Posição no veículo, uso de cinto de segurança e suas conseqüências nas fraturas de face em ocupantes de carros

INTRODUCTION: Trauma caused by traffic accidents is among the main etiologies involved in the occurrence of facial fractures throughout the world. However, the trauma mechanisms involved are different according to the location where the study was performed, due to different conditions of development, legislation, and culture. A retrospective study was done between February 2001 and July 2006, with the purpose of determining the epidemiology and the mechanisms involved in the occurrence of facial fractures among car occupants in the metropolitan area of São Paulo. METHODS: Data were collected from 297 patients admitted with facial fractures to the emergency room of the Hospital das Clínicas, São Paulo University Medical School. Within this period, 151 individuals had been involved in traffic accidents, among which 56 (37.08%) were inside passenger cars. These were grouped based on the seating position that they were occupying at the time of the accident and the wearing of seat belts. Data concerning the number and location of fracture lines were obtained from the different groups, and a fracture/patient index (F/P I) was calculated to compare and make reference to the impact energy among these groups, for subsequent analysis and discussion. RESULTS: 323 fracture lines occurred among 56 patients who were car occupants. By applying the F/P I, we obtained higher values in the group of rear-seat passengers who were not wearing seat belts (7.23 fractures per patient), followed by the group of drivers not wearing seat belts (6.33 fractures per patient), the group of front-seat passengers not wearing seat belts (5.58 fractures per patient), the group of drivers wearing seat belts (5.54 fractures per patient) and, finally, the group of front-seat passengers wearing seat belts (4.00 fractures per patient). None of the rear-seat passengers was wearing seat belts. CONCLUSION: The data collected indicate that the driver position shows a high incidence of facial fractures, not being effectively protected by the seat belt, although the wearing of seat belts seems to have a protective role against the occurrence of facial fractures in front-seat passengers. It was not possible to evaluate the wearing of seat belts among rear-seat passengers, even though the high incidence of fractures in this group showed its high susceptibility to the occurrence of facial fractures, which highlights the need of taking protective measures against this situation.INTRODUÇÃO: Os traumatismos devidos a acidentes de trânsito estão entre as principais etiologias na ocorrência de fraturas de face em todo o mundo. No entanto os mecanismos de trauma são diferentes, conforme o local onde o estudo foi realizado, devido a condições de desenvolvimento, legislação e cultura 1, 2, 3, 4. Com o objetivo de se conhecer a epidemiologia e os mecanismos envolvidos na ocorrência de fraturas de face em ocupantes de automóveis na região metropolitana de São Paulo, foi realizado um estudo retrospectivo entre Fevereiro de 2001 e Julho de 2006. MÉTODO: Foram coletados dados de 297 pacientes admitidos com fraturas de face na sala de emergência do HC-FMUSP. Destes, 151 indivíduos estiveram envolvidos em acidentes de trânsito sendo que 56 (37,08%) estavam dentro de automóveis. Estes últimos foram agrupados baseados na posição em que estavam sentados no veículo no momento do acidente e no uso de cintos de segurança. Dados referentes ao número e localização dos traços de fratura foram obtidos nos diferentes grupos e um Índice Fraturas/Paciente (IF/P) foi idealizado para comparar e avaliar o impacto nesses grupos, e para posteriormente serem analisados e discutidos. RESULTADO: Ocorreram 323 traços de fraturas nos 56 pacientes ocupantes de carros. Aplicando-se o IF/P obtivemos maiores valores no grupo de passageiros do banco traseiro sem cinto de segurança (7,23 fraturas/ paciente), seguido pelo grupo de motoristas sem cinto de segurança (6,33 fraturas/ paciente), passageiros dianteiros sem cinto de segurança (5,58 fraturas/ paciente), motoristas com cinto de segurança (5,54 fraturas/ paciente) e por último o grupo de passageiros dianteiros com cinto de segurança (4,00 fraturas/ paciente). Nesta amostragem, não houve ocupante do banco traseiro com cinto de segurança. CONCLUSÃO: Baseado nos dados dos pacientes e nos resultados do índice foi realizada uma análise comparando-se a incidência de fraturas de face em diferentes condições dentro de um carro, levando-se em conta a posição do ocupante e o uso do cinto de segurança. Os dados indicam que a posição do motorista apresenta uma incidência elevada de fraturas de face, não oferecendo proteção efetiva mesmo com o uso do cinto de segurança, que parece ter papel protetor contra a ocorrência de fraturas de face na posição do passageiro dianteiro. Não foi possível avaliar o uso do cinto de segurança na posição do passageiro traseiro, mas a alta incidência de fraturas no grupo de ocupantes do banco traseiro sem cinto de segurança mostrou a grande suscetibilidade desta posição à ocorrência de fraturas de face, alertando para a necessidade de se tomar medidas de proteção para esta situação

The global burden of cancer attributable to risk factors, 2010-19 : a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

Background Understanding the magnitude of cancer burden attributable to potentially modifiable risk factors is crucial for development of effective prevention and mitigation strategies. We analysed results from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019 to inform cancer control planning efforts globally. Methods The GBD 2019 comparative risk assessment framework was used to estimate cancer burden attributable to behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risk factors. A total of 82 risk-outcome pairs were included on the basis of the World Cancer Research Fund criteria. Estimated cancer deaths and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) in 2019 and change in these measures between 2010 and 2019 are presented. Findings Globally, in 2019, the risk factors included in this analysis accounted for 4.45 million (95% uncertainty interval 4.01-4.94) deaths and 105 million (95.0-116) DALYs for both sexes combined, representing 44.4% (41.3-48.4) of all cancer deaths and 42.0% (39.1-45.6) of all DALYs. There were 2.88 million (2.60-3.18) risk-attributable cancer deaths in males (50.6% [47.8-54.1] of all male cancer deaths) and 1.58 million (1.36-1.84) risk-attributable cancer deaths in females (36.3% [32.5-41.3] of all female cancer deaths). The leading risk factors at the most detailed level globally for risk-attributable cancer deaths and DALYs in 2019 for both sexes combined were smoking, followed by alcohol use and high BMI. Risk-attributable cancer burden varied by world region and Socio-demographic Index (SDI), with smoking, unsafe sex, and alcohol use being the three leading risk factors for risk-attributable cancer DALYs in low SDI locations in 2019, whereas DALYs in high SDI locations mirrored the top three global risk factor rankings. From 2010 to 2019, global risk-attributable cancer deaths increased by 20.4% (12.6-28.4) and DALYs by 16.8% (8.8-25.0), with the greatest percentage increase in metabolic risks (34.7% [27.9-42.8] and 33.3% [25.8-42.0]). Interpretation The leading risk factors contributing to global cancer burden in 2019 were behavioural, whereas metabolic risk factors saw the largest increases between 2010 and 2019. Reducing exposure to these modifiable risk factors would decrease cancer mortality and DALY rates worldwide, and policies should be tailored appropriately to local cancer risk factor burden. Copyright (C) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license.Peer reviewe

Statement of Second Brazilian Congress of Mechanical Ventilarion : part I

Resumo não disponíve

Cancer Incidence, Mortality, Years of Life Lost, Years Lived With Disability, and Disability-Adjusted Life Years for 29 Cancer Groups From 2010 to 2019: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.

The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019 (GBD 2019) provided systematic estimates of incidence, morbidity, and mortality to inform local and international efforts toward reducing cancer burden. To estimate cancer burden and trends globally for 204 countries and territories and by Sociodemographic Index (SDI) quintiles from 2010 to 2019. The GBD 2019 estimation methods were used to describe cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in 2019 and over the past decade. Estimates are also provided by quintiles of the SDI, a composite measure of educational attainment, income per capita, and total fertility rate for those younger than 25 years. Estimates include 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs). In 2019, there were an estimated 23.6 million (95% UI, 22.2-24.9 million) new cancer cases (17.2 million when excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and 10.0 million (95% UI, 9.36-10.6 million) cancer deaths globally, with an estimated 250 million (235-264 million) DALYs due to cancer. Since 2010, these represented a 26.3% (95% UI, 20.3%-32.3%) increase in new cases, a 20.9% (95% UI, 14.2%-27.6%) increase in deaths, and a 16.0% (95% UI, 9.3%-22.8%) increase in DALYs. Among 22 groups of diseases and injuries in the GBD 2019 study, cancer was second only to cardiovascular diseases for the number of deaths, years of life lost, and DALYs globally in 2019. Cancer burden differed across SDI quintiles. The proportion of years lived with disability that contributed to DALYs increased with SDI, ranging from 1.4% (1.1%-1.8%) in the low SDI quintile to 5.7% (4.2%-7.1%) in the high SDI quintile. While the high SDI quintile had the highest number of new cases in 2019, the middle SDI quintile had the highest number of cancer deaths and DALYs. From 2010 to 2019, the largest percentage increase in the numbers of cases and deaths occurred in the low and low-middle SDI quintiles. The results of this systematic analysis suggest that the global burden of cancer is substantial and growing, with burden differing by SDI. These results provide comprehensive and comparable estimates that can potentially inform efforts toward equitable cancer control around the world.Funding/Support: The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation received funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities. Dr Aljunid acknowledges the Department of Health Policy and Management of Kuwait University and the International Centre for Casemix and Clinical Coding, National University of Malaysia for the approval and support to participate in this research project. Dr Bhaskar acknowledges institutional support from the NSW Ministry of Health and NSW Health Pathology. Dr Bärnighausen was supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation through the Alexander von Humboldt Professor award, which is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research. Dr Braithwaite acknowledges funding from the National Institutes of Health/ National Cancer Institute. Dr Conde acknowledges financial support from the European Research Council ERC Starting Grant agreement No 848325. Dr Costa acknowledges her grant (SFRH/BHD/110001/2015), received by Portuguese national funds through Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, IP under the Norma Transitória grant DL57/2016/CP1334/CT0006. Dr Ghith acknowledges support from a grant from Novo Nordisk Foundation (NNF16OC0021856). Dr Glasbey is supported by a National Institute of Health Research Doctoral Research Fellowship. Dr Vivek Kumar Gupta acknowledges funding support from National Health and Medical Research Council Australia. Dr Haque thanks Jazan University, Saudi Arabia for providing access to the Saudi Digital Library for this research study. Drs Herteliu, Pana, and Ausloos are partially supported by a grant of the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research and Innovation, CNDS-UEFISCDI, project number PN-III-P4-ID-PCCF-2016-0084. Dr Hugo received support from the Higher Education Improvement Coordination of the Brazilian Ministry of Education for a sabbatical period at the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, between September 2019 and August 2020. Dr Sheikh Mohammed Shariful Islam acknowledges funding by a National Heart Foundation of Australia Fellowship and National Health and Medical Research Council Emerging Leadership Fellowship. Dr Jakovljevic acknowledges support through grant OI 175014 of the Ministry of Education Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia. Dr Katikireddi acknowledges funding from a NHS Research Scotland Senior Clinical Fellowship (SCAF/15/02), the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00022/2), and the Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office (SPHSU17). Dr Md Nuruzzaman Khan acknowledges the support of Jatiya Kabi Kazi Nazrul Islam University, Bangladesh. Dr Yun Jin Kim was supported by the Research Management Centre, Xiamen University Malaysia (XMUMRF/2020-C6/ITCM/0004). Dr Koulmane Laxminarayana acknowledges institutional support from Manipal Academy of Higher Education. Dr Landires is a member of the Sistema Nacional de Investigación, which is supported by Panama’s Secretaría Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación. Dr Loureiro was supported by national funds through Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia under the Scientific Employment Stimulus–Institutional Call (CEECINST/00049/2018). Dr Molokhia is supported by the National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Center at Guy’s and St Thomas’ National Health Service Foundation Trust and King’s College London. Dr Moosavi appreciates NIGEB's support. Dr Pati acknowledges support from the SIAN Institute, Association for Biodiversity Conservation & Research. Dr Rakovac acknowledges a grant from the government of the Russian Federation in the context of World Health Organization Noncommunicable Diseases Office. Dr Samy was supported by a fellowship from the Egyptian Fulbright Mission Program. Dr Sheikh acknowledges support from Health Data Research UK. Drs Adithi Shetty and Unnikrishnan acknowledge support given by Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal Academy of Higher Education. Dr Pavanchand H. Shetty acknowledges Manipal Academy of Higher Education for their research support. Dr Diego Augusto Santos Silva was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil Finance Code 001 and is supported in part by CNPq (302028/2018-8). Dr Zhu acknowledges the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas grant RP210042

[pt] UM OLHAR FILOSÓFICO SOBRE O PENSAMENTO MÉDICO: UMA AVALIAÇÃO DA INTERAÇÃO ENTRE OS SABERES FILOSÓFICO E MÉDICO, SOB O ENFOQUE DO DESENVOLVIMENTO DA ANALOGIA MÉDICA

Nesta tese, à luz do prisma filosófico, empreendemos um olhar que abrangeu o pensamento médico filosófico desde a Antiguidade até a Revolução Terapêutica. Nosso olhar contemplou: na Antiguidade, uma época em que houve uma estreita colaboração entre Filosofia e Medicina, baseada na pesquisa mútua dos aspectos etiológicos, quer da enfermidade da alma, quer daquela do corpo; foi a época do nascimento e apogeu da Analogia Médica; na Idade Média, identificou um estado de hibernação da Analogia Médica no século XII, seguido de um leve despertar no século XIII, a volta a um estado de adormecimento e o despertar definitivo, no século XV; na Renascença, captou a retomada dos textos médicos e a queda do saber galênico tradicional; na Modernidade, finalmente, diagnosticou o início do distanciamento entre os saberes filosófico e médico, com o respectivo definhamento da Analogia Médica. Desde então, nosso olhar aprofundou se nas idas e vindas do saber médico filosófico, especulando as causas e consequências desse distanciamento, e chegou à conclusão de que o legado deixado pelo pensamento médico moderno orientou e orienta a Medicina contemporânea para um sentido de desumanização em relação à pessoa do paciente. Por fim, depois de tanto ver, nossa razão assentiu para a necessidade de uma reforma na Medicina, principalmente em sua paidéia, baseada numa próxima colaboração com a Filosofia a fim de receber subsídios quando à questão central de qualquer procedimento terapêutico: qual é o ser do ser humano?In this Thesis, using the light of the philosophical prism, we undertake an examination embracing medical philosophical thought beginning in antiquity, continuing up until the Therapeutic Revolution. Our view contemplates: in antiquity, a time during which there was a strict collaboration between Philosophy and Medicine, based upon mutual research of the etiological aspects of disease not only of the soul but also of the body; it was the time of the birth and apogee of the Medical Analogy; during the Middle Ages it was possible to identify that the Medical Analogy had entered a state of hibernation in the twelfth century, followed by a slight awakening in the thirteenth century, returning to a state of sleep, with the final awakening occurring in the fifteenth century; during the Renaissance it captured a return to the medical texts and the fall of traditional Galenic knowledge; finally during the Modern era we have diagnosed the initial phases of a distancing between philosophical and medical knowledge, with a respective weakening of Medical Analogy. Since the Modern era our examination has focused upon the vacillations of medical philosophical knowledge, speculating upon the causes and consequences of this distancing, and our examination found that the legacy left by modern medical thought has oriented and continues to orient Modern Medicine towards a dehumanization in relation to the person of the patient. Finally, we concluded that medical reform is needed, principally, in its Paideia, based upon a closer collaboration with philosophy, with the intent to provide subsidies to help answer the central question of any therapeutic procedure, which is: what is the nature of the being of the human being

Instrumento de avaliação de disciplina e professor

Unavailable.Indisponível