Browsing by Subject "Vulnerable"

Sort by: Order: Results:

Now showing items 1-2 of 2
  • Holmberg, Ville; Salmi, Heli; Kattainen, Salla; Ollgren, Jukka; Kantele, Anu; Pynnönen, Juulia; Järvinen, Asko; Forsblom, Erik; Silén, Suvi; Kivivuori, Sanna Maria; Meretoja, Atte; Hästbacka, Johanna (2022)
    Objectives: Motivated by reports of increased risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in ethnic minorities of high-income countries, we explored whether patients with a foreign first language are at an increased risk of COVID-19 infections, more serious presentations, or worse outcomes. Methods: In a retrospective observational population-based quality registry study covering a population of 1.7 million, we studied the incidence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2), admissions to specialist healthcare and the intensive care unit (ICU), and all-cause case fatality in different language groups between 27th February and 3rd August 2020 in Southern Finland. A first language other than Finnish, Swedish or Sami served as a surrogate marker for a foreign ethnic background. Results: In total, 124 240 individuals were tested, and among the 118 300 (95%) whose first language could be determined, 4005 (3.4%) were COVID-19-positive, 623 (0.5%) were admitted to specialized hospitals, and 147 (0.1%) were admitted to the ICU; 254 (0.2%) died. Those with a foreign first language had lower testing rates (348, 95%CI 340-355 versus 758, 95%CI 753-762 per 10 000, p < 0.0001), higher incidence (36, 95%CI 33-38 versus 22, 95%CI 21-23 per 10 000, p < 0.0001), and higher positivity rates (103, 95%CI 96-109 versus 29, 95%CI 28-30 per 1000, p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in ICU admissions, disease severity at ICU admission, or ICU outcomes. Case fatality by 90 days was 7.7% in domestic cases and 1.2% in those with a foreign first language, explained by demographics (age-and sex adjusted HR 0.49, 95%CI 0.21-1.15). Conclusions: The population with a foreign first language was at an increased risk for testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, but when hospitalized they had outcomes similar to those in the native, domestic language population. This suggests that special attention should be paid to the prevention and control of infectious diseases among language minorities. (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases.
  • Feel4Diabetes Res Grp; Kivelä, Jemina; Wikström, Katja; Virtanen, Eeva; Georgoulis, Michael; Lindström, Jaana (2020)
    Background Feel4Diabetes was a school and community based intervention aiming to promote healthy lifestyle and tackle obesity for the prevention of type 2 diabetes among families in 6 European countries. We conducted this literature review in order to guide the development of evidence-based implementation of the Feel4Diabetes intervention. We focused on type 2 diabetes prevention strategies, including all the phases from risk identification to implementation and maintenance. Special focus was given to prevention among vulnerable groups and people under 45 years. Methods Scientific and grey literature published between January 2000 and January 2015 was searched for relevant studies using electronic databases. To present the literature review findings in a systematic way, we used the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. A complementary literature search from February 2015 to December 2018 was also conducted. Results The initial review included 27 studies with a follow-up >= 12 months and 9 studies with a follow-up >= 6 months and with a participant mean age <45 years. We found out that interventions should be targeted at people at risk to improve recruiting and intervention effectiveness. Screening questionnaires (primarily Finnish Diabetes Risk Score FINDRISC) and blood glucose measurement can both be used for screening; the method does not appear to affect intervention effectiveness. Screening and recruitment is time-consuming, especially when targeting lower socioeconomic status and age under 45 years. The intervention intensity is more important for effectiveness than the mode of delivery. Moderate changes in several lifestyle habits lead to good intervention results. A minimum of 3-year follow-up seemed to be required to show a reduction in diabetes risk in high-risk individuals. In participants <45 years, the achieved results in outcomes were less pronounced. The complementary review included 12 studies, with similar results regarding intervention targets and delivery modes, as well as clinical significance. Conclusion This narrative review highlighted several important aspects that subsequently guided the development of the Feel4Diabetes high-risk intervention. Research on diabetes prevention interventions targeted at younger adults or vulnerable population groups is still relatively scarce. Feel4Diabetes is a good example of a project aiming to fill this research gap.