Community projects based on Art & Health: A collaboration between the Faculty of Fine Arts at the Complutense University of Madrid and Madrid city council's Madrid Salud Service

In 2011 the Faculty of Fine Arts at the Complutense University of Madrid, and Madrid City Council's Health Promotion and Prevention Service (Madrid Salud Service) signed a collaboration agreement for developing joint projects and activities. This mutual collaboration agreement has generated an extremely active working network, in which university students supported by health service professionals plus Faculty academics and researchers have designed, and developed, community projects based on art and health with a number of groups (children, adolescents, women at risk, people with diversity, etc.). Across all these projects, both artistic creativity and art education have worked as mediators to offer significant experiences in promoting health. These arts programs (painting, drawing, photography, textiles, dialogues, and art appreciation) have been designed and developed by students for these communities and groups. These community projects based on art and health emphasise the capacity for commitment and collaboration of the groups and communities involved. Students and participants create together and in an atmosphere of trust, with awareness of their abilities and of the importance of art as a tool for changing their realities, in other words, as a tool for social transformation

The evolution of the ventilatory ratio is a prognostic factor in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 ARDS patients

Background: Mortality due to COVID-19 is high, especially in patients requiring mechanical ventilation. The purpose of the study is to investigate associations between mortality and variables measured during the first three days of mechanical ventilation in patients with COVID-19 intubated at ICU admission. Methods: Multicenter, observational, cohort study includes consecutive patients with COVID-19 admitted to 44 Spanish ICUs between February 25 and July 31, 2020, who required intubation at ICU admission and mechanical ventilation for more than three days. We collected demographic and clinical data prior to admission; information about clinical evolution at days 1 and 3 of mechanical ventilation; and outcomes. Results: Of the 2,095 patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU, 1,118 (53.3%) were intubated at day 1 and remained under mechanical ventilation at day three. From days 1 to 3, PaO2/FiO2 increased from 115.6 [80.0-171.2] to 180.0 [135.4-227.9] mmHg and the ventilatory ratio from 1.73 [1.33-2.25] to 1.96 [1.61-2.40]. In-hospital mortality was 38.7%. A higher increase between ICU admission and day 3 in the ventilatory ratio (OR 1.04 [CI 1.01-1.07], p = 0.030) and creatinine levels (OR 1.05 [CI 1.01-1.09], p = 0.005) and a lower increase in platelet counts (OR 0.96 [CI 0.93-1.00], p = 0.037) were independently associated with a higher risk of death. No association between mortality and the PaO2/FiO2 variation was observed (OR 0.99 [CI 0.95 to 1.02], p = 0.47). Conclusions: Higher ventilatory ratio and its increase at day 3 is associated with mortality in patients with COVID-19 receiving mechanical ventilation at ICU admission. No association was found in the PaO2/FiO2 variation

CIBERER : Spanish national network for research on rare diseases: A highly productive collaborative initiative

Altres ajuts: Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII); Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación.CIBER (Center for Biomedical Network Research; Centro de Investigación Biomédica En Red) is a public national consortium created in 2006 under the umbrella of the Spanish National Institute of Health Carlos III (ISCIII). This innovative research structure comprises 11 different specific areas dedicated to the main public health priorities in the National Health System. CIBERER, the thematic area of CIBER focused on rare diseases (RDs) currently consists of 75 research groups belonging to universities, research centers, and hospitals of the entire country. CIBERER's mission is to be a center prioritizing and favoring collaboration and cooperation between biomedical and clinical research groups, with special emphasis on the aspects of genetic, molecular, biochemical, and cellular research of RDs. This research is the basis for providing new tools for the diagnosis and therapy of low-prevalence diseases, in line with the International Rare Diseases Research Consortium (IRDiRC) objectives, thus favoring translational research between the scientific environment of the laboratory and the clinical setting of health centers. In this article, we intend to review CIBERER's 15-year journey and summarize the main results obtained in terms of internationalization, scientific production, contributions toward the discovery of new therapies and novel genes associated to diseases, cooperation with patients' associations and many other topics related to RD research

Epidemiología de campo y epidemiología social Field epidemiology and social epidemiology

Mediante la comparación de la epidemiología de campo y la epidemiología social, se pretende reflexionar sobre los imaginarios no explícitos que operan en ambos ámbitos, necesariamente convergentes, sobre los obstáculos de la práctica epidemiológica actual para alcanzar su función social y sobre la necesidad de cambiar las bases epistemológicas, metodológicas y prácticas que operan en la epidemiología, empezando por la formación del epidemiólogo de campo. La epidemiología de campo tiende a la acción sin marco teórico. La epidemiología social, por el contrario, tiende a los desarrollos teóricos (reflexión e investigación sobre los determinantes sociales) alejados de la acción, debido a los limitantes para cambiar las políticas públicas. Otras diferencias se sitúan en el nivel de intervención (micro/macroespacios), el objeto de intervención (control del brote frente a control de las desigualdades) y en la forma de articular la comunicación con la sociedad. Se asemejan en la preocupación por el método, la predominancia de una orientación positivista y condicionada por la estadística, aunque en proceso de cierta apertura epistemológica, la tensión experimentada entre relacionarse con un mundo virtual de bases de datos o con la sociedad real, su situación en la periferia del sistema político-social-institucional-profesional y por estar abocadas a la frustración profesional. Finalmente, se formulan 10 interrogantes a los epidemiólogos de campo sobre su práctica actual, a través de los cuales se podría evaluar si están realizando una epidemiología social, y se sugieren cambios para introducir en la formación y práctica del epidemiólogo.<br>Comparing field epidemiology and social epidemiology, we pretend to think about the no explicit images and meanings operating in both necessary convergent fields, about the obstacles present in epidemiological practice to fulfil its social function and about the necessity of changing epistemological, methodological and practice grounds, beginning with field epidemiologists teaching programmes. Field epidemiology would tend to act in an absent theoretical frame. On the other hand, social epidemiology would tend to prioritize theoretical developments (thinking and research about social determinants) without correspondent action, because of the limits to change public policies. Other differences are found at intervention level (micro-macrospace), its aim (outbreak control vs. inequalities control) and the way to communicate with society. They are similar in the methodological concern, the predominance of orientation based on positivism and framed through statistic methods, but in process of epistemological opening, the stress experienced between the alternative relationship to a virtual world of data bases or to the real society, their peripherical situation in relation of the political, social, institutional and professional system and the tendency to professional frustration. Finally, we ask ten questions to the field epidemiologists related with their present practice, in order to consider if they are developing social epidemiology, and propose some changes in epidemiologist teaching and practice

Intersectorality and social participation as coping policies for health inequities-worldwide

Objective: To determine the impact that intersectoral policies and social participation, implemented worldwide, have had on the modification of the social determinants for health and on the reduction of social health inequities. Method: A scoping review of the literature published in the period 2005-2015 was performed. The literature search was conducted on PubMed and Scielo databases. Two researchers reviewed each document. Data were analysed according to the intersectoral action and social participation variables and according to the theoretical frameworks of the Social Determinants Model of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH) and the theoretical constructs of Social Capital (SC) and Life Course (LC). Results: Out of 45 documents likely to be selected for final review, all of them based on title and abstract, 20 documents were eventually picked out and analysed; most them (n = 8) were conducted in all Latin America and Latin America's countries. Twelve documents reported intersectoral action associated with social participation in partnership with different institutions. Regarding theoretical frameworks, most of studies (n = 8) used CSDH and SC. In relation to health outcomes, the studies showed mainly: increased access to health and education, follow-up of pregnant women, increasing in prenatal examinations, reduction in malnutrition/child mortality, reduction in extreme poverty/hunger; reduction in epidemics/tuberculosis, control of alcohol/drug consumption, promotion of health/mental as well as basic sanitation improvements. Conclusions: Intersectoral and social participation experiences studied yielded positive outcomes regarding health status and quality of life in the communities in which such experiences were implemented. Resumen: Objetivo: Determinar el impacto que las políticas intersectoriales y la participación social, implementadas en todo el mundo, han tenido tanto en la modificación de los determinantes sociales de la salud como en la reducción de las desigualdades sociales en salud. Método: Se realizó una revisión exploratoria (periodo 2005-2015). La búsqueda bibliográfica se hizo en las bases de datos PubMed y Scielo. Cada artículo fue revisado por dos investigadores. Los datos fueron analizados según las variables de acción intersectorial y participación social, y de acuerdo con los marcos teóricos: modelo de determinantes sociales de la Comisión de Determinantes Sociales de la Salud (CDSS) y constructos teóricos de capital social (CS) y curso de la vida. Resultados: De los 45 documentos seleccionables para la revisión final, basándose en el título y el resumen, 20 fueron seleccionados y analizados; la mayoría (n = 8) realizados en América Latina. Doce artículos informaban sobre acciones intersectoriales en asociación con participación social en colaboración con diferentes instituciones. En cuanto a los marcos teóricos, la mayoría (n = 8) utilizaron CDSS y CS. En relación con los resultados de salud, los estudios mostraron principalmente: mayor acceso a la salud y educación, seguimiento de embarazadas, aumento en exámenes prenatales, reducción de la desnutrición/mortalidad infantil, reducción de la pobreza extrema/hambre, reducción de las epidemias/tuberculosis, control del consumo de alcohol/drogas, promoción de la salud/salud mental, y mejoras en el saneamiento básico. Conclusiones: Las experiencias intersectoriales y de participación social estudiadas arrojan resultados positivos en el estado de salud y calidad de vida de las comunidades en que fueron implementadas. Keywords: Intersectorality, Social participation, Social inequities, Social determinants of health, Policies, Palabras clave: Intersectorialidad, Participación social, Desigualdades sociales, Determinantes sociales de la salud, Política