Purpose: Hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, azithromycin, and lopinavir/ritonavir are drugs that were used for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during the early pandemic period. It is well-known that these agents can prolong the QTc interval and potentially induce Torsades de Pointes (TdP). We aim to assess the prevalence and risk of QTc prolongation and arrhythmic events in COVID-19 patients treated with these drugs.Methods: We searched electronic databases from inception to September 30, 2020 for studies reporting peak QTc ≥500 ms, peak QTc change ≥60 ms, peak QTc interval, peak change of QTc interval, ventricular arrhythmias, TdP, sudden cardiac death, or atrioventricular block (AVB). All meta-analyses were conducted using a randomeffects model. Results: Forty-seven studies (three case series, 35 cohorts, and nine randomized controlled trials [RCTs]) involving 13 087 patients were included. The pooled prevalence of peak QTc ≥500 ms was 9% (95% confidence interval [95%CI], 3%-18%) and 8% (95%CI, 3%-14%) in patients who received hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin, respectively. Likewise, the use of hydroxychloroquine (risk ratio [RR], 2.68; 95%CI, 1.56-4.60) and hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin (RR, 3.28; 95%CI, 1.16-9.30) was associated with an increased risk of QTc prolongation compared to no treatment. Ventricular arrhythmias, TdP, sudden cardiac death, and AVB were reported in <1% of patients across treatment groups.The only two studies that reported individual data of lopinavir/ritonavir found no cases of QTc prolongation.Conclusions: COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine with or without azithromycin had a relatively high prevalence and risk of QTc prolongation. However, the prevalence of arrhythmic events was very low, probably due to underreporting. The limited information about lopinavir/ritonavir showed that it does not prolong the QTc interval.

RESUMENObjetivos. Evaluar la asociación entre tener una especialidad médica y el ingreso económico mensual en médicos peruanos, y comparar los ingresos económicos entre áreas con mayor y menor densidad de médicos en Perú. Materiales y métodos. Se analizaron los datos de la Encuesta Nacional de Satisfacción de Usuarios de Salud realizada en Perú el año 2015. Esta encuesta con nivel de inferencia nacional fue realizada a médicos que laboran en establecimientos de salud de Perú. Se evaluó el ingreso económico considerando todas las actividades remuneradas del médico. Se calcularon las razones de prevalencia crudas y ajustadas (RP y RPa) y sus intervalos de confianza al 95% (IC95%) mediante regresiones de Poisson con varianza robusta, tomando en cuenta el muestreo complejo de la encuesta. Resultados. De 2219 médicos encuestados, se analizaron 2154 (97,0%) observaciones. La frecuencia de ganar >S/ 5000 (1572,3 USD) mensuales fue de 29,1% en médicos generales; 65,6% en especialistas; 63,0% en especialidades clínicas; 70,5% en especialidades quirúrgicas, y 55,7% en otras especialidades. En comparación a los médicos generales, los médicos con especialidades clínicas, quirúrgicas, y otras especialidades, tuvieron más probabilidades de ganar >S/ 5000 mensuales (RPa = 1,44, 1,49, y 1,26, respectivamente). La probabilidad de ganar >S/ 5000 fue mayor en quienes laboraban en departamentos con baja densidad de médicos. Conclusiones. Los ingresos económicos fueron mayores en médicos especialistas que en no especialistas. Los ingresos económicos fueron mayores en departamentos con menor densidad de médicos, lo cual puede animar a que los médicos laboren en dichos departamentos. Palabras clave: Salarios y beneficios; Recursos humanos; Emigración e inmigración (fuente: DeCS BIREME). ECONOMIC INCOME IN PERUVIAN PHYSICIANS ACCORDING TO THE SPECIALTY: A CROSS-SECTIONAL ANALYSIS OF THE ENSUSALUD 2015 ABSTRACTObjectives. To evaluate the relationship between having a medical specialty and the monthly income of Peruvian doctors, and to compare the economic incomes among areas with higher and lower density of medical doctors in Peru. Materials and methods. We analyzed data of the National Satisfaction Survey of Health Users (in Spanish: ENSUSALUD) carried out in Peru in the year 2015. This survey, with a national level of inference, was performed on physicians working at health facilities in Peru. Monthly income was measured considering all paid activities of the physician. Crude and adjusted prevalence ratios (PR and aPR) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated through Poisson regression models with robust variance, taking into account the complex sampling of the survey. Results. Out of 2 219 Physicians surveyed, 2 154 (97.0%) observations were analyzed. The probability of earning > S/5 000 (1 572.3 USD) per month was 29.1% for general practitioners; 65.6% for specialists; 63.0% for clinical specialists; 70.5% for surgeons, and 55.7% for other specialties. Compared to general practitioners, physicians with clinical, s...

Background The Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) is a widely used instrument to assess depression in older adults. The short GDS versions that have four (GDS-4) and five items (GDS-5) represent alternatives for depression screening in limited-resource settings. However, their accuracy remains uncertain. Objective To assess the accuracy of the GDS-4 and GDS-5 versions for depression screening in older adults. Methods Until May 2020, we systematically searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Google Scholar; for studies that have assessed the sensitivity and specificity of GDS-4 and GDS-5 for depression screening in older adults. We conducted meta-analyses of the sensitivity and specificity of those studies that used the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or the International Classification of Diseases-10 (ICD-10) as reference standard. Study quality was assessed with the QUADAS-2 tool. We performed bivariate random-effects meta-analyses to calculate the pooled sensitivity and specificity with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) at each reported common cut-off. For the overall meta-analyses, we evaluated each GDS-4 version or GDS-5 version separately by each cut-off, and for investigations of heterogeneity, we assessed altogether across similar GDS versions by each cut-off. Also, we assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE methodology. Results Twenty-three studies were included and meta-analyzed, assessing eleven different GDS versions. The number of participants included was 5048. When including all versions together, at a cut-off 2, GDS-4 had a pooled sensitivity of 0.77 (95% CI: 0.70–0.82) and a pooled specificity of 0.75 (0.68–0.81); while GDS-5 had a pooled sensitivity of 0.85 (0.80–0.90) and a pooled specificity of 0.75 (0.69–0.81). We found results for more than one GDS-4 version at cut-off points 1, 2, and 3; and for more than one GDS-5 version at cut-off points 1, 2, 3, and 4. Mostly, significant subgroup differences at different test thresholds across versions were found. The accuracy of the different GDS-4 and GDS-5 versions showed a high heterogeneity. There was high risk of bias in the index test domain. Also, the certainty of the evidence was low or very low for most of the GDS versions. Conclusions We found several GDS-4 and GDS-5 versions that showed great heterogeneity in estimates of sensitivity and specificity, mostly with a low or very low certainty of the evidence. Altogether, our results indicate the need for more well-designed studies that compare different GDS versions.

Background and Aims: Vasoactive agents with endoscopic therapy are used to treat acute variceal bleeding (AVB). There are two main groups of vasoactive agents: terlipressin and vasopressin (T-V), and octreotide and somatostatin (O-S). However, the benefit/harm balance is unclear. Our aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of T-V versus O-S for the management of AVB. Methods: We performed a systematic search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, Scopus, and CENTRAL. Our main outcomes were mortality and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were bleeding control, rebleeding, blood transfusion, hospital stay. We evaluated the certainty of evidence using GRADE methodology. Results: We included 21 RCTs. The risk of mortality (RR: 1.01; 95%CI: 0.83-1.22), bleeding control (RR: 0.96; 95%CI: 0.91-1.02; I 2 =53%), early rebleeding (RR: 0.91; 95%CI: 0.66-1.24: I 2 =0%), late rebleeding (RR: 0.94; 95 CI: 0.56-1.60; I 2 =0%), blood transfusion (MD: 0.04; 95%CI: -0.31-0.39; I 2 =68%) and hospital stay (MD: -1.06; 95%CI: -2.80-0.69; I 2 =0%) were similar between T-V and O-S groups. Only 15 studies reported adverse events, which were significantly higher in the T-V compared to the O-S group (RR 2.39; 95%CI: 1.58-3.63; I 2 =57%). The certainty of evidence was moderate for the main outcomes, and low or very low for others. Conclusions: In cirrhotic patients with AVB, those treated with T-V had similar mortality risk compared to O-S. However, the use of T-V showed an increased risk of adverse events compared to O-S.

No abstract