Intestinal bacteria may influence lung homeostasis via the gut-lung axis. We conducted a single-center, quadruple-blinded, randomized trial in adult symptomatic Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid19) outpatients. Subjects were allocated 1:1 to probiotic formula (strains Lactiplantibacillus plantarum KABP022, KABP023, and KAPB033, plus strain Pediococcus acidilactici KABP021, totaling 2 × 10 9 colony-forming units (CFU)) or placebo, for 30 days. Co-primary endpoints included: i) proportion of patients in complete symptomatic and viral remission; ii) proportion progressing to moderate or severe disease with hospitalization, or death; and iii) days on Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Three hundred subjects were randomized (median age 37.0 years [range 18 to 60], 161 [53.7%] women, 126 [42.0%] having known metabolic risk factors), and 293 completed the study (97.7%). Complete remission was achieved by 78 of 147 (53.1%) in probiotic group compared to 41 of 146 (28.1%) in placebo (RR: 1.89 [95 CI 1.40–2.55]; P < .001), significant after multiplicity correction. No hospitalizations or deaths occurred during the study, precluding the assessment of remaining co-primary outcomes. Probiotic supplementation was well-tolerated and reduced nasopharyngeal viral load, lung infiltrates and duration of both digestive and non-digestive symptoms, compared to placebo. No significant compositional changes were detected in fecal microbiota between probiotic and placebo, but probiotic supplementation significantly increased specific IgM and IgG against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) compared to placebo. It is thus hypothesized this probiotic primarily acts by interacting with the host’s immune system rather than changing colonic microbiota composition. Future studies should replicate these findings and elucidate its mechanism of action (Registration: NCT04517422). Abbreviations: AE: Adverse Event; BMI: Body Mass Index; CONSORT: CONsolidated Standards of Reporting Trials; CFU: Colony-Forming Units; eDRF: Electronic Daily Report Form; GLA: Gut-Lung Axis; GSRS: Gastrointestinal Symptoms Rating Scale; hsCRP: High-sensitivity C-Reactive Protein; HR: Hazard Ratio; ICU: Intensive Care Unit; OR: Odds Ratio; PCoA: Principal Coordinate Analysis; RR: Relative Risk; RT-qPCR: Real-Time Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction; SARS-CoV2: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; SpO 2 : Peripheral Oxygen Saturation; WHO: World Health Organization
The present study examined the validity of the coronaphobia phenomenon with healthcare professionals using a psychometric approach. Using SurveyMonkey, an adapted version of the Coronavirus Anxiety Scale-Healthcare version (CAS-HC) was administered to 231 adult healthcare professionals in Mexico. Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated that dysfunctional coronavirus anxiety symptoms cohered into a reliable, single factor structure of coronaphobia. A receiver operating characteristic curve analysis indicated that the classification features of the CAS-HC were strong, but supported a less stringent cut-score for this population. Construct validity was supported by the positive correlations between the CAS-HC and measures of depression and generalized anxiety, while known groups validity was found with high CAS-HC scores exhibited by those working in emergency rooms, triage, and intensive care units. The findings collectively support the coronaphobia construct with healthcare professionals, and the finding that over one third of the participants in the study scored in the clinical range on this measure points to the critical importance of assessing and alleviating this form of distress in this vulnerable but indispensable workforce.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether daily administration of Lactobacillus reuteri DSM 17938 reduces the frequency and duration of diarrheal episodes and other health outcomes in day school children in Mexico. METHODS: Healthy children (born at term, aged 6–36 months) attending day care centers were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. They received L reuteri DSM 17938 (dose 108 colony-forming unit; n = 168) or identical placebo (n = 168) by mouth, daily for 3 months, after which they were followed-up after a further 3 months without supplementation. RESULTS: Data from all children were included in the final analysis. L reuteri DSM 17938 significantly reduced the frequency and duration of episodes of diarrhea and respiratory tract infection at both 3 and 6 months (P < .05). Additionally, the number of doctor visits, antibiotic use, absenteeism from day school and parental absenteeism from work were significantly reduced in the L reuteri group (P < .05). A cost-benefit analysis revealed significant reductions in costs in the L reuteri-treated children. No adverse events related to the study product were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In healthy children attending day care centers, daily administration of L reuteri DSM 17938 had a significant effect in reducing episodes and duration of diarrhea and respiratory tract infection, with consequent cost savings for the community.
Background:5% to 40% of infants cry excessively, usually accompanied by fussiness and excessive of gas. There are no uniform criteria for treatment of infantile colic. Lactobacillus reuteri DSM 17938 has been used with promising results. The objective of this network-meta-analysis (NMA) is to compare the efficacy of L reuteri DSM 17938 with other interventions for infantile colic.Methods:RCTs, published between 1960 and 2015 for the treatment of infantile colic were included. Primary outcome was duration of crying after 21 to 28 days of treatment. Different databases were searched. Information was analyzed using control group as central axis. A random effect model was used. Hedges standard mean difference (SMD) and odds ratio (OR) were calculated. A SUCRA analysis was performed to evaluate superiority for each intervention.Results:32 RCTs were analyzed, including 2242 patients. Studies with L reuteri DSM 17938 versus Ctrl., Diet versus Ctrl. and Acupuncture versus Ctrl. were the most influential studies in the NMA. L reuteri DSM 17938 [WMD −51.3 h (CI95% −72.2 to −30.5 h), P .0001] and dietetic approaches [WMD −37.4 h (CI95% −56.1 to −18.7 h), P .0001] were superior compared to the other treatments.Conclusions:L reuteri DSM 17938 and some dietetic approaches are better to other interventions for treatment of infantile colic.
Introduction. There are not enough studies about the barriers to lose weight from the perspective of children and their parents. Methods. Children and adolescents diagnosed with overweight/obesity in the Department of Endocrinology and their parents were invited to participate in a series of focus group discussions (FGD). Twenty-nine children 10–16 years old and 22 parents participated in 7 focus groups; 2 mothers and 2 adolescents participated in depth interviews. All interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed through grounded theory. Results. Parents went to the hospital only when their children presented any obesity complication; for them, overweight was not a health problem. Parents referred to lack of time to supervise about a healthy diet and exercise; besides, the same parents, relatives, friends, and the mass media encourage the consumption of junk food. Children accepted eating a lot, not doing exercise, skipping meals, and not understanding overweight consequences. Both, parents and children, demanded support to do the time recommended for exercise inside the schools. They also suggested getting information from schools and mass media (TV) about overweight consequences, exercise, and healthy food by health workers; they recommended prohibiting announcements about junk food and its sale. Conclusions. The barriers detected were lack of perception of being overweight, its identification as a disease and its consequences, lack of time to supervise a healthy lifestyle, and a big social influence to eat junk food.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.