Search

The Extracorporeal Treatments In Poisoning (EXTRIP) workgroup was formed to provide recommendations on the use of extracorporeal treatments (ECTR) in poisoning. Here, the workgroup presents its results for tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). After an extensive literature search, using a predefined methodology, the subgroup responsible for this poison reviewed the articles, extracted the data, summarized findings, and proposed structured voting statements following a predetermined format. A two-round modified Delphi method was chosen to reach a consensus on voting statements and RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to quantify disagreement. Blinded votes were compiled, returned, and discussed in person at a meeting. A second vote determined the final recommendations. Seventy-seven articles met inclusion criteria. Only case reports, case series, and one poor-quality observational study were identified yielding a very low quality of evidence for all recommendations. Data on 108 patients, including 12 fatalities, were abstracted. The workgroup concluded that TCAs are not dialyzable and made the following recommendation: ECTR is not recommended in severe TCA poisoning (1D). The workgroup considers that poisoned patients with TCAs are not likely to have a clinical benefit from extracorporeal removal and recommends it NOT to be used in TCA poisoning.

Violence against women is a major problem in Brazil, but data on its prevalence are scarce. We aimed to estimate the prevalence of physical violence against women in Brazil. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of physical violence against women. Population-based researches that assessed physical violence in Brazilian women were searched on MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and VHL/BIREME. The last search update was carried out in March 2020. Two researchers selected the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the quality of the eligible studies. Summary of prevalence and 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated using Freeman–Tukey double arccosine transformation, weighted by the official local population size. Heterogeneity was estimated by I 2 and investigated by meta-regression analyses. Of 3,408 reports, 13 studies carried out from 1999 to 2016 (n = 25,781 women) were included. Most studies had limitations on sample size (5/13) and response rate (7/13). The prevalence of physical violence was 22.4% in lifetime (95% CI [21.6, 23.2%]; I 2 = 99.0%), and 11.5% in previous year (95% CI [11.1, 11.9%]; I 2 = 99.5%). Assuring privacy during interview significantly increased the prevalence (p =.028; residual I 2 = 80.0%). Higher prevalence was also observed in studies with adequate sample source, validated questionnaire, and privacy (in both recall periods), potentially due to lower risk of nonresponse bias. Over two in 10 Brazilian women suffered physical violence during their lives, and over one tenth, in the previous year. Measurement of outcome affected the prevalence; privacy should be assured for the interviewee for future reliable estimates in the country. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Discrimination is the differentiated treatment of individuals due to prejudgments. Discriminatory practices in health care result in negative effects on patients' health. In Brazil, skin color represents the main form of racial discrimination, which may have an impact on the accessibility and quality of health care. The Brazilian Amazon lacks investigations on this topic at the population level. This study aims to estimate the prevalence of perceived discrimination in health services and associated factors in the Manaus Metropolitan Region, state of Amazonas, Brazil. Design: A population-based cross-sectional study was conducted with a probabilistic sample of adults interviewed in 2015. The associated factors were investigated by calculating the prevalence ratio (PR) using Poisson regression with robust variance. Results: A total of 4,001 participants were included. The overall prevalence of perceived discrimination was 12.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.8–13.9%). When compared to the reference categories, women (PR = 1.43; 95%CI: 1.20–1.70), individuals with brown skin color (Brazilian mixed race; PR = 1.33; 95%CI: 1.04–1.71), people who suffer from hypertension (PR = 1.27;95%CI: 1.03–1.57), and people who frequently used health services (p≤0.03) experienced more discrimination from health professionals. Conclusions: The prevalence of perceived discrimination in health services in Manaus Metropolitan Region is frequent and is associated with ethnic, social and health-related factors. Investments in inclusive public health policies and a better quality of health assistance are required to tackle this problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To estimate the prevalence of childhood obesity in Brazil by means of a systematic review of representative studies. Sources: We searched for population-based studies that assessed obesity in Brazilian children aged < 10 years in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and other sources up to September, 2019. Paired researchers selected studies, extracted data and assessed the quality of these studies. Meta-analysis of prevalence and confidence interval (95% CI) was calculated, weighted by the population sizes using Freeman-Tukey double-arccosine transformation. Heterogeneity (I2) and publication bias were investigated by meta-regression and Egger's test, respectively. Summary of the findings: 53 studies were included (n = 122,395), which were held from 1986 to 2015 and limited mainly due to inadequate response rates. Prevalence of obesity in the threedecade period was of 8.2% ([95% CI]: 8.1-8.4%, I² = 98.5%). Higher prevalence was observed in boys (9.7% [9.4-9.9%], I² = 97.4%) than girls (7.3% [7.1-7.5%], I² = 96.1%). Prevalence increased according to the decade (1990: 6.5% [6.0-7.0 %], I² = 96.8%; 2000: 7.9% [7.7-8.0 %], I² = 98.8%; 2010: 12.0% [11.5-12.6 %], I2 = 95.8%), and Brazilian region (Northeast: 6.4% [6.2-6.7%], I² = 98.1%; North: 6.7% [6.3-7.2%], I² = 98.8%; Southeast:10.6% [10.2-11.0%], I² = 98.2%; South: 10.1 [9.7-10.4%], I² = 97.7%). Heterogeneity was affected by age and region (p < 0.05) and publication bias was discarded (p = 0.746). Conclusion: For every 100 Brazilian children, over eight had obesity in the three-decade period and 12 in each 100 had childhood obesity in more recent estimates. Higher prevalence occurred in boys, recent decades and more developed Brazilian regions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Few studies have evaluated the continuity of primary care in universal health care systems, especially in underserved areas. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study with 4,001 adults (=18 years old) living in the Manaus Metropolitan Region in 2015. Interviews were conducted in households selected with probabilistic sampling. City and neighborhood variables were collected from databanks. Prevalence ratios (PR) of the continuity of care (defined as using a primary care service and having been previously registered in the Family Health Strategy program) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated with multilevel Poisson regression analysis. Results: A total of 20.6% (95%CI 19.4-21.9%) of the participants reported continuity of primary care. Women (PR = 1.38; 95%CI 1.18-1.61), nonwhite individuals (PR = 1.13; 95%CI 1.05-1.21), and poorer people (PR = 1.55; 95%CI 1.19-2.02) had higher levels of continuity, whereas health insurance holders had lower levels of continuity (PR = 0.46; 95%CI 0.34-0.62). Individuals with continuity of care had more physician consultations (PR = 1.06; 95%CI 1.02-1.10), dentist consultations (PR = 1.16; 95%CI 1.05-1.28), fewer depressive (PR = 0.59; 95%CI 0.44-0.79) and anxiety symptoms (PR = 0.64; 95%CI 0.48-0.85), and a higher quality of life (ß = 0.033; 95%CI 0.011-0.054) than those without continuity. Conclusions: Continuity of care was attained by two-tenths of the population and the level of continuity was high among socioeconomically disadvantaged people. Good outcomes and health services usage increased with continuity of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are commonly used to treat conditions such as arterial hypertension and supraventricular dysrhythmias. Poisoning from these drugs can lead to severe morbidity and mortality. We aimed to determine the utility of extracorporeal treatments (ECTRs) in the management of CCB poisoning. We conducted systematic reviews of the literature, screened studies, extracted data, summarized findings, and formulated recommendations following published EXTRIP methods. A total of 83 publications (6 in vitro and 1 animal experiments, 55 case reports or case series, 19 pharmacokinetic studies, 1 cohort study and 1 systematic review) met inclusion criteria regarding the effect of ECTR. Toxicokinetic or pharmacokinetic data were available on 210 patients (including 32 for amlodipine, 20 for diltiazem, and 52 for verapamil). Regardless of the ECTR used, amlodipine, bepridil, diltiazem, felodipine, isradipine, mibefradil, nifedipine, nisoldipine, and verapamil were considered not dialyzable, with variable levels of evidence, while no dialyzability grading was possible for nicardipine and nitrendipine. Data were available for clinical analysis on 78 CCB poisoned patients (including 32 patients for amlodipine, 16 for diltiazem, and 23 for verapamil). Standard care (including high dose insulin euglycemic therapy) was not systematically administered. Clinical data did not suggest an improvement in outcomes with ECTR. Consequently, the EXTRIP workgroup recommends against using ECTR in addition to standard care for patients severely poisoned with either amlodipine, diltiazem or verapamil (strong recommendations, very low quality of the evidence (1D)). There were insufficient clinical data to draft recommendation for other CCBs, although the workgroup acknowledged the low dialyzability from, and lack of biological plausibility for, ECTR. Both dialyzability and clinical data do not support a clinical benefit from ECTRs for CCB poisoning. The EXTRIP workgroup recommends against using extracorporeal methods to enhance the elimination of amlodipine, diltiazem, and verapamil in patients with severe poisoning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]