Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 73(34): 740-746, 2024 Aug 29.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39207933

RESUMO

Caregivers provide support to persons who might otherwise require placement in long-term care facilities. Approximately one in five U.S. adults provides care to family members or friends who have a chronic health condition or disability. Promoting the well-being of this large segment of the population is a public health priority as recognized by the 2022 National Strategy to Support Family Caregivers. Although negative associations between caregiving and caregiver health are known, changes in the health status of caregivers over time are not. Data from the 2015-2016 and 2021-2022 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System were analyzed to compare changes in the prevalence of 19 health indicators among cross-sectional samples of caregivers and noncaregivers at different time points. Caregivers experienced improvements in prevalence of four health indicators, whereas six worsened. Some health indicators, such as cigarette smoking, improved for both caregivers and noncaregivers, although smoking prevalence remained higher for caregivers (16.6% versus 11.7%). Prevalence of lifetime depression increased for both groups and remained higher among caregivers (25.6%) than among noncaregivers (18.6%). During 2021-2022, age-adjusted estimates for caregivers were unfavorable for 13 of the 19 health indicators when compared with noncaregivers. Strategies for supporting caregivers are available, and integrating these with existing programs to address mental health and chronic diseases among this population might improve caregiver well-being. For example, many community organizations support caregivers by offering interventions designed to relieve caregiver strain, including skills training, support groups, and care coordination.


Assuntos
Sistema de Vigilância de Fator de Risco Comportamental , Cuidadores , Humanos , Cuidadores/psicologia , Cuidadores/estatística & dados numéricos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Feminino , Adulto , Idoso , Adulto Jovem , Indicadores Básicos de Saúde , Adolescente , Estudos Transversais , Nível de Saúde , Previsões
2.
BJOG ; 131(9): 1270-1278, 2024 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38497098

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical utility of point-of-care (POC) capillary blood glucose (CBG) testing in the assessment of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) during oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Antenatal clinics at King's College Hospital. POPULATION: Women screened for GDM between March and June 2020. METHODS: The CBG was measured using the POC StatStrip® test and the venous plasma glucose (VPG) was measured by Roche analyser (Cobas 8000 c702). GDM was diagnosed based on the 2015 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) Clinical Guideline criteria. The two methods were compared statistically using Analyse-It 5.40.2. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV) for the POC StatStrip® test, compared with VPG measured by reference laboratory method. RESULTS: A total of 230 women were included. The number and percentage of women with glucose concentrations above the GDM threshold using the POC StatStrip® test versus laboratory VPG measurement was 15 (6.5%) versus eight (3.4%) at fasting and 105 (45.6%) versus 72 (31.1%) at 2 h, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity values (and 95% CIs) for the POC StatStrip® test were 88% (52%-99%) and 97% (93%-98%) at fasting and 97% (91%-99%) and 79% (71%-84%) at 2 h, respectively. However, the specificity and the NPV for the POC StatStrip® test for concentrations of ≤5.0 mmol/L at fasting or <7.5 mmol/L at 2 h were 100%, and the sensitivity and the PPV for concentrations of >9.5 mmol/L at 2 h were 100%. CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort the POC measurement of CBG cannot entirely replace the laboratory method for the OGTT; however, it can be used to rule out/rule in GDM for glucose concentrations of ≤5.0 mmol/L at fasting or <7.5/>9.5 mmol/L at 2 h.


Assuntos
Glicemia , Diabetes Gestacional , Teste de Tolerância a Glucose , Testes Imediatos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Humanos , Feminino , Diabetes Gestacional/diagnóstico , Diabetes Gestacional/sangue , Gravidez , Estudos Prospectivos , Glicemia/análise , Adulto , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Sistemas Automatizados de Assistência Junto ao Leito/normas
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA