scholarly journals 234 Vegetable, fruit, dairy and discretionary food intake of cystic fibrosis (CF) patients and comparison with the general population: A cross-sectional study

2015 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. S118
Author(s):  
A.C. Tierney ◽  
S.A. Fong-To ◽  
M. Clode ◽  
J. Casamento ◽  
A. Tsee Woon Yuen ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Oluwaseun Esan ◽  
Daniella Schlüter ◽  
Rhiannon Phillips ◽  
Rebecca Cosgriff ◽  
Shantini Parajothy ◽  
...  

Objective To estimate the pregnancy rates and outcomes for women with cystic fibrosis (wwCF) in the UK compared to the general population and to explore the impact of the introduction of disease modifying treatments on pregnancy rates. Design A population-based cross-sectional study. Setting Electronic records of UK CF Registry Data (~99% of all CF), and conceptions data for England and Wales (E&W). Population All women aged 15-44 years who were pregnant between 2003-2017. Methods We calculated 3-yearly crude and age-specific pregnancy rates per 1,000 women years (wys), pregnancy rates for wwCF with a G551D mutation before and after Ivacaftor was introduced in 2012 and compared live birth rates. Main outcome measures Crude rates, age specific fertility, and maternal morbidity. Results The overall pregnancy rate was 23.5 (95% CI 21.9-25.3) per 1,000 wys, ~3.4fold difference to E&W women (77.7). This pattern was evident in the age specific rates, except for those aged 40-44 years where the difference in rates was much less (wwCF 8.2 per 1,000 wys vs. 13.3 in E&W). LB rate differences mirrored pregnancy rates (wwCF 17.4 per 1000 wys vs. 61.4 E&W women). Following the introduction of Ivacaftor, pregnancy rates in wwCF with G551D increased from 29.5 to 56.9 per 1000wys (2012-2014 to 2015-2017). Conclusions Pregnancy rates in wwCF are about a third of the rates in the general population but on the rise following the introduction of Ivacaftor. There is no indication that there is a reduced chance of a live birth in wwCF who become pregnant.


2016 ◽  
Vol 150 ◽  
pp. 23-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caterina Ledda ◽  
Cristoforo Pomara ◽  
Massimo Bracci ◽  
Dario Mangano ◽  
Vincenzo Ricceri ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Kevin L. Schwartz ◽  
Camille Achonu ◽  
Sarah A. Buchan ◽  
Kevin A. Brown ◽  
Brenda Lee ◽  
...  

AbstractImportanceProtecting healthcare workers (HCWs) from COVID-19 is a priority to maintain a safe and functioning healthcare system. The risk of transmitting COVID-19 to family members is a source of stress for many.ObjectiveTo describe and compare HCW and non-HCW COVID-19 cases in Ontario, Canada, as well as the frequency of COVID-19 among HCWs’ household members.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsUsing reportable disease data at Public Health Ontario which captures all COVID-19 cases in Ontario, Canada, we conducted a population-based cross-sectional study comparing demographic, exposure, and clinical variables between HCWs and non-HCWs with COVID-19 as of 14 May 2020. We calculated rates of infections over time and determined the frequency of within household transmissions using natural language processing based on residential address.Exposures and OutcomesWe contrasted age, gender, comorbidities, clinical presentation (including asymptomatic and presymptomatic), exposure histories including nosocomial transmission, and clinical outcomes between HCWs and non-HCWs with confirmed COVID-19.ResultsThere were 4,230 (17.5%) HCW COVID-19 cases in Ontario, of whom 20.2% were nurses, 2.3% were physicians, and the remaining 77.4% other specialties. HCWs were more likely to be between 30-60 years of age and female. HCWs were more likely to present asymptomatically (8.1% versus 7.0%, p=0.010) or with atypical symptoms (17.8% versus 10.5%, p<0.001). The mortality among HCWs was 0.2% compared to 10.5% of non-HCWs. HCWs commonly had exposures to a confirmed case or outbreak (74.1%), however only 3.1% were confirmed to be nosocomial. The rate of new infections was 5.5 times higher in HCWs than non-HCWs, but mirrored the epidemic curve. We identified 391 (9.8%) probable secondary household transmissions and 143 (3.6%) acquisitions. Children < 19 years comprised 14.6% of secondary cases compared to only 4.2% of the primary cases.Conclusions and RelevanceHCWs represent a disproportionate number of COVID-19 cases in Ontario but with low confirmed numbers of nosocomial transmission. The data support substantial testing bias and under-ascertainment of general population cases. Protecting HCWs through appropriate personal protective equipment and physical distancing from colleagues is paramount.Key PointsQuestionWhat are the differences between healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers with COVID-19?FindingsIn this population-based cross-sectional study there were 4,230 healthcare workers comprising 17.5% of COVID-19 cases. Healthcare workers were diagnosed with COVID-19 at a rate 5.5 times higher than the general population with 0.8% of all healthcare workers, compared to 0.1% of non-healthcare workers.MeaningHigh healthcare worker COVID-19 burden highlights the importance of physical distancing from colleagues, appropriate personal protective equipment, as well as likely substantial testing bias and under-ascertainment of COVID-19 in the general population.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document