Physical exercise is known to be beneficial for breast cancer survivors (BCS). However, avoiding nonfunctional overreaching is crucial in this population, as they are in physiological dysregulation. These factors could decrease their exercise capacity or facilitate nonfunctional overreaching, which can increase their risk of additional morbidities and even all-cause mortality. The focus of this study is to evaluate the reliability and validity of the ATOPE+ mHealth system to estimate autonomic balance and specific wellness parameters associated with BCS’ perceived load, thereby informing nonlinear prescriptions in individualized physical exercise programs for BCS.Twenty-two BCS were included in the reliability and validity analysis. Measures were taken for four days, including morning autonomic balance by heart rate variability, self-reported perception of recovery from exercise, sleep satisfaction, emotional distress and fatigue after exertion. Measures were taken utilizing the ATOPE+ mHealth system application. The results of these measures were compared with criterion instruments to assess validity.The reliability results indicated that the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) showed an excellent correlation for recovery (0.93; 95% CI 0.85–0.96) and distress (0.94, 95% CI 0.89–0.97) as well as good correlation for the natural logarithm of the mean square root differences of the standard deviation (LnRMSSD) (0.87; 95% CI 0.74–0.94). Sleep satisfaction also showed an excellent correlation with a weighted kappa of 0.83. The validity results showed no significant differences, except for fatigue. ATOPE+ is reliable and valid for remotely assessing autonomic balance, perception of recovery, sleep satisfaction and emotional distress in BCS; however, it is not for fatigue. This highlights that ATOPE+ could be an easy and efficient system used to assess readiness in BCS, and could help to improve their health by supporting the prescription of optimal and safe physical exercise. Trial registration NCT03787966 ClinicalTrials.gov, December 2019 [ATOPE project]. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03787966.

Background: In the COVID-19 era, there was a call for the transformation of higher education. Universities had to combine non-face-to-face teaching with traditional procedures. This study analyzed the effectiveness and perceived satisfaction in a cohort of health sciences students of non-face-to-face teaching with passive training versus face-to-face teaching with active training in the proper donning and doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE) in a clinical simulation scenario. Methods: A total of 142 participants were randomized into two groups: (a) non-face-to-face teaching with passive training; (b) face-to-face teaching with active training. The proper protocol for donning and doffing PPE was assessed. Students evaluated their skills before and after training and satisfaction with training received. Results: Significant differences were observed for the statements “I felt more confident in donning after receiving this training” (p = 0.029) and “I felt more confident in doffing after receiving this training” (p = 0.042) in the face-to-face teaching with active training group compared to the non-face-to-face teaching with passive training group, whose number of tasks violated was significantly higher (p = 0.020). Satisfaction was significantly higher in the face-to-face and active training group (p = 0.004). Conclusions: Face-to-face teaching with active training improves effectiveness and satisfaction more than non-face-to-face teaching with passive training for acquiring skills in donning and doffing PPE properly.

Objectives We aimed to investigate the rate of non-adherence to antimalarials and glucocorticoids (GCs) and to analyze their potential relationships with sociodemographic characteristics, disease activity and accumulate damage in a cohort of Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted among 670 patients. The Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Activity Questionnaire (SLAQ) and the Lupus Damage Index Questionnaire (LDIQ) were used to assess disease activity and accumulated damage. Results The prevalence of non-adherence to antimalarials and GCs were 10.67% and 39.61%. 86.9% of participants indicated that the reason for stopping therapy was the presence of side effects. SLE patients with non-adherence to antimalarials and GCs had significantly higher scores in disease severity (SLAQ) compared to adherence patients (5.03 (2.12) vs 4.39 (2.61); p = .004 and (4.75 (2.29) vs 4.05 (2.78); p ≤ .001). Conclusion Adherence to the treatment indicated in SLE differs from drug to drug. Findings highlight the importance of developing interventions to support adherence and improve outcomes among patients.