Influencia de la carrera a pie sobre el hábito tabáquico

ObjetivoInvestigar si la carrera a pie influye sobre el hábito tabáquico.DiseñoEstudio de casos y controles, con emparejamiento 1:1. Observación longitudinal retrospectiva.EmplazamientoAtención primaria. Ciudad de Toledo.ParticipantesCasos: 48 corredores voluntarios sanos de 47 ± 7,8 años de edad. Controles: 48 sujetos sanos, emparejados por sexo y año de nacimiento, elegidos al azar entre la población adscrita al medico investigador.Mediciones principalesHábito tabáquico y gramos semanales de alcohol mediante cuestionario, peso, talla, presión arterial y frecuencia cardíaca de reposo. Se obtuvieron las odds ratio (OR) de las proporciones de sujetos que fumaban o habían fumado alguna vez, de los que seguían fumando y de las probabilidades de abandono del tabaco de cada grupo.ResultadosLa OR de la proporción de sujetos que fumaban o habían fumado entre los grupos de corredores (54,2%) y controles (70,9%) era de 0,486 (intervalo de confianza [IC] del 95%, 0,205-1,149; χ2=2,8; p=0,093). La OR para continuación del hábito entre los grupos de corredores (8,4%) y controles (41,7%) era de 0,127 (IC del 95%, 0,035-0,456; χ2=14,0; p=0,0002). En el grupo de corredores había abandonado el tabaco el 45,8% y en el de controles, el 31,2% (OR=7,85; IC del 95%, 1,89-32,52; χ2=11,8; p=0,0007). El 50% de los corredores que fumaban lo había dejado desde que comenzó a correr y el 76,9% de éstos lo había dejado justo en el momento de comenzar a correr.ConclusionesHay una asociación negativa entre carrera a pie y tabaco. Si un fumador decide comenzar a correr regularmente, tiene muchas probabilidades de dejar de fumar y mantenerse así.ObjectiveTo investigate whether running influences smoking habits.DesignStudy of cases and controls, with 1:1 pairing. Retrospective longitudinal observational study.SettingPrimary care City of Toledo, Spain.ParticipantsCases: 48 healthy volunteer runners of 47±7.8 years of age. Controls: 48 healthy subjects, paired by gender and year of birth, chosen at random from the medical list assigned to the medical researcher.Principal measurementsSmoking habits and alcohol consumption in grams per week using a questionnaire, weight, height, blood pressure, and heart rate at rest. The odds ratio (OR) was obtained on the proportion of subjects who smoked or smoked at some time, those who continued smoking and the probabilities of giving up tobacco in each group.ResultsThe OR of the proportion of subjects who smoked or had smoked between the groups of runners (54.2%) and controls (70.9%) was 0.486 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.205-1.149; χ2=2.8; P=.093). The OR for continuing the habit between groups of runners (8.4%) and controls (41.7%) was 0.127 (95% CI, 0.035-0.456; χ2=14.0; P=.0002). In the group of runners, 45.8% had stopped smoking, as well as 31.2% of the controls (OR=7.85; 95% CI, 1.89-32.52; χ2=11.8; P=.0007); 50% of the runners who smoked had given it up since starting to run and 76.9% of these had given it up just at the time of starting to run.ConclusionsThere is a negative association between running and tobacco. If a smoker decides to run regularly he/she has high probabilities of giving up smoking and continue to do so

Rationale and design of a randomised controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of an exercise program to improve the quality of life of patients with heart failure in primary care : the EFICAR study protocol

Background: Quality of life (QoL) decreases as heart failure worsens, which is one of the greatest worries of these patients. Physical exercise has been shown to be safe for people with heart failure. Previous studies have tested heterogeneous exercise programs using different QoL instruments and reported inconsistent effects on QoL. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a new exercise program for people with heart failure (EFICAR), additional to the recommended optimal treatment in primary care, to improve QoL, functional capacity and control of cardiovascular risk factors. Methods/Design: Multicenter clinical trial in which 600 patients with heart failure in NYHA class II-IV will be randomized to two parallel groups: EFICAR and control. After being recruited, through the reference cardiology services, in six health centres from the Spanish Primary Care Prevention and Health Promotion Research Network (redIAPP), patients are followed for 1 year after the beginning of the intervention. Both groups receive the optimized treatment according to the European Society of Cardiology guidelines. In addition, the EFICAR group performs a 3 month supervised progressive exercise program with an aerobic (high-intensity intervals) and a strength component; and the programme continues linked with community resources for 9 months. The main outcome measure is the change in health-related QoL measured by the SF-36 and the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaires at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months. Secondary outcomes considered are changes in functional capacity measured by the 6-Minute Walking Test, cardiac structure (B-type natriuretic peptides), muscle strength and body composition. Both groups will be compared on an intention to treat basis, using multi-level longitudinal mixed models. Sex, age, social class, co-morbidity and cardiovascular risk factors will be considered as potential confounding and predictor variables. Discussion: A key challenges of this study is to guarantee the safety of the patients; however, the current scientific evidence supports the notion of there being no increase in the risk of decompensation, cardiac events, hospitalizations and deaths associated with exercise, but rather the opposite. Safety assurance will be based on an optimized standardised pharmacological therapy and health education for all the participants

Healthcare workers hospitalized due to COVID-19 have no higher risk of death than general population. Data from the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry

Aim To determine whether healthcare workers (HCW) hospitalized in Spain due to COVID-19 have a worse prognosis than non-healthcare workers (NHCW). Methods Observational cohort study based on the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry, a nationwide registry that collects sociodemographic, clinical, laboratory, and treatment data on patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in Spain. Patients aged 20-65 years were selected. A multivariate logistic regression model was performed to identify factors associated with mortality. Results As of 22 May 2020, 4393 patients were included, of whom 419 (9.5%) were HCW. Median (interquartile range) age of HCW was 52 (15) years and 62.4% were women. Prevalence of comorbidities and severe radiological findings upon admission were less frequent in HCW. There were no difference in need of respiratory support and admission to intensive care unit, but occurrence of sepsis and in-hospital mortality was lower in HCW (1.7% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.024 and 0.7% vs. 4.8%; p<0.001 respectively). Age, male sex and comorbidity, were independently associated with higher in-hospital mortality and healthcare working with lower mortality (OR 0.211, 95%CI 0.067-0.667, p = 0.008). 30-days survival was higher in HCW (0.968 vs. 0.851 p<0.001). Conclusions Hospitalized COVID-19 HCW had fewer comorbidities and a better prognosis than NHCW. Our results suggest that professional exposure to COVID-19 in HCW does not carry more clinical severity nor mortality

Treatment with tocilizumab or corticosteroids for COVID-19 patients with hyperinflammatory state: a multicentre cohort study (SAM-COVID-19)

Objectives: The objective of this study was to estimate the association between tocilizumab or corticosteroids and the risk of intubation or death in patients with coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) with a hyperinflammatory state according to clinical and laboratory parameters. Methods: A cohort study was performed in 60 Spanish hospitals including 778 patients with COVID-19 and clinical and laboratory data indicative of a hyperinflammatory state. Treatment was mainly with tocilizumab, an intermediate-high dose of corticosteroids (IHDC), a pulse dose of corticosteroids (PDC), combination therapy, or no treatment. Primary outcome was intubation or death; follow-up was 21 days. Propensity score-adjusted estimations using Cox regression (logistic regression if needed) were calculated. Propensity scores were used as confounders, matching variables and for the inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTWs). Results: In all, 88, 117, 78 and 151 patients treated with tocilizumab, IHDC, PDC, and combination therapy, respectively, were compared with 344 untreated patients. The primary endpoint occurred in 10 (11.4%), 27 (23.1%), 12 (15.4%), 40 (25.6%) and 69 (21.1%), respectively. The IPTW-based hazard ratios (odds ratio for combination therapy) for the primary endpoint were 0.32 (95%CI 0.22-0.47; p < 0.001) for tocilizumab, 0.82 (0.71-1.30; p 0.82) for IHDC, 0.61 (0.43-0.86; p 0.006) for PDC, and 1.17 (0.86-1.58; p 0.30) for combination therapy. Other applications of the propensity score provided similar results, but were not significant for PDC. Tocilizumab was also associated with lower hazard of death alone in IPTW analysis (0.07; 0.02-0.17; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Tocilizumab might be useful in COVID-19 patients with a hyperinflammatory state and should be prioritized for randomized trials in this situatio