Resumen: El objetivo fue analizar la visión de los jueces federales brasileños sobre las implicaciones de la vacunación contra la COVID-19. Se realizó un estudio con jueces federales brasileños, quienes recibieron una encuesta elaborada con preguntas de opción múltiple sobre la vacunación contra la COVID-19, abordando temas como su obligatoriedad, aplicación de medidas coercitivas, reticencia a vacunarse, grupos prioritarios, acciones de Agência Nacional de Vigilancia Sanitaria (Anvisa), el papel del Poder Judicial y los pasaportes de inmunidad. Respondieron a la encuesta 254 de los 1.300 jueces federales que actúan en todos los estados. La mayoría de los encuestados tiene título de licenciatura o especialización (59,1%) y actúa como juez desde hace más de 10 años (63,8%). Gran parte de los jueces (87,7%) está de acuerdo con la obligatoriedad de la vacuna para adultos y niños y adolescentes (66,1%). Más del 75% de los jueces cree que todos los niveles de gobierno pueden imponer sanciones a quienes se nieguen a vacunarse. El 93% de los jueces confía en la vacunación, el 56,1% rechaza los movimientos antivacunas y el 75,2% cree que las acciones de Anvisa deben ser respetadas. Las acciones del Poder Judicial con relación a la pandemia de COVID-19 son aprobadas por el 62,6% de los jueces, y el 88,2% apoya los pasaportes de inmunidad. Existe un vínculo directo entre la vacunación obligatoria, la confianza en la vacuna y la adopción de pasaportes de inmunidad. La mayoría de los jueces federales está de acuerdo con la vacunación obligatoria para niños y adultos, apoya la aplicación de sanciones en caso de rechazo de la vacunación, desaprueba los movimientos antivacunas, está de acuerdo con las acciones de Anvisa y apoya la intervención del Poder Judicial con relación a la pandemia de COVID-19. Resumen COVID19. COVID19 COVID 19. 19 COVID19, 19, coercitivas vacunarse prioritarios Anvisa, , (Anvisa) inmunidad 25 1300 1 300 1.30 estados 59,1% 591 59 (59,1% 63,8%. 638 63,8% . 63 8 (63,8%) 87,7% 877 87 7 (87,7% 66,1%. 661 66,1% 66 (66,1%) 75 93 561 56 56,1 752 2 75,2 respetadas COVID-1 626 62 6 62,6 882 88 88,2 COVID1 (Anvisa 130 30 1.3 59,1 5 (59,1 63,8 (63,8% 87,7 (87,7 66,1 (66,1% 9 56, 75, COVID- 62, 88, 13 3 1. 59, (59, 63, (63,8 87, (87, 66, (66,1 (59 (63, (87 (66, (5 (63 (8 (66 ( (6

Abstract: The aim was to analyze the perception of Brazilian federal judges on the implications of COVID-19 vaccination. A study was carried out with Brazilian federal judges, who received a survey designed with multiple-choice questions on COVID-19 vaccination, covering topics such as its mandatory aspect, the application of coercive measures, hesitation to vaccinate, priority groups, the duties of Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (Anvisa, acronym in Portuguese), the role of the Judiciary branch, and immunity passports. A total of 254 out of 1,300 federal judges from all states responded to the survey. Most respondents have a Bachelor’s degree or a specialization (59.1%) and have been judges for more than 10 years (63.8%). A great majority of the judges (87.7%) agree with vaccine mandates for adults and for children and adolescents (66.1%). Over 75% of judges believe that all levels of government can impose sanctions on those who refuse to get vaccinated. The judges trust vaccination 93% of the time, 56.1% reject anti-vaccination movements, and 75.2% believe that Anvisa duties should be respected. The Judiciary branch actions concerning the COVID-19 pandemic are approved by 62.6% of judges, and 88.2% support immunity passports. There is a direct connection among mandatory vaccination, trust in the vaccine, and the adoption of immunity passports. Most federal judges agree with vaccine mandates for children and adults, support the application of sanctions for vaccination refusal, disapprove of anti-vaccination movements, agree with Anvisa’s duties, and support judicial intervention in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. Abstract COVID19 COVID 19 COVID-1 multiplechoice multiple choice aspect measures vaccinate groups Anvisa, (Anvisa Portuguese, Portuguese , Portuguese) passports 25 1300 1 300 1,30 Bachelors Bachelor s 59.1% 591 59 (59.1% 63.8%. 638 63.8% . 63 8 (63.8%) 87.7% 877 87 7 (87.7% 66.1%. 661 66.1% 66 (66.1%) 75 vaccinated 93 time 561 56 56.1 antivaccination anti movements 752 2 75.2 respected 626 62 6 62.6 882 88 88.2 refusal Anvisas COVID1 COVID- 130 30 1,3 59.1 5 (59.1 63.8 (63.8% 87.7 (87.7 66.1 (66.1% 9 56. 75. 62. 88. 13 3 1, 59. (59. 63. (63.8 87. (87. 66. (66.1 (59 (63. (87 (66. (5 (63 (8 (66 ( (6

Resumo: O objetivo foi analisar a visão de juízes federais brasileiros sobre as implicações da vacinação contra a COVID-19. Foi realizado um estudo com juízes federais brasileiros, que receberam uma pesquisa elaborada com questões de múltipla escolha sobre a vacinação contra a COVID-19, abordando temas como sua obrigatoriedade, aplicação de medidas coercitivas, hesitação vacinal, grupos prioritários, ações da Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (Anvisa), o papel do Poder Judiciário e os passaportes de imunidade. Responderam à pesquisa 254 dos 1.300 juízes federais atuantes em todos os estados. A maioria dos entrevistados possui bacharelado ou especialização (59,1%) e atua como juiz há mais de 10 anos (63,8%). Grande parte dos juízes (87,7%) concorda com a obrigatoriedade da vacina para adultos e crianças e adolescentes (66,1%). Mais de 75% dos juízes acreditam que todos os níveis de governo podem impor sanções para aqueles que se recusam a ser vacinados. 93% dos juízes confiam na vacinação, 56,1% rejeitam movimentos antivacinação e 75,2% acreditam que as ações da Anvisa devem ser respeitadas. As ações do Judiciário referentes à pandemia da COVID-19 são aprovadas por 62,6% dos juízes e 88,2% apoiam passaportes de imunidade. Existe uma ligação direta entre a vacinação obrigatória, a confiança na vacina e a adoção de passaportes de imunidade. A maioria dos juízes federais concorda com a obrigatoriedade da vacina para crianças e adultos, apoia a aplicação de sanções no caso de recusa de vacinação, desaprova movimentos antivacinação, concorda com as ações da Anvisa e apoia a intervenção do Judiciário em relação à pandemia da COVID-19. Resumo COVID19. COVID19 COVID 19. 19 COVID19, 19, coercitivas vacinal prioritários Anvisa, , (Anvisa) imunidade 25 1300 1 300 1.30 estados 59,1% 591 59 (59,1% 63,8%. 638 63,8% . 63 8 (63,8%) 87,7% 877 87 7 (87,7% 66,1%. 661 66,1% 66 (66,1%) 75 vacinados 93 561 56 56,1 752 2 75,2 respeitadas COVID-1 626 62 6 62,6 882 88 88,2 obrigatória COVID1 (Anvisa 130 30 1.3 59,1 5 (59,1 63,8 (63,8% 87,7 (87,7 66,1 (66,1% 9 56, 75, COVID- 62, 88, 13 3 1. 59, (59, 63, (63,8 87, (87, 66, (66,1 (59 (63, (87 (66, (5 (63 (8 (66 ( (6

Resumen: El objetivo fue analizar la visión de los jueces federales brasileños sobre las implicaciones de la vacunación contra la COVID-19. Se realizó un estudio con jueces federales brasileños, quienes recibieron una encuesta elaborada con preguntas de opción múltiple sobre la vacunación contra la COVID-19, abordando temas como su obligatoriedad, aplicación de medidas coercitivas, reticencia a vacunarse, grupos prioritarios, acciones de Agência Nacional de Vigilancia Sanitaria (Anvisa), el papel del Poder Judicial y los pasaportes de inmunidad. Respondieron a la encuesta 254 de los 1.300 jueces federales que actúan en todos los estados. La mayoría de los encuestados tiene título de licenciatura o especialización (59,1%) y actúa como juez desde hace más de 10 años (63,8%). Gran parte de los jueces (87,7%) está de acuerdo con la obligatoriedad de la vacuna para adultos y niños y adolescentes (66,1%). Más del 75% de los jueces cree que todos los niveles de gobierno pueden imponer sanciones a quienes se nieguen a vacunarse. El 93% de los jueces confía en la vacunación, el 56,1% rechaza los movimientos antivacunas y el 75,2% cree que las acciones de Anvisa deben ser respetadas. Las acciones del Poder Judicial con relación a la pandemia de COVID-19 son aprobadas por el 62,6% de los jueces, y el 88,2% apoya los pasaportes de inmunidad. Existe un vínculo directo entre la vacunación obligatoria, la confianza en la vacuna y la adopción de pasaportes de inmunidad. La mayoría de los jueces federales está de acuerdo con la vacunación obligatoria para niños y adultos, apoya la aplicación de sanciones en caso de rechazo de la vacunación, desaprueba los movimientos antivacunas, está de acuerdo con las acciones de Anvisa y apoya la intervención del Poder Judicial con relación a la pandemia de COVID-19.

Resumo: O objetivo foi analisar a visão de juízes federais brasileiros sobre as implicações da vacinação contra a COVID-19. Foi realizado um estudo com juízes federais brasileiros, que receberam uma pesquisa elaborada com questões de múltipla escolha sobre a vacinação contra a COVID-19, abordando temas como sua obrigatoriedade, aplicação de medidas coercitivas, hesitação vacinal, grupos prioritários, ações da Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (Anvisa), o papel do Poder Judiciário e os passaportes de imunidade. Responderam à pesquisa 254 dos 1.300 juízes federais atuantes em todos os estados. A maioria dos entrevistados possui bacharelado ou especialização (59,1%) e atua como juiz há mais de 10 anos (63,8%). Grande parte dos juízes (87,7%) concorda com a obrigatoriedade da vacina para adultos e crianças e adolescentes (66,1%). Mais de 75% dos juízes acreditam que todos os níveis de governo podem impor sanções para aqueles que se recusam a ser vacinados. 93% dos juízes confiam na vacinação, 56,1% rejeitam movimentos antivacinação e 75,2% acreditam que as ações da Anvisa devem ser respeitadas. As ações do Judiciário referentes à pandemia da COVID-19 são aprovadas por 62,6% dos juízes e 88,2% apoiam passaportes de imunidade. Existe uma ligação direta entre a vacinação obrigatória, a confiança na vacina e a adoção de passaportes de imunidade. A maioria dos juízes federais concorda com a obrigatoriedade da vacina para crianças e adultos, apoia a aplicação de sanções no caso de recusa de vacinação, desaprova movimentos antivacinação, concorda com as ações da Anvisa e apoia a intervenção do Judiciário em relação à pandemia da COVID-19.

Abstract: The aim was to analyze the perception of Brazilian federal judges on the implications of COVID-19 vaccination. A study was carried out with Brazilian federal judges, who received a survey designed with multiple-choice questions on COVID-19 vaccination, covering topics such as its mandatory aspect, the application of coercive measures, hesitation to vaccinate, priority groups, the duties of Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (Anvisa, acronym in Portuguese), the role of the Judiciary branch, and immunity passports. A total of 254 out of 1,300 federal judges from all states responded to the survey. Most respondents have a Bachelor’s degree or a specialization (59.1%) and have been judges for more than 10 years (63.8%). A great majority of the judges (87.7%) agree with vaccine mandates for adults and for children and adolescents (66.1%). Over 75% of judges believe that all levels of government can impose sanctions on those who refuse to get vaccinated. The judges trust vaccination 93% of the time, 56.1% reject anti-vaccination movements, and 75.2% believe that Anvisa duties should be respected. The Judiciary branch actions concerning the COVID-19 pandemic are approved by 62.6% of judges, and 88.2% support immunity passports. There is a direct connection among mandatory vaccination, trust in the vaccine, and the adoption of immunity passports. Most federal judges agree with vaccine mandates for children and adults, support the application of sanctions for vaccination refusal, disapprove of anti-vaccination movements, agree with Anvisa’s duties, and support judicial intervention in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective: To determine clinical outcomes and mortality risk factors related to mental disorders in a cohort of hospitalized patients with Covid-19 in Brazil. Methods: This retrospective cohort study used a Brazilian database called the Sistema de Vigilância Epidemiológica da Gripe (Influenza Epidemiological Surveillance System) to analyze patients aged ≥ 18 years who were hospitalized with Covid-19 between 2020 and 2022. The exposure of interest was mental disorders (anxiety, depression, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder) identified through self-report. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Covariates included demographic and clinical characteristics. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, chi-square tests, and binary logistic regression were used to analyze the data. Results: A cohort of 2,124,285 patients was included in the analysis, with 23,246 individuals (1.1%) self-reporting mental disorders, of which depression was the most prevalent (52.3%). The mortality rate of patients with mental disorders was 30.8%. Age, sex, region, dyspnea, low oxygen saturation, and comorbidities were associated with a higher mortality risk, as was schizophrenia (adjusted OR: 1.68; 95%CI 1.54-1.81). Conclusions: Individuals with schizophrenia had a greater likelihood of Covid-19-related death than those without mental health conditions. These findings underscore the significant effect of serious mental disorders on Covid-19 mortality. Objective Covid19 Covid 19 Covid-1 Brazil Methods Influenza System 1 202 2022 anxiety, anxiety (anxiety disorder selfreport. selfreport self report. report self-report inhospital hospital characteristics statistics ttests, ttests t tests t-tests chisquare chi square data Results 2124285 2 124 285 2,124,28 analysis 23246 23 246 23,24 1.1% 11 (1.1% selfreporting reporting 52.3%. 523 52.3% . 52 3 (52.3%) 308 30 8 30.8% Age sex region dyspnea saturation adjusted OR 1.68 168 68 95CI CI 95 1.541.81. 154181 1.54 1.81 54 81 1.54-1.81) Conclusions Covid19related Covidrelated conditions Covid1 Covid- 20 212428 12 28 2,124,2 2324 24 23,2 1.1 (1.1 52.3 5 (52.3% 30.8 1.6 16 6 9 541 1.541.81 15418 154 1.5 181 1.8 1.54-1.81 21242 2,124, 232 23, 1. (1. 52. (52.3 30. 1.541.8 1541 15 1.54-1.8 2124 2,124 (1 (52. 1.541. 1.54-1. 212 2,12 ( (52 1.541 1.54-1 21 2,1 (5 1.54- 2,

Objective: To analyze the prevalence of symptoms of common mental disorders (CMD) in health professionals in Primary Health Care from August to October 2021. Methods: Cross-sectional study carried out with health professionals from the northern macroregion of Minas Gerais. Sampling method was snowball type. The dependent variable, CMD, was assessed using the Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ-20). Poisson regression was used in the statistical analysis. Results: 702 health professionals participated. The prevalence of CMD was 43.2%, higher in those who had previous symptoms of mental disorders (PR=2.42; 95%CI 1.43;4.08) and current (PR=1.54; 95%CI 1.25;1.89); overwork during the pandemic (PR=1.42; 95%CI 1.16;1.73); previous symptoms of anxiety (PR=1.27; 95%CI 1.01;1.61), depression (PR=1.27; 95%CI 1.06;1.52) and other mental disorders (PR=1.20 ;95%CI 1.01;1.43). Conclusion: There was an association between CMD and previous and current symptoms of mental disorders and work overload during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objetivo: Analizar la prevalencia de síntomas de trastornos mentales comunes (TMC) en profesionales sanitarios de la Atención Primaria de Salud de agosto a octubre de 2021. Métodos: Estudio transversal realizado con profesionales de la salud de la macrorregión norte de Minas Gerais. El muestreo fue del tipo bola de nieve. La variable dependiente, TMC, se evaluó mediante el Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ-20). En el análisis estadístico se utilizó la regresión de Poisson. Resultados: Participaron 702 profesionales de salud. La prevalencia de TMC fue del 43,2%, mayor en quienes presentaban síntomas de trastornos mentales previos (RP=2,42; IC95% 1,43;4,08) y actuales (RP=1,54; IC95% 1,25;1,89); exceso de trabajo durante la pandemia (RP=1,42; IC95% 1,16;1,73); síntomas previos de ansiedad (RP=1,27; IC95% 1,01;1,61), depresión (RP=1,27; IC95% 1,06;1,52) y otros trastornos mentales (RP=1,20; IC95% 1,01;1,43). Conclusión: Hubo una asociación entre los TMC y los síntomas previos y actuales de los trastornos mentales y la sobrecarga de trabajo durante la pandemia de COVID-19.

Objetivo: analisar a prevalência de sintomas de transtornos mentais comuns (TMCs) em profissionais de saúde da Atenção Primária à Saúde, no período agosto-outubro/2021. Métodos: estudo transversal com profissionais de saúde da macrorregião Norte de saúde de Minas Gerais; amostragem de tipo “bola de neve”; a variável dependente, TMCs, foi avaliada pelo Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ-20); utilizou-se regressão de Poisson na análise estatística. Resultados: participaram 702 profissionais de saúde; a prevalência de TMCs foi de 43,2%, maior naqueles que apresentaram sintomas de transtornos mentais prévios (razão de prevalências [RP] = 2,42 – IC95% 1,43;4,08) e atuais (RP = 1,54 – IC95% 1,25;1,89), trabalho a mais durante a pandemia (RP = 1,42 – IC95% 1,16;1,73), sintomas prévios de ansiedade (RP = 1,27 – IC95% 1,01;1,61), depressão (RP = 1,27 – IC95% 1,06;1,52) e outros transtornos mentais (RP = 1,20 – IC95% 1,01;1,43). Conclusão: observou-se associação de TMCs com sintomas prévios e atuais de transtornos mentais e sobrecarga de trabalho, durante a pandemia da covid-19.

Resumen Objetivo: analizar la prevalencia de síntomas de trastornos mentales comunes (TMC) en profesionales sanitarios de la Atención Primaria de Salud de agosto a octubre de 2021. Métodos: estudio transversal realizado con profesionales de la salud de la macrorregión norte de Minas Gerais. El muestreo fue del tipo bola de nieve. La variable dependiente, TMC, se evaluó mediante el Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ-20). En el análisis estadístico se utilizó la regresión de Poisson. Resultados: participaron 702 profesionales de salud. La prevalencia de TMC fue del 43,2%, mayor en quienes presentaban síntomas de trastornos mentales previos (RP = 2,42; IC95% 1,43;4,08) y actuales (RP = 1,54; IC95% 1,25;1,89); exceso de trabajo durante la pandemia (RP = 1,42; IC95% 1,16;1,73); síntomas previos de ansiedad (RP = 1,27; IC95% 1,01;1,61), depresión (RP = 1,27; IC95% 1,06;1,52) y otros trastornos mentales (RP = 1,20; IC95% 1,01;1,43). Conclusión: hubo una asociación entre los TMC y los síntomas previos y actuales de los trastornos mentales y la sobrecarga de trabajo durante la pandemia de COVID-19. Objetivo (TMC 2021 Métodos Gerais nieve dependiente SelfReporting Self Reporting SRQ20. SRQ20 SRQ 20 . (SRQ-20) Poisson Resultados 70 432 43 2 43,2% RP 2,42 242 42 IC95 IC 1,434,08 143408 1,43 4,08 1 4 08 1,43;4,08 1,54 154 54 1,251,89 125189 1,25 1,89 25 89 1,25;1,89) 1,42 142 1,161,73 116173 1,16 1,73 16 73 1,16;1,73) 1,27 127 27 1,011,61, 101161 1,01 1,61 , 01 61 1,01;1,61) 1,061,52 106152 1,06 1,52 06 52 1,06;1,52 1,20 120 1,011,43. 101143 1,01;1,43) Conclusión COVID19. COVID19 COVID 19. 19 COVID-19 202 SRQ2 (SRQ-20 7 43,2 2,4 24 IC9 434 1,434,0 14340 143 1,4 408 4,0 0 1,43;4,0 1,5 15 5 251 1,251,8 12518 125 1,2 189 1,8 8 1,25;1,89 14 161 1,161,7 11617 116 1,1 173 1,7 1,16;1,73 12 011 1,011,61 10116 101 1,0 1,6 6 1,01;1,61 061 1,061,5 10615 106 152 1,06;1,5 1,011,43 10114 1,01;1,43 COVID1 COVID-1 (SRQ-2 43, 2, 1,434, 1434 1, 40 4, 1,43;4, 1,251, 1251 18 1,25;1,8 1,161, 1161 11 17 1,16;1,7 1,011,6 1011 10 1,01;1,6 1,061, 1061 1,06;1, 1,011,4 1,01;1,4 COVID- (SRQ- 1,434 1,43;4 1,251 1,25;1, 1,161 1,16;1, 1,011, 1,01;1, 1,061 1,06;1 (SRQ 1,43; 1,25;1 1,16;1 1,011 1,01;1 1,06; 1,25; 1,16; 1,01;

Abstract Objective: to analyze the prevalence of symptoms of common mental disorders (CMDs) in Primary Health Care professionals between August-October/2021. Methods: this was a cross-sectional study conducted with health professionals in the Northern health macro-region of Minas Gerais state; snowball sampling was used; the dependent variable, CMDs, was evaluated using the Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ-20); Poisson regression was used to perform the statistical analysis. Results: a total of 702 health professionals took part in the study; the prevalence of CDMs was 43.2%. It was higher in those with previous [prevalence ratios (PR) = 2.42; 95%CI 1.43;4.08] and current (PR = 1.54; 95%CI 1.25;1.89) symptoms of mental disorders, overwork during the pandemic (PR = 1.42; 95%CI 1.16;1.73), previous symptoms of anxiety (PR = 1.27; 95%CI 1.01;1.61), depression (PR = 1.27; 95%CI 1.06;1.52) and other mental disorders (PR = 1.20; 95%CI 1.01;1.43). Conclusion: there was an association between CDMs and presenting previous and current symptoms of mental disorders and work overload during the covid-19 pandemic. Objective CMDs (CMDs AugustOctober/2021. AugustOctober2021 AugustOctober August October/2021. October 2021 August-October/2021 Methods crosssectional cross sectional macroregion macro region state variable SelfReporting Self Reporting SRQ20 SRQ 20 (SRQ-20) analysis Results 70 432 43 2 43.2% PR 2.42 242 42 95CI CI 95 1.434.08 143408 1.43 4.08 1 4 08 1.43;4.08 1.54 154 54 1.251.89 125189 1.25 1.89 25 89 1.25;1.89 1.42 142 1.161.73, 116173 1.16 1.73 , 16 73 1.16;1.73) 1.27 127 27 1.011.61, 101161 1.01 1.61 01 61 1.01;1.61) 1.061.52 106152 1.06 1.52 06 52 1.06;1.52 1.20 120 1.011.43. 101143 . 1.01;1.43) Conclusion covid19 covid 19 covid-1 AugustOctober/2021 AugustOctober202 October2021 October/2021 202 August-October/202 SRQ2 (SRQ-20 7 43.2 2.4 24 9 434 1.434.0 14340 143 1.4 408 4.0 0 1.43;4.0 1.5 15 5 251 1.251.8 12518 125 1.2 189 1.8 8 1.25;1.8 14 161 1.161.73 11617 116 1.1 173 1.7 1.16;1.73 12 011 1.011.61 10116 101 1.0 1.6 6 1.01;1.61 061 1.061.5 10615 106 152 1.06;1.5 1.011.43 10114 1.01;1.43 covid1 covid- AugustOctober/202 AugustOctober20 October202 October/202 August-October/20 (SRQ-2 43. 2. 1.434. 1434 1. 40 4. 1.43;4. 1.251. 1251 18 1.25;1. 1.161.7 1161 11 17 1.16;1.7 1.011.6 1011 10 1.01;1.6 1.061. 1061 1.06;1. 1.011.4 1.01;1.4 AugustOctober/20 AugustOctober2 October20 October/20 August-October/2 (SRQ- 1.434 1.43;4 1.251 1.25;1 1.161. 1.16;1. 1.011. 1.01;1. 1.061 1.06;1 AugustOctober/2 October2 October/2 August-October/ (SRQ 1.43; 1.25; 1.161 1.16;1 1.011 1.01;1 1.06; AugustOctober/ October/ August-October 1.16; 1.01;

Resumo Objetivo: analisar a prevalência de sintomas de transtornos mentais comuns (TMCs) em profissionais de saúde da Atenção Primária à Saúde, no período agosto-outubro/2021. Métodos: estudo transversal com profissionais de saúde da macrorregião Norte de saúde de Minas Gerais; amostragem de tipo “bola de neve”; a variável dependente, TMCs, foi avaliada pelo Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ-20); utilizou-se regressão de Poisson na análise estatística. Resultados: participaram 702 profissionais de saúde; a prevalência de TMCs foi de 43,2%, maior naqueles que apresentaram sintomas de transtornos mentais prévios [razão de prevalências (RP) = 2,42 ;IC95% 1,43;4,08] e atuais (RP = 1,54; IC95% 1,25;1,89), trabalho a mais durante a pandemia (RP = 1,42; IC95% 1,16;1,73), sintomas prévios de ansiedade (RP = 1,27; IC95% 1,01;1,61), depressão (RP = 1,27; IC95% 1,06;1,52) e outros transtornos mentais (RP = 1,20; IC95% 1,01;1,43). Conclusão: observou-se associação de TMCs com sintomas prévios e atuais de transtornos mentais e sobrecarga de trabalho, durante a pandemia da covid-19. Objetivo (TMCs Saúde agostooutubro/2021. agostooutubro2021 agostooutubro agosto outubro/2021. outubro 2021 agosto-outubro/2021 Métodos Gerais bola neve neve” dependente SelfReporting Self Reporting SRQ20 SRQ 20 (SRQ-20) utilizouse utilizou se estatística Resultados 70 432 43 2 43,2% razão RP 242 42 2,4 IC95 IC ;IC95 1,434,08 143408 1,43 4,08 1 4 08 1,43;4,08 1,54 154 54 1,251,89, 125189 1,25 1,89 , 25 89 1,25;1,89) 1,42 142 1,161,73, 116173 1,16 1,73 16 73 1,16;1,73) 1,27 127 27 1,011,61, 101161 1,01 1,61 01 61 1,01;1,61) 1,061,52 106152 1,06 1,52 06 52 1,06;1,52 1,20 120 1,011,43. 101143 . 1,01;1,43) Conclusão observouse observou covid19. covid19 covid 19. 19 covid-19 agostooutubro/2021 agostooutubro202 outubro2021 outubro/2021 202 agosto-outubro/202 SRQ2 (SRQ-20 7 43,2 24 2, IC9 ;IC9 434 1,434,0 14340 143 1,4 408 4,0 0 1,43;4,0 1,5 15 5 251 1,251,89 12518 125 1,2 189 1,8 8 1,25;1,89 14 161 1,161,73 11617 116 1,1 173 1,7 1,16;1,73 12 011 1,011,61 10116 101 1,0 1,6 6 1,01;1,61 061 1,061,5 10615 106 152 1,06;1,5 1,011,43 10114 1,01;1,43 covid1 covid-1 agostooutubro/202 agostooutubro20 outubro202 outubro/202 agosto-outubro/20 (SRQ-2 43, ;IC 1,434, 1434 1, 40 4, 1,43;4, 1,251,8 1251 18 1,25;1,8 1,161,7 1161 11 17 1,16;1,7 1,011,6 1011 10 1,01;1,6 1,061, 1061 1,06;1, 1,011,4 1,01;1,4 covid- agostooutubro/20 agostooutubro2 outubro20 outubro/20 agosto-outubro/2 (SRQ- 1,434 1,43;4 1,251, 1,25;1, 1,161, 1,16;1, 1,011, 1,01;1, 1,061 1,06;1 agostooutubro/2 outubro2 outubro/2 agosto-outubro/ (SRQ 1,43; 1,251 1,25;1 1,161 1,16;1 1,011 1,01;1 1,06; agostooutubro/ outubro/ agosto-outubro 1,25; 1,16; 1,01;

ABSTRACT Objective: To analyze specialized dental care through access, demand and the work processes provided by the CEO's, using secondary data from the cycles of the PMAQ-CEO. Material and Methods: Cross-sectional study using public domain data. Variables of interest were selected from the external evaluation instrument data matrices and were grouped in categories. The categories were geographic distribution, structural, human resources, work processes and access and coordination. Results: The total of 932 CEO’s were evaluated in 2014 and 1,042 in 2016, most of them type II, present in the Northeast region. In both cycles, the highest average of dentists worked in the endodontic specialty (2.4 professionals per CEO) and the lowest in oral medicine (0.8 professionals per CEO). Of the two cycles, 91.5% of the CEO’s had a manager, 79.5% performed action planning activities and 74.5% realized internal self-assessment processes. There was an increase in the mean number of days to be seen at the CEO in all analyzed specialties (p<0.001) and 85.2% of the CEO's managers reported that there is a reference for oral cancer confirmed cases. Conclusion: Between the PMAQCEO cycles the number of CEO has increased, but there are still a big pent-up demand and the presence of care gaps. However, an expansion and improvement of the CEO’s actions was evidenced, mainly related to the work processes. Objective CEOs, CEOs s, s PMAQCEO. PMAQ CEO. PMAQ-CEO Methods Crosssectional Cross sectional distribution structural resources coordination Results 93 201 1042 1 042 1,04 2016 II region 2.4 24 2 4 (2. 0.8 08 0 8 (0. . 915 91 5 91.5 manager 795 79 79.5 745 74 74.5 selfassessment self assessment p<0.001 p0001 p 001 (p<0.001 852 85 85.2 cases Conclusion increased pentup pent up gaps However evidenced 9 20 104 04 1,0 2. (2 0. (0 91. 7 79. 74. p<0.00 p000 00 (p<0.00 85. 10 1, ( p<0.0 p00 (p<0.0 p<0. p0 (p<0. p<0 (p<0 p< (p< (p

Abstract Objective The aim of this case-control study was to investigate environmental factors, such as caffeine, folic acid, nutritional iron supplementation, multivitamin complexes, alcohol, and tobacco (second-hand smoking), which have been described as risk factors for the development of oral clefts. Methods This case-control study employed convenience sampling and included 409 mothers: 132 with children with oral clefts (cases) and 277 with children without oral clefts (controls). The age range of the children in both groups was 0 to 2 years. A questionnaire was administered to each mother to inquire about their habits and food consumption during the first trimester of pregnancy. Results Folic acid supplementation was observed in 116 (87.8%) of the case group (p< 0.001) and 271 (97.8%) of the control group. Regarding the use of ferrous sulfate, 114 (86.3%) of the case group and 271 (97.8%) of the control group reported using it. In the case group, 84 (63.6%) mothers reported being exposed to second-hand smoke, and 5 (3.7%) reported alcohol consumption (p= 0.797). In terms of caffeine consumption, 127 mothers (95.4%) in the case group consumed it (p= 0.13), while 247 (88.8%) reported consumption in the control group. Conclusions The results suggest a direct relationship between secondhand smoke, alcohol consumption, and the lack of maternal supplementation with oral clefts. casecontrol complexes second hand smoking, smoking , smoking) 40 13 cases (cases 27 controls. controls . (controls) years pregnancy 11 87.8% 878 87 8 (87.8% p< p (p 0.001 0001 001 97.8% 978 97 (97.8% sulfate 86.3% 863 86 3 (86.3% 63.6% 636 63 6 (63.6% smoke 3.7% 37 7 (3.7% p= 0.797. 0797 0.797 797 0.797) 12 95.4% 954 95 4 (95.4% 0.13, 013 0.13 0.13) 24 88.8% 888 88 (88.8% 1 (controls 87.8 (87.8 0.00 000 00 97.8 9 (97.8 86.3 (86.3 63.6 (63.6 3.7 (3.7 079 0.79 79 95.4 (95.4 01 0.1 88.8 (88.8 87. (87. 0.0 97. (97. 86. (86. 63. (63. 3. (3. 07 0.7 95. (95. 0. 88. (88. (87 (97 (86 (63 (3 (95 (88 (8 (9 (6 (

Abstract Objective: to analyze the prevalence of symptoms of common mental disorders (CMDs) in Primary Health Care professionals between August-October/2021. Methods: this was a cross-sectional study conducted with health professionals in the Northern health macro-region of Minas Gerais state; snowball sampling was used; the dependent variable, CMDs, was evaluated using the Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ-20); Poisson regression was used to perform the statistical analysis. Results: a total of 702 health professionals took part in the study; the prevalence of CDMs was 43.2%. It was higher in those with previous [prevalence ratios (PR) = 2.42; 95%CI 1.43;4.08] and current (PR = 1.54; 95%CI 1.25;1.89) symptoms of mental disorders, overwork during the pandemic (PR = 1.42; 95%CI 1.16;1.73), previous symptoms of anxiety (PR = 1.27; 95%CI 1.01;1.61), depression (PR = 1.27; 95%CI 1.06;1.52) and other mental disorders (PR = 1.20; 95%CI 1.01;1.43). Conclusion: there was an association between CDMs and presenting previous and current symptoms of mental disorders and work overload during the covid-19 pandemic.

Resumo Objetivo: analisar a prevalência de sintomas de transtornos mentais comuns (TMCs) em profissionais de saúde da Atenção Primária à Saúde, no período agosto-outubro/2021. Métodos: estudo transversal com profissionais de saúde da macrorregião Norte de saúde de Minas Gerais; amostragem de tipo “bola de neve”; a variável dependente, TMCs, foi avaliada pelo Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ-20); utilizou-se regressão de Poisson na análise estatística. Resultados: participaram 702 profissionais de saúde; a prevalência de TMCs foi de 43,2%, maior naqueles que apresentaram sintomas de transtornos mentais prévios [razão de prevalências (RP) = 2,42 ;IC95% 1,43;4,08] e atuais (RP = 1,54; IC95% 1,25;1,89), trabalho a mais durante a pandemia (RP = 1,42; IC95% 1,16;1,73), sintomas prévios de ansiedade (RP = 1,27; IC95% 1,01;1,61), depressão (RP = 1,27; IC95% 1,06;1,52) e outros transtornos mentais (RP = 1,20; IC95% 1,01;1,43). Conclusão: observou-se associação de TMCs com sintomas prévios e atuais de transtornos mentais e sobrecarga de trabalho, durante a pandemia da covid-19.

Resumen Objetivo: analizar la prevalencia de síntomas de trastornos mentales comunes (TMC) en profesionales sanitarios de la Atención Primaria de Salud de agosto a octubre de 2021. Métodos: estudio transversal realizado con profesionales de la salud de la macrorregión norte de Minas Gerais. El muestreo fue del tipo bola de nieve. La variable dependiente, TMC, se evaluó mediante el Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ-20). En el análisis estadístico se utilizó la regresión de Poisson. Resultados: participaron 702 profesionales de salud. La prevalencia de TMC fue del 43,2%, mayor en quienes presentaban síntomas de trastornos mentales previos (RP = 2,42; IC95% 1,43;4,08) y actuales (RP = 1,54; IC95% 1,25;1,89); exceso de trabajo durante la pandemia (RP = 1,42; IC95% 1,16;1,73); síntomas previos de ansiedad (RP = 1,27; IC95% 1,01;1,61), depresión (RP = 1,27; IC95% 1,06;1,52) y otros trastornos mentales (RP = 1,20; IC95% 1,01;1,43). Conclusión: hubo una asociación entre los TMC y los síntomas previos y actuales de los trastornos mentales y la sobrecarga de trabajo durante la pandemia de COVID-19.

RESUMO Objetivo: Realizar uma revisão sistemática da literatura avaliando a prevalência de transtornos mentais em profissionais da saúde durante a pandemia da COVID-19. Métodos: Trata-se de revisão sistemática conduzida com base no checklist Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). As bases de dados usadas foram a Biblioteca Virtual de Saúde (BVS) e os serviços da United States National Library of Medicine (NLM) via PubMed, com as estratégias de busca: “COVID-19” AND “Saúde mental”; “COVID-19” AND “Saúde mental” AND “pessoal de saúde”, em português e inglês, selecionando artigos observacionais e/ou de prevalência publicados a partir de 2020. Resultados: A busca resultou na identificação de 18.643 artigos, e a amostra final foi composta por 9 artigos. Os sintomas mais frequentes foram os de depressão, ansiedade e insônia em profissionais que atuaram no período da pandemia da COVID-19, predominantemente do sexo feminino e idade média de 34,5 anos. A média da prevalência de ansiedade, depressão e insônia foi, respectivamente, de 40,3%, 39,9% e 36,1%, aferidas em 8.866 profissionais da saúde. Os profissionais atuantes na linha de frente no combate à COVID-19 apresentaram maiores prevalências de transtornos mentais comuns em relação a outros profissionais de saúde. Conclusões: Mostraram-se associadas a maiores prevalências de sintomas de TMC: sexo feminino, atuação na linha de frente, maior jornada de trabalho, histórico de uso de medicamentos psicotrópicos, condições inadequadas de trabalho, uso de álcool e tabaco e atuação na área de enfermagem. Observa-se a importância de estratégias de atenção à saúde mental dos profissionais de saúde.

ABSTRACT Objective: To conduct a systematic review of the literature evaluating the prevalence of mental disorders in health professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: This is a systematic review conducted based on the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. The databases used were the Biblioteca Virtual de Saúde (BVS) and the services of the United States National Library of Medicine (NLM) via PubMed, with the search strategies: “COVID-19” AND “Mental health”; “COVID-19” AND “Mental health” AND “health personnel”, in Portuguese and English, selecting observational and/or prevalence articles published from 2020 onwards. Results: The search resulted in the identification of 18,643 articles, and the final sample consisted of 9 articles. The most frequently evaluated symptoms were symptoms of depression, anxiety and insomnia in professionals who worked during the COVID-19 pandemic period, predominantly female and mean age of 34.5 years. The average prevalence of anxiety, depression and insomnia was respectively 40.3%, 39.9% and 36.1%, measured in 8,866 health professionals. Health professionals working on the front line in the fight against Covid-19 had higher prevalence of common mental disorders in relation to other health professionals. Conclusions: The following were associated with a higher prevalence of CMD symptoms: female sex, frontline work, longer working hours, history of psychotropic medication use, inadequate working conditions, use of alcohol and tobacco, and work in the nursing field. The importance of mental health care strategies for health professionals is observed.