HIV AND HCV COINFECTION: PREVALENCE, ASSOCIATED FACTORS AND GENOTYPE CHARACTERIZATION IN THE MIDWEST REGION OF BRAZIL

Estudo transversal sobre a prevalência, fatores associados e distribuição dos genótipos do HCV foi realizado em 848 pacientes infectados pelo HIV, recrutados em centros de referência na Região Centro-Oeste do Brasil. A taxa de prevalência de coinfecção HIV-HCV foi de 6,9% (IC 95%: 5,2-8,6). Na análise multivariada, o aumento da idade, o uso de drogas ilícitas (injetáveis e não injetáveis), história de transfusão de sangue antes de 1994, e ausência de companheiro constante foram fatores associados independentes e significativos para a coinfecção HIV-HCV. A análise filogenética baseada na região NS5B revelou a presença de dois principais genótipos do HCV em circulação: genótipos 1 (58,3%) e 3 (41,7%). A prevalência da coinfecção HIV-HCV foi menor do que as relatadas em estudos realizados com pacientes infectados pelo HIV em diferentes regiões do Brasil, devido ao fato de que o uso de drogas ilícitas não é modo frequente de transmissão do HIV neste Estado do Brasil. Triagem sorológica de pacientes HIV-positivos para HCV antes de iniciar o tratamento antirretroviral, identificação completa dos fatores associados e a implementação de programas eficazes de redução de danos são altamente recomendados para fornecer informações úteis, para o tratamento e para evitar a coinfecção com HCV nestes pacientes.A cross-sectional study on prevalence, associated factors and genotype distribution of HCV infection was conducted among 848 HIV-infected patients recruited at reference centers in the Midwest Region of Brazil. The prevalence rate of HIV-HCV coinfection was 6.9% (95% CI: 5.2 to 8.6). In multivariable analysis, increasing age, use of illicit drugs (injection and non-injection), a history of blood transfusion before 1994, and the absence of a steady partnership were significant independent associated factors for HIV-HCV coinfection. The phylogenetic analysis based on the NS5B region revealed the presence of two major circulating genotypes of HCV: genotypes 1 (58.3%) and 3 (41.7%). The prevalence of HIV-HCV coinfection was lower than those reported in studies conducted with HIV-infected patients in different regions of Brazil, due to the fact that illicit drug use is not a frequent mode of HIV transmission in this region of Brazil. Serologic screening of HIV-patients for HCV before initiating antiretroviral treatment, a comprehensive identification of associated factors, and the implementation of effective harm reduction programs are highly recommended to provide useful information for treatment and to prevent HCV coinfection in these patients

Effect of flexible family visitation on delirium among patients in the Intensive Care Unit: the ICU visits randomized clinical trial

Fernando Augusto Bozza. Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Instituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas. Documento produzido em parceria ou por autor vinculado à Fiocruz, mas não consta a informação no documento.Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Moinhos de Vento (HMV), Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Rosa, D. B. da Silva, Eugênio, Haack, Medeiros, Tonietto, Teixeira); Research Projects Office, HMV, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Rosa, Falavigna, D. B. da Silva, Sganzerla, Santos, Kochhann, de Moura, Eugênio, Haack, Barbosa, Robinson, Schneider, de Oliveira, Jeffman, Medeiros, Hammes); Brazilian Research in Intensive Care Network (BRICNet), São Paulo, São Paulo (Rosa, Cavalcanti, Machado, Azevedo, Salluh, Nobre, Bozza, Teixeira); HCor Research Institute, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil (Cavalcanti); Department of Anesthesiology, Pain and Intensive Care, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP), São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil (Machado); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Sírio-Libanês, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil (Azevedo); Department of Critical Care, Instituto D’Or de Pesquisa e Ensino, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (Salluh, Mesquita, Bozza); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (HCPA), Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Pellegrini, Moraes); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz do Sul, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Foernges); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Santa Rita, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Torelly); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Universitário do Oeste do Paraná, Cascavel, Paraná, Brazil (Ayres, Duarte); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital do Câncer de Cascavel, Cascavel, Paraná, Brazil (Duarte); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil (Lovato); Intensive Care Unit, Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Feira de Santana, Feira de Santana, Bahia, Brazil (Sampaio); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Geral Clériston Andrade, Feira de Santana, Bahia, Brazil (de Oliveira Júnior); Intensive Care Unit, Santa Casa de Misericórdia de São João Del Rei, São João Del Rei, Minas Gerais, Brazil (Paranhos); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Regional Doutor Deoclécio Marques de Lucena, Parnamirim, Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil (Dantas, de Brito); Intensive Care Unit, Fundação Hospital Adriano Jorge, Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil (Paulo); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Agamenon Magalhães, Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil (Gallindo); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital da Cidade, Passo Fundo, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Pilau); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Mãe de Deus, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Valentim); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital de Urgências de Goiânia, Goiânia, Goiânia, Brazil (Meira Teles); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital das Clínicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil (Nobre); Intensive Care Unit, Pavilhão Pereira Filho, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Birriel); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Regional do Baixo Amazonas, Santarém, Pará, Brazil (Corrêa e Castro); Intensive Care Unit, Hospital Nossa Senhora da Conceição, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (Specht); School of Medicine, Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre (UFCSPA), Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (N. B. da Silva); Department of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston (Korte); Unit of Pediatric Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Ospedale dei Bambini—ASST Spedali Civili, Brescia, Italy (Giannini); Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (Bozza).Submitted by Janaína Nascimento ([email protected]) on 2019-09-11T14:37:38Z No. of bitstreams: 1 ve_Rosa_Regis_etal_INI_2019.pdf: 616825 bytes, checksum: 2aae5be305137324e272a08cc32e9270 (MD5)Approved for entry into archive by Janaína Nascimento ([email protected]) on 2019-09-11T14:52:11Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 ve_Rosa_Regis_etal_INI_2019.pdf: 616825 bytes, checksum: 2aae5be305137324e272a08cc32e9270 (MD5)Made available in DSpace on 2019-09-11T14:52:11Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ve_Rosa_Regis_etal_INI_2019.pdf: 616825 bytes, checksum: 2aae5be305137324e272a08cc32e9270 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019Múltipla - Ver em Notas.IMPORTANCE: The effects of intensive care unit (ICU) visiting hours remain uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a flexible family visitation policy in the ICU reduces the incidence of delirium. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Cluster-crossover randomized clinical trial involving patients, family members, and clinicians from 36 adult ICUs with restricted visiting hours (<4.5 hours per day) in Brazil. Participants were recruited from April 2017 to June 2018, with follow-up until July 2018. INTERVENTIONS: Flexible visitation (up to 12 hours per day) supported by family education (n = 837 patients, 652 family members, and 435 clinicians) or usual restricted visitation (median, 1.5 hours per day; n = 848 patients, 643 family members, and 391 clinicians). Nineteen ICUs started with flexible visitation, and 17 started with restricted visitation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcome was incidence of delirium during ICU stay, assessed using the CAM-ICU. Secondary outcomes included ICU-acquired infections for patients; symptoms of anxiety and depression assessed using the HADS (range, 0 [best] to 21 [worst]) for family members; and burnout for ICU staff (Maslach Burnout Inventory). RESULTS: Among 1685 patients, 1295 family members, and 826 clinicians enrolled, 1685 patients (100%) (mean age, 58.5 years; 47.2% women), 1060 family members (81.8%) (mean age, 45.2 years; 70.3% women), and 737 clinicians (89.2%) (mean age, 35.5 years; 72.9% women) completed the trial. The mean daily duration of visits was significantly higher with flexible visitation (4.8 vs 1.4 hours; adjusted difference, 3.4 hours [95% CI, 2.8 to 3.9]; P < .001). The incidence of delirium during ICU stay was not significantly different between flexible and restricted visitation (18.9% vs 20.1%; adjusted difference, −1.7% [95% CI, −6.1% to 2.7%]; P = .44). Among 9 prespecified secondary outcomes, 6 did not differ significantly between flexible and restricted visitation, including ICU-acquired infections (3.7% vs 4.5%; adjusted difference, −0.8% [95% CI, −2.1% to 1.0%]; P = .38) and staff burnout (22.0% vs 24.8%; adjusted difference, −3.8% [95% CI, −4.8% to 12.5%]; P = .36). For family members, median anxiety (6.0 vs 7.0; adjusted difference, −1.6 [95% CI, −2.3 to −0.9]; P < .001) and depression scores (4.0 vs 5.0; adjusted difference, −1.2 [95% CI, −2.0 to −0.4]; P = .003) were significantly better with flexible visitation. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients in the ICU, a flexible family visitation policy, vs standard restricted visiting hours, did not significantly reduce the incidence of delirium