Hispano-Americans in Europe: what do we know about their health status and determinants? A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Policy makers and health practitioners are in need of guidance to respond to the growing geographic mobility of Hispano-American migrants in Europe. Drawing from contributions from epidemiology, social sciences, demography, psychology, psychiatry and economy, this scoping review provides an up-to-date and comprehensive synthesis of studies addressing the health status and determinants of this population. We describe major research gaps and suggest specific avenues of further inquiry. METHODS: We identified systematically papers that addressed the concepts "health" and "Hispano Americans" indexed in five data bases from Jan 1990 to May 2014 with no language restrictions. We screened the 4,464 citations retrieved against exclusion criteria and classified 193 selected references in 12 thematic folders with the aid of the reference management software ENDNOTE X6. After reviewing the full text of all papers we extracted relevant data systematically into a table template to facilitate the synthesising process. RESULTS: Most studies focused on a particular disease, leaving unexplored the interlinkages between different health conditions and how these relate to legislative, health services, environmental, occupational, and other health determinants. We elucidated some consistent results but there were many heterogeneous findings and several popular beliefs were not fully supported by empirical evidence. Few studies adopted a trans-national perspective and many consisted of cross-sectional descriptions that considered "Hispano-Americans" as a homogeneous category, limiting our analysis. Our results are also constrained by the availability and varying quality of studies reviewed./nCONCLUSIONS:/nBurgeoning research has produced some consistent findings but there are huge gaps in knowledge. To prevent unhelpful generalisations we need a more holistic and nuanced understanding of how mobility, ethnicity, income, gender, legislative status, employment status, working conditions, neighbourhood characteristics and social status intersect with demographic variables and policy contexts to influence the health of the diverse Hispano-American populations present in Europe

Rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in stable cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND: We evaluated whether rivaroxaban alone or in combination with aspirin would be more effective than aspirin alone for secondary cardiovascular prevention. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 27,395 participants with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease to receive rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (100 mg once daily), rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily), or aspirin (100 mg once daily). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction. The study was stopped for superiority of the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group after a mean follow-up of 23 months. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group than in the aspirin-alone group (379 patients [4.1%] vs. 496 patients [5.4%]; hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.86; P<0.001; z=−4.126), but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group (288 patients [3.1%] vs. 170 patients [1.9%]; hazard ratio, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.40 to 2.05; P<0.001). There was no significant difference in intracranial or fatal bleeding between these two groups. There were 313 deaths (3.4%) in the rivaroxaban-plus-aspirin group as compared with 378 (4.1%) in the aspirin-alone group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.96; P=0.01; threshold P value for significance, 0.0025). The primary outcome did not occur in significantly fewer patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group than in the aspirin-alone group, but major bleeding events occurred in more patients in the rivaroxaban-alone group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, those assigned to rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin had better cardiovascular outcomes and more major bleeding events than those assigned to aspirin alone. Rivaroxaban (5 mg twice daily) alone did not result in better cardiovascular outcomes than aspirin alone and resulted in more major bleeding events