O CUIDADO EM SAÚDE E AS IMPLICAÇÕES PARA OS CUIDADORES DOMICILIARES

RESUMO: O artigo trata da temática do cuidado domiciliar em saúde, modalidade de atendimento que tem crescido em vários países, impulsionada pelas transições demográficas e epidemiológicas dos últimos anos. Com foco em duas experiências, o trabalho apresenta os resultados de uma pesquisa com o objetivo de analisar o perfil dos cuidadores de dois programas de atenção em saúde domiciliar sendo, um público e outro privado desenvolvido em cidades localizadas na Região da Grande Florianópolis. Trata-se de uma pesquisa qualitativa com aplicação de entrevistas com cuidadores de pessoas em internação domiciliar. Como principais resultados aponta-se que a família tem sido cada vez mais responsabilizada pelo cuidado em saúde, principalmente as mulheres alterando a dinâmica familiar que implica nas condições objetivas de vida

Table1_New regulation on medical devices made of substances: Opportunities and challenges for pharmacological and toxicological research.DOCX

The Medical Device (MD) Regulation EU 2017/745 (MDR) has provided a completely new and more robust regulatory framework at guarantee of the safety and efficacy of therapeutic options accessing the market. At the same time, the MDR poses several challenges for stakeholders, among which, the most significant lying on MDs made of substances (MDMS) whose mechanism of action should be non-pharmacological, immunological, or metabolic.Moving from single active substances to very complex mixtures, such as the case of natural products, the demonstration of the non-targeted, non-pharmacological mechanism, is even much more challenging since it is very hard to specifically identify and characterize all the interactions each constituent can have within the body.New scientific paradigms to investigate these multiple interactions and delineate the principal mechanism of action through which the effect is achieved are necessary for the correct regulatory classification and placement in the market of MDMS.This article will discuss the difficulties in delineating the boundaries between pharmacological and non-pharmacological mechanisms, practical approaches to the study of complex mixtures and the challenges on the application of current experimental paradigms to the study of the mechanism of action of MDMS.</p

Effect of SFN 30 µM on RNA damage induced by doxorubicin, spermine, SNAP and H₂O₂ in HL-60 cells.

<p>RIN values were calculated after pre-treatment of cells with SFN for 24 h (6 h for H₂O₂). Data are means ± SEM of three independent experiments.</p

Effect of SFN on RNA integrity on Jurkat cell-free system.

<p>A representative electropherogram of RNA size distribution (A) and RIN values (B) after 3 h of treatment with SFN of a cell-free system. Data are means ± SEM of three independent experiments.</p

Effect of SNAP plus SFN on RNA damage in Jurkat cells.

<p>RIN values calculated after pre-treatment (A) or co-treatment (B) of cells with SFN plus SNAP and representative electropherograms of RNA size distribution after treatment with SNAP plus SFN (C). Data are means ± SEM of three independent experiments.</p

Effect of spermine plus SFN on RNA damage in Jurkat cells.

<p>RIN values calculated after pre-treatment (A) or co-treatment (B) of cells with SFN plus spermine and representative electropherograms of RNA size distribution after treatment with spermine plus SFN (C). Data are means ± SEM of three independent experiments.</p

Effect of different xenobiotics on RNA integrity in Jurkat cells.

<p>Electropherograms of RNA size distribution recorded in untreated cultures and after 24 h of treatment with doxorubicin, spermine, SNAP or H₂O₂. The data are representative of three different experiments with similar results.</p

Effect of SFN on RNA integrity on Jurkat cell system.

<p>A representative electropherogram of RNA size distribution (A) and RIN values (B) calculated after cell treatment with SFN for 24 h. Data are means ± SEM of three independent experiments.</p

Effect of SFN and spermine on glutathione levels in Jurkat cells.

<p>Effect of SFN, spermine and SFN plus spermine on glutathione level determined by microplate fluorescence reader. Cells were treated for 3 h (A) or 24 h (B) with SFN (10 µM), spermine (0.5 mM) or SFN (10 µM)+spermine (0.5 mM). Results are means ± SEM of four independent experiments with triplicate dishes.</p

Effect of H₂O₂ plus SFN on RNA damage in Jurkat cells.

<p>RIN values calculated after pre-treatment (A) or co-treatment (B) of cells with SFN plus H₂O₂ and representative electropherograms of RNA size distribution after treatment with H₂O₂ plus SFN (C). Data are means ± SEM of three independent experiments.</p