ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: The numbers of cases of arboviral diseases have increased in tropical and subtropical regions while the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic overwhelms healthcare systems worldwide. The clinical manifestations of arboviral diseases, especially dengue fever, can be very similar to COVID-19, and misdiagnoses are still a reality. In the meantime, outcomes for patients and healthcare systems in situations of possible syndemic have not yet been clarified. OBJECTIVE: We set out to conduct a systematic review to understand and summarize the evidence relating to clinical manifestations, disease severity and prognoses among patients coinfected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and arboviruses. METHODS: We conducted a rapid systematic review with meta-analysis, on prospective and retrospective cohorts, case-control studies and case series of patients with confirmed diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 and arboviral infection. We followed the Cochrane Handbook recommendations. We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, LILACS, Scopus and Web of Science to identify published, ongoing and unpublished studies. We planned to extract data and assess the risk of bias and the certainty of evidence of the studies included, using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment. RESULTS: We were able to retrieve 2,407 citations using the search strategy, but none of the studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. CONCLUSION: The clinical presentations, disease severity and prognoses of patients coinfected with SARS-CoV-2 and arboviruses remain unclear. Further prospective studies are necessary in order to provide useful information for clinical decision-making processes. Protocol registration number in the PROSPERO database: CRD42020183460

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMID) are at increased risk of infection. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether patients undergoing pharmacological treatment for IMID present higher risk of worse outcomes when diagnosed with COVID-19. DESIGN AND SETTING: Rapid systematic review conducted in the medical school of the Federal University of São Paulo (SP), Brazil. METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, SCOPUS, Web of Science, L·OVE, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO-ICTRP for studies evaluating patients diagnosed with COVID-19 who were undergoing pharmacological treatment for IMID. Two authors selected studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence, following the Cochrane recommendations. RESULTS: We identified 1,498 references, from which one cohort study was included. This compared patients with and without rheumatic diseases (RD) who all had been diagnosed with COVID-19. Those with RD seemed to have higher chances of hospitalization and mortality, but no statistical difference was detected between the groups: hospitalization: odds ratio (OR) 1.17; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.6 to 2.29; mortality rate: OR 1.53; 95% CI 0.33 to 7.11 (very low certainty of evidence). Patients with RD were three times more likely to require admission to intensive care units (ICUs), with invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), than those without RD: OR 3.72; 95% CI 1.35 to 10.26 (for both outcomes; very low certainty of evidence). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing pharmacological treatment for IMID seem to present higher chances of requiring admission to ICUs, with IMV. Additional high-quality studies are needed to analyze the effects of different treatments for IMID.

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: The current health crisis due to COVID-19 is forcing us to profoundly rethink our social organizations and practices in health. While there is no effective treatment for the virus, staying home and social isolation are the control measures recommended by health authorities. The aim of this study is to perform a scoping review in order to summarize the current evidence in telehealth for COVID-19. METHODS: This study is a protocol to describe the rationale, hypothesis and planned methods of our scoping review. We will include randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies, qualitative studies, and/or case series that describe telehealth interventions applied or developed to respond to COVID-19. We will search Medline via PubMed, Embase via Elsevier, Cochrane Library - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Portal Regional BVS - LILACS, and Scopus. We will include studies performed since December 2019 with no language restrictions. We will use the Risk of Bias tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to perform the critical appraisal of included studies. We will assess the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has emerged in China in December 2019 and rapidly spread. Although extraordinary efforts have been made on research regarding pharmacological interventions, none have proven effective. This is the protocol for a rapid living systematic review that aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of different pharmacological interventions for the treatment of COVID-19. METHODS: rapid living systematic review methodology with Network Meta-Analysis following the recommendations of Cochrane Handbook. We will include randomized controlled trials (RCT) and quasi-RCTs that evaluate single and/or combined pharmacological interventions at any dose for the treatment of COVID-19. We will search Medline via PubMed, Embase via Elsevier, Cochrane Library - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Portal Regional BVS - LILACS, Scopus and WebofScience to identify potentially eligible studies. No language restrictions will be used in the selection. We will perform the critical appraisal of included studies with the Risk of Bias tool and the certainty of evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Determining prognostic factors in a context of health crises such as the COVID-19 scenario may provide the best possible care for patients and optimize the management and the resource utilization of the health system. Thus, we aim to systematically review the prognostic factors for different outcomes of patients with COVID-19. DESIGN AND SETTING: Protocol for a rapid living systematic review methodology following the recommendations proposed by the Cochrane Handbook. METHODS: We will include cohorts and case‐control studies. We will search Medline via PubMed, Embase via Elsevier, Cochrane Library - Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Portal Regional BVS- LILACS, Scopus and WebofScience to identify studies. No language restrictions will be applied. We will perform the critical appraisal of included studies with the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool and the certainty of evidence will be evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: We propose to systematically review the available evidence to evaluate if patients with immune mediated or inflammatory diseases under pharmacological treatment with immunosuppressants, immunobiologics, DMARDs or targeted synthetic DMARDs have better or worse outcomes when infected by SARS-CoV-2. This study is a protocol for our rapid living systematic review. METHODS: Protocol for a rapid living systematic review methodology following the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) guidance. To conduct the rapid systematic review, we will employ abbreviated systematic review methods, including: not performing independent screens of abstracts and not searching grey literature. As this will be a living review, it will be continuously updated.

O objetivo deste estudo foi determinar a prevalência de osteopenia e osteoporose em uma população de mulheres que fizeram exames de densitometria em uma clínica especializada no sul do Brasil. Nós conduzimos um estudo transversal, incluindo 1.871 mulheres que se submeteram à densitometria óssea entre janeiro e dezembro de 2012. Foi feita uma análise de regressão logística com todas as variáveis independentes e os desfechos (osteopenia, osteoporose e risco de fraturas). A densitometria óssea foi diagnosticada como normal em 36,5% das mulheres, 49,8% com osteopenia e 13,7% com osteoporose. Estar na menopausa e ter mais de 50 anos foram fatores de risco para osteopenia e osteoporose, enquanto ter feito histerectomia e apresentar índice de massa corporal (IMC) maior do que 25 foram fatores de proteção. Para o desfecho fratura em qualquer sítio, os fatores associados foram idade acima de 50 anos e osteopenia ou osteoporose, (OR = 2,09, intervalo de confiança [IC]: 1,28-3, 95%, 40) e (OR = 2,49, 95% CI: 1,65-3, 74), respectivamente.

The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of osteopenia and osteoporosis in a female population, that had bone mineral density (BMD) measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in a specialized clinic in the south of Brazil. We conducted a cross-sectional study including 1871 women that performed scans between January and December 2012. We conducted a logistic regression analysis with all independent variables and outcomes (osteopenia, osteoporosis and fracture risk). According to DXA results, 36.5% of women had normal BMD, 49.8% were diagnosed with osteopenia and 13.7% with osteoporosis. Menopause and age over 50 years old were risk factors for osteopenia and osteoporosis while prior hysterectomy and BMI greater than 25 were protective factors. For the outcome of fracture at any site the risk factors were age over 50 years old, osteopenia and osteoporosis (OR = 2.09, 95% CI: 1.28–3.40) and (OR = 2.49, 95% CI: 1.65–3.74), respectively.

A fim de investigar o uso de tabaco e fatores associados entre universitários do Sul do Brasil no ano de 2010, realizou-se estudo transversal com questionários autoaplicáveis. A amostra foi dividida em dois grandes grupos: área da Saúde e demais cursos. A amostra de cada grupo foi dividida de acordo com a proporção em relação ao número total de alunos. Os alunos foram selecionados do primeiro e último ano de cada curso. A análise estatística foi realizada no Software SPSS versão 17.0(r). Responderam aos questionários 584 alunos. A prevalência de tabagismo entre os acadêmicos foi de 8,9%, sendo 4,7% tabagistas ativos e 4,2% fumantes ocasionais; 2,6% declararam-se ex-fumantes. A idade média foi de 23,0 anos (±9,7), sendo 62,3% do sexo feminino. Dentre os fumantes 49% começaram a fumar por vontade própria e 27,4% por influência de amigos. A maioria declarou fumar para relaxar. Observou-se associação significativa entre o tabagismo e o uso de álcool (OR 5,80; IC95% 1,20-28,01) e de drogas ilícitas (OR 42,29; IC95% 11,45-175,1) e a existência de outros familiares fumantes (OR 4,02; IC95% 2,05-7,85). A prevalência de tabagismo encontrada neste estudo foi baixa. O tabagismo foi significativamente associado a alunos usuários de drogas ilícitas, que fazem uso de álcool e que tem algum tabagista na família.

To investigate tobacco use and associated factors among college students at a university in southern Brazil in 2010, we conducted a cross-sectional study using self-reported questionnaires. The sample was divided into two main groups: the Health area and other courses The sample number in each group was divided according to the ratio of the total number of students. Students who composed the sample were selected from the first and last year of each course. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS version 17.0(r). 584 students responded to questionnaires. The prevalence of smoking among students was 8.9%, 4.7% were smokers and 4.2% occasional smokers; 2.6% reported they were former smokers. The average age was 23.0 years (± 9.7), 62.3% were female. Among smokers 49% started smoking on their own and 27.4% under the influence of friends. We observed a significant association between smoking and alcohol use (OR 5.80; 95%CI 1.20-28.01), illicit drugs (OR 42.29; 95%CI 11.45-175.1) and the existence of other relatives who are smokers (OR 4.02; 95%CI 2.05-7.85).The prevalence of smoking found in this study was low. Smoking was significantly associated with student drugs users, consuming alcohol and to have a smoker in the family.