitonina/análise , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Inquéritos e Questionários
12.
Eur J Endocrinol ; 183(4): P11-P18, 2020 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32698145

RESUMO

Background: Currently, there are no European recommendations for the management of pediatric thyroid cancer. Other current international guidelines are not completely concordant. In addition, medical regulations differ between, for instance, the US and Europe. We aimed to develop new, easily accessible national recommendations for differentiated thyroid carcinoma (DTC) patients <18 years of age in the Netherlands as a first step toward a harmonized European Recommendation. Methods: A multidisciplinary working group was formed including pediatric and adult endocrinologists, a pediatric radiologist, a pathologist, endocrine surgeons, pediatric surgeons, pediatric oncologists, nuclear medicine physicians, a clinical geneticist and a patient representative. A systematic literature search was conducted for all existing guidelines and review articles for pediatric DTC from 2000 until February 2019. The Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument was used for assessing quality of the articles. All were compared to determine dis- and concordances. The American Thyroid Association (ATA) pediatric guideline 2015 was used as framework to develop specific Dutch recommendations. Discussion points based upon expert opinion and current treatment management of DTC in children in the Netherlands were identified and elaborated. Results: Based on the most recent evidence combined with expert opinion, a 2020 Dutch recommendation for pediatric DTC was written and published as an online interactive decision tree (www.oncoguide.nl). Conclusion: Pediatric DTC requires a multidisciplinary approach. The 2020 Dutch Pediatric DTC Recommendation can be used as a starting point for the development of a collaborative European recommendation for treatment of pediatric DTC.


Assuntos
Adenocarcinoma/terapia , Pediatria/normas , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Padrões de Prática Médica/estatística & dados numéricos , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Neoplasias da Glândula Tireoide/terapia , Adenocarcinoma/epidemiologia , Adenocarcinoma/patologia , Idade de Início , Diferenciação Celular , Criança , Humanos , Comunicação Interdisciplinar , Países Baixos/epidemiologia , Pediatria/organização & administração , Pediatria/estatística & dados numéricos , Neoplasias da Glândula Tireoide/epidemiologia , Neoplasias da Glândula Tireoide/patologia
14.
Ocul Immunol Inflamm ; 28(5): 709-713, 2020 Jul 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32721206

RESUMO

This document summarizes the experience of the International Uveitis Study Group (IUSG), the Intraocular Inflammation Society (IOIS), and the Foster Ocular Inflammation Society (FOIS) and can aid as a guide for the treatment of uveitis patients in the era of COVID-19 pandemic.


Assuntos
Betacoronavirus , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Oftalmologia/organização & administração , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto/normas , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Uveíte/diagnóstico , Uveíte/terapia , Consenso , Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Humanos , Internacionalidade , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/diagnóstico , Fatores de Risco , Sociedades Médicas
15.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 99(29): e21209, 2020 Jul 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32702889

RESUMO

Patients aged ≥75 years with the diagnosis of atrial fibrillation (AF) are at a higher risk of stroke and, according to recent recommendations, should receive oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy. This study aimed to assess the recommended prophylactic antithrombotic therapy among patients with AF aged ≥ 75 years and its compliance with current guidelines. We also aimed to identify predisposing factors associated with the administration of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in elderly patients with AF.This was a retrospective, single-center observational study. Patients with AF aged ≥75 years hospitalized at a reference cardiology center from 2014 to 2017 were included in the analysis.Among the 1236 eligible patients (43.4% male; mean age, 82 years), OACs were recommended in 90.1% of cases. Of these, 59.8% of patients used NOACs and 40.2% used vitamin K antagonists. Additionally, 3.3% of patients received antiplatelet (AP) therapy and 2.5% were administered low molecular weight heparin. Only 4.5% of patients did not receive any anticoagulant treatment. The majority (89.9%) of patients received relevant prophylactic antithrombotic therapy according to current guidelines; only 1.4% were overtreated and 8.7% were undertreated. The significant predictors of NOAC therapy among patients treated with anticoagulants were non-permanent AF (odds ratio [OR] = 1.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.30-2.18, P = .0001), age-by 5 years (OR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.16-1.52, P = .0001), and glomerular filtration rate-by 5 units (OR = 1.06, 95% CI = 1.02-1.10, P = .0066).A high percentage of AF patients aged ≥75 years receive OACs, mainly NOACs. Most patients are treated according to the current guidelines; under treatment is primarily observed in patients receiving AP therapy. Non-permanent AF, age, and preservation of renal function are significant predictors of NOAC use.


Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Fibrilação Atrial , Idoso Fragilizado , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/prevenção & controle , Administração Oral , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anticoagulantes/administração & dosagem , Humanos , Masculino , Polônia , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Estudos Retrospectivos
16.
Med Sci (Paris) ; 36(6-7): 607-615, 2020.
Artigo em Francês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32614312

RESUMO

Retinitis pigmentosa is the most common blinding inherited retinal dystrophy. Gene therapy is a burgeoning revolutionary approach that paves the way to treatment of previously incurable diseases. At the end of 2017 and 2018, a gene therapy, Luxturna®, obtained a marketing authorization by respectively the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) and the EMA (European Medicines Agency). This treatment, with proven efficacy, is available to patients with Leber congenital amaurosis and retinitis pigmentosa associated with bi-allelic mutations of the RPE 65 gene. In this paper, we present the current advances in gene therapy for retinitis pigmentosa and discuss the technological, economic and ethical challenges to overcome for gene therapy to improve medical practices.


Assuntos
Terapia Genética , Retinite Pigmentosa/terapia , Estudos de Associação Genética , Terapia Genética/economia , Terapia Genética/ética , Terapia Genética/métodos , Terapia Genética/tendências , Humanos , Mutação , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Padrões de Prática Médica/tendências , Melhoria de Qualidade , Retinite Pigmentosa/genética
17.
PLoS One ; 15(6): e0234425, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32542028

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Amid the ongoing U.S. opioid crisis, achieving safe and effective chronic pain management while reducing opioid-related morbidity and mortality is likely to require multi-level efforts across health systems, including the Military Health System (MHS), Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and civilian sectors. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a series of qualitative panel discussions with national experts to identify core challenges and elicit recommendations toward improving the safety of opioid prescribing in the U.S. DESIGN: We invited national experts to participate in qualitative panel discussions regarding challenges in opioid risk mitigation and how best to support providers in delivery of safe and effective opioid prescribing across MHS, VA, and civilian health systems. PARTICIPANTS: Eighteen experts representing primary care, emergency medicine, psychology, pharmacy, and public health/policy participated. APPROACH: Six qualitative panel discussions were conducted via teleconference with experts. Transcripts were coded using team-based qualitative content analysis to identify key challenges and recommendations in opioid risk mitigation. KEY RESULTS: Panelists provided insight into challenges across multiple levels of the U.S. health system, including the technical complexity of treating chronic pain, the fraught national climate around opioids, the need to integrate surveillance data across a fragmented U.S. health system, a lack of access to non-pharmacological options for chronic pain care, and difficulties in provider and patient communication. Participating experts identified recommendations for multi-level change efforts spanning policy, research, education, and the organization of healthcare delivery. CONCLUSIONS: Reducing opioid risk while ensuring safe and effective pain management, according to participating experts, is likely to require multi-level efforts spanning military, veteran, and civilian health systems. Efforts to implement risk mitigation strategies at the patient level should be accompanied by efforts to increase education for patients and providers, increase access to non-pharmacological pain care, and support use of existing clinical decision support, including state-level prescription drug monitoring programs.


Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Dor Crônica/terapia , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Padrões de Prática Médica/organização & administração , Programas de Monitoramento de Prescrição de Medicamentos/organização & administração , Analgésicos Opioides/normas , Sistemas de Apoio a Decisões Clínicas/organização & administração , Prescrições de Medicamentos/normas , Feminino , Humanos , Colaboração Intersetorial , Masculino , Serviços de Saúde Militar/normas , Epidemia de Opioides , Educação de Pacientes como Assunto/organização & administração , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Uso Indevido de Medicamentos sob Prescrição/prevenção & controle , Programas de Monitoramento de Prescrição de Medicamentos/normas , Atenção Primária à Saúde/organização & administração , Atenção Primária à Saúde/normas , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , United States Department of Veterans Affairs/organização & administração , United States Department of Veterans Affairs/normas
18.
PLoS One ; 15(6): e0234854, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32569338

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Umbilical cord clamping is a crucial step during the third stage of labour that separates the newborn from the placenta. Despite the available evidence that delayed umbilical cord clamping is more beneficial to infants, as well as the existence of 2014 WHO recommendation that the umbilical cord should be clamped between 1 and 3 minutes, its implementation is still low in many countries including Tanzania. OBJECTIVE: This study describes the experiences and perceptions of nurse-midwives`and obstetricians`about the timing of umbilical cord clamping at a regional referral hospital in Tanzania. METHODS: A descriptive qualitative study design that adopted a purposeful sampling strategy to recruit 19 participants was used. Nine semi-structured interviews with six nurse-midwives`and three obstetricians`, as well as one focus group discussion with ten nurse-midwives`were conducted. Thematic analysis guided the analysis of data. RESULTS: Three main themes generated from the data, each having 2 to 5 subthemes. 1. Experiences about the timing of umbilical cord clamping. 2. Perceptions about the umbilical cord clamping. 3. Factors influencing the practice of delayed umbilical cord clamping to improve newborn health outcomes. CONCLUSION: Although the nurse-midwives`and obstetricians`commonly practiced clamping the umbilical cord immediately after delivery, they understood that delayed cord clamping has a potential benefit of oxygenation to the newborn in the event of the need for resuscitation. To move forward with the good practice in maternal and newborn care, proper pre-service and providers training on matters underlying childbirth is essential to address the gap of knowledge. Delayed cord clamping should be practiced widely to improve the health outcomes of the newborn.


Assuntos
Parto Obstétrico/normas , Padrões de Prática em Enfermagem/normas , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Cordão Umbilical/cirurgia , Adulto , Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Constrição , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Tocologia , Enfermeiras Obstétricas , Obstetrícia , Médicos , Gravidez , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Encaminhamento e Consulta , Inquéritos e Questionários , Tanzânia , Fatores de Tempo
19.
Eur Geriatr Med ; 11(4): 645-650, 2020 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32557250

RESUMO

The nursing home sector has seen a disproportionately high number of deaths as part of the COVID-19 pandemic. This reflects, in part, the frailty and vulnerability of older people living in care homes but has also, in part, been a consequence of the failure to include care homes in the systematic planning of a response to COVID, as well as a measure of neglect of standards and quality improvement in the sector. In response, the EUGMS published a set of medical standards of care developed in consultation with experts across its member national societies in 2015. The standards consisted of seven core principles of medical care for physicians working in nursing homes as a first step in developing a programme of clinical, academic and policy engagement in improving medical care for older people who are living and frequently also dying as residents in nursing homes. The gravity of the concerns arising for nursing home care from the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as emerging insights on care improvement in nursing homes indicate that an update of these medical standards is timely. This was performed by the writing group from the original 2015 guidelines and is intended as an interim measure pending a more formal review incorporating a systematic review of emerging literature and a Delphi process.


Assuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Assistência à Saúde/normas , Instituição de Longa Permanência para Idosos/organização & administração , Casas de Saúde/organização & administração , Médicos/normas , Pneumonia Viral/terapia , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Causas de Morte , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Técnica Delfos , Europa (Continente) , Feminino , Avaliação Geriátrica/métodos , Necessidades e Demandas de Serviços de Saúde , Humanos , Masculino , Pandemias , Equipe de Assistência ao Paciente/normas , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Análise de Sobrevida
20.
BMJ Open ; 10(6): e039674, 2020 06 17.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32554730

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The current COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the measures taken to control it, have a profound impact on healthcare. This study was set up to gain insights into the consequences of the COVID-19 outbreak on the core competencies of general practice, as they are experienced by general practitioners (GPs) on the frontline. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: We performed a descriptive study using semistructured interviews with 132 GPs in Flanders, using a topic list based on the WONCA definition of core competencies in general practice. Data were analysed qualitatively using framework analysis. RESULTS: Changes in practice management and in consultation strategies were quickly adopted. There was a major switch towards telephone triage and consults, for covid-related as well as for non-covid related problems. Patient-centred care is still a major objective. Clinical decision-making is largely focused on respiratory assessment and triage, and GPs feel that acute care is compromised, both by their own changed focus and by the fact that patients consult less frequently for non-covid problems. Chronic care is mostly postponed, and this will have consequences that will extend and become visible after the corona crisis. Through the holistic eyes of primary care, the current outbreak-as well as the measures taken to control it-will have a profound impact on psychological and socioeconomic well-being. This impact is already visible in vulnerable people and will continue to become clear in the medium and long terms. GPs think that they are at high risk of getting infected. Dropping out and being unable to contribute their part or becoming virus transmitters are reported to be greater concerns than getting ill themselves. CONCLUSIONS: The current times have a profound impact on the core competences of primary care. Although the vast increase in patients soliciting medical help and the necessary separate covid and non-covid flows have been dealt with, GPs are worried about the continuity of regular care and the consequences of the anticovid measures. These may become a threat for the general health of the population and for the provision of primary healthcare in the near and distant future.


Assuntos
Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Tomada de Decisão Clínica/métodos , Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Clínicos Gerais/psicologia , Pneumonia Viral/terapia , Atenção Primária à Saúde/organização & administração , Adulto , Bélgica , Infecções por Coronavirus/psicologia , Gerenciamento Clínico , Feminino , Medicina Geral/organização & administração , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/psicologia , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Pesquisa Qualitativa
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA