Background: There is inconclusive evidence regarding congenital, intrapartum, and postnatal maternal-fetal-neonatal SARS-CoV-2 infections during the COVID-19 pandemic. A narrative review was conducted with the aim of guiding clinicians on the management of pregnant women with respect to congenital, intrapartum, and postnatal maternal-fetal-neonatal SARS-CoV-2 infections and breastfeeding during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Searches were conducted in Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, Dialnet, CUIDEN, Scielo, and Virtual Health Library to identify observational, case series, case reports, and randomized controlled trial studies assessing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from mother to baby and/or through breastfeeding during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: A total of 49 studies was included in this review, comprising 329 pregnant women and 331 neonates (two pregnant women delivered twins). The studies were performed in China (n = 26), USA (n = 7), Italy (n = 3), Iran (n = 2), Switzerland (n = 1), Spain (n = 1), Turkey (n = 1), Australia (n = 1), India (n = 1), Germany (n = 1), France (n = 1), Canada (n = 1), Honduras (n = 1), Brazil (n = 1), and Peru (n = 1). Samples from amniotic fluid, umbilical cord blood, placenta, cervical secretion, and breastmilk were collected and analyzed. A total of 15 placental swabs gave positive results for SARS-CoV-2 ribonucleic acid (RNA) on the fetal side of the placenta. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was found in seven breastmilk samples. One umbilical cord sample was positive for SARS-CoV-2. One amniotic fluid sample tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Conclusions: This study presents some evidence to support the potential of congenital, intrapartum, and postnatal maternal-fetal-neonatal SARS-CoV-2 infections during the COVID-19 pandemic. Mothers should follow recommendations including wearing a facemask and hand washing before and after breastfeeding.
Sexually transmitted infections are an important public health issue. The purpose of this study is to analyse the association between different sexual habits and the prevalence of sexually transmitted infections in the population of Granada who consult with a specialised centre. An observational, cross-sectional study was conducted based on the medical records of 678 people from the Sexually Transmitted Diseases and Sexual Orientation Centre of Granada, who were diagnosed positively or negatively with a sexually transmitted infection, during the 2000−2014 period. Sociodemographic and clinical data, as well as data on frequency and type of sexual habits, frequency of condom use and sexually transmitted infection positive or negative diagnosis were collected. Univariate and bivariate analyses were conducted. The most popular sexual habits were vaginal intercourse, oral sex (mouth–vagina and mouth–penis) and the least popular were anus–mouth and anal sex. The use of condom is frequent in vaginal and anal sex and less frequent in oral sex. Sexually transmitted infection is associated with mouth–penis (p = 0.004) and mouth–vagina (p = 0.023) oral sex and anal sex (p = 0.031). It is observed that there is a relationship between the presence of STIs and oral sex practices, people having such practices being the ones who use condoms less frequently. There is also a relationship between anal sex and the prevalence of STIs, although in such sexual practice the use of condom does prevail.
Objective: To analyze the difference in the prevalence of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) between two time periods (2000–2007 and 2008–2014, with the latter period characterized by the economic crisis), as well as determine differences in sociodemographic factors, clinical care, and risk indicators. Methods: This was a retrospective, observational, and analytical study, reviewing 1437 medical records of subjects attending a specialized center in the province of Granada (Spain) for consultation associated with the presence or suspicion of an STI between 2000–2014. Data were collected on variables relating to the research objective. A descriptive and bivariate statistical analysis was performed by multiple logistic regression. Results: In the analysis comparing the presence of STIs between the crisis and non-crisis periods, the percentage of positive diagnoses reached 56.6% compared to 43.4% negative diagnoses during the non-crisis period, while the percentages were 75.2% and 24.8%, respectively, during the crisis period. This difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001) with an odds ratio (OR) of 2.21 after adjusting for age, sex, days since last unprotected sexual intercourse, and partners in the last year. Conclusions: There are significant differences in the prevalence of STIs between the study periods, which is consistent with the reports of some authors regarding the effect of the financial crisis on these conditions; however, it is worth considering other aspects that might explain the differences.
Dating violence is a significant problem among adolescents. It encompasses a variety of violent behavior, from verbal abuse to physical and sexual abuse, from threats to rape and murder. Among young people, idealization of love and romantic myths are very common as a consequence of our culture and society, which lead them to develop dysfunctional relationships that somehow favor and facilitate partner violence and sexist ideas in daily life. Education is the basic tool to eradicate discrimination and violence against women. The objective of this study is to explore the false myths of romantic love in adolescents and their related factors. A cross-sectional study was conducted with 16–19-year-old teenagers (n = 180), through questionnaires and by employing the romantic love myths scale, the ambivalent sexism inventory, and the love attitudes scale. Adolescents accepted to a greater degree the love myths associated with idealization than those related to abuse with scale values of Med = 2.72, SD = 0.55, and Med = 1.34, SD = 0.68, respectively. Designed models predict love idealization on the basis of benevolent sexism (β = 0.03; CI 95% = 0.021–0.039), religion (β = 0.198; CI 95% = 0.047–0.349), passionate love (β = 0.038; CI 95% = 0.015–0.061), practical love (β = 0.024; CI 95% = 0.001–0.047), and friendly love (β = 0.036; CI 95% = 0.014–0.058). Hostile sexism and undergraduate studies were associated with the myths that relate love and abuse (β = 0.19; CI 95% = 0.007–0.031, β = 0.208; CI 95% = 0.001–0.414, respectively).
This study analysed the capacity of emergency physicians and nurses working in the city of Granada (Spain) to respond to intimate partner violence (IPV) against women, and the mediating role of certain factors and opinions towards certain sexist myths in the detection of cases. This is a cross-sectional study employing the physician readiness to manage intimate partner violence survey (PREMIS) between October 2020 and January 2021, with 164 surveys analysed. Descriptive and analytical statistics were applied, designing three multivariate regression models by considering opinions about different sexist myths. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were considered for the detection of cases. In the past six months, 34.8% of professionals reported that they had identified some cases of IPV, particularly physicians (OR = 2.47, 95% CI = 1.14–5.16; OR = 2.65, 95% CI = 1.26–5.56). Those who did not express opinions towards sexist myths related to the understanding of the victim or the consideration of alcohol/drug abuse as the main causes of violence and showed a greater probability of detecting a case (NS) (OR = 1.26 and OR = 1.65, respectively). In order to confirm the indicia found, further research is required, although there tends to be a common opinion towards the certain sexual myth of emergency department professionals not having an influence on IPV against women.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
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.