Estátikos (Brazil)

Objetivo: someter a prueba la estructura factorial, confiabilidad y validez convergente del instrumento Functional Health Pattern Assessment Screening Tool – Versión modificada para Brasil. Método: evaluación psicométrica del instrumento Functional Health Pattern Assessment Screening Tool – Versión modificada para Brasil. Setecientos diecisiete participantes respondieron el instrumento de recolección de datos, compuesto por dos partes. La Parte I incluyó un cuestionario estructurado para recopilar datos sociodemográficos y las percepciones y el nivel de satisfacción de los participantes con respecto a su estado de salud actual. La Parte II consistió en la herramienta sometida a prueba. La estructura interna se evaluó empleando Análisis Factorial Confirmatorio. La validez interna se evaluó por medio de la correlación entre las puntuaciones obtenidas en la herramienta y los índices correspondientes a los niveles de autopercepción y satisfacción con respecto al estado de salud actual. La confiabilidad se evaluó utilizando el coeficiente alfa de Cronbach. Resultados: el Análisis Factorial Confirmatorio confirmó una solución con tres factores. Las cargas factoriales fueron significativas y variaron entre 0,16 y 0.75; los índices de ajuste sugirieron ajuste moderado del modelo. La consistencia interna correspondiente a los tres componentes varió entre 0,779 y 0,919. Conclusión: los hallazgos sugieren que la herramienta es válida y confiable para ser usada en la población de Brasil, aunque se recomienda interpretar los resultados con precaución debido al moderado ajuste del modelo.

One of the challenges for the development of electric mobility projects is to estimate the potential demand for charging stations for electric vehicles, as this is an essential and basic information to assess the technical-economic feasibility and long-term sustainability of Electric Stations. Such an estimate is even more complex when data is scarce. Thus, in this work a growth prediction method was developed, based on logistic growth curves, integrating variables associated with the behaviour of electric vehicle users, such as the range anxiety factor and the preference for convenience recharges over recharges of opportunity.

ObjectiveTo determine whether tocilizumab improves clinical outcomes for patients with severe or critical coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19).DesignRandomised, open label trial.SettingNine hospitals in Brazil, 8 May to 17 July 2020.ParticipantsAdults with confirmed covid-19 who were receiving supplemental oxygen or mechanical ventilation and had abnormal levels of at least two serum biomarkers (C reactive protein, D dimer, lactate dehydrogenase, or ferritin). The data monitoring committee recommended stopping the trial early, after 129 patients had been enrolled, because of an increased number of deaths at 15 days in the tocilizumab group.InterventionsTocilizumab (single intravenous infusion of 8 mg/kg) plus standard care (n=65) versus standard care alone (n=64).Main outcome measureThe primary outcome, clinical status measured at 15 days using a seven level ordinal scale, was analysed as a composite of death or mechanical ventilation because the assumption of odds proportionality was not met.ResultsA total of 129 patients were enrolled (mean age 57 (SD 14) years; 68% men) and all completed follow-up. All patients in the tocilizumab group and two in the standard care group received tocilizumab. 18 of 65 (28%) patients in the tocilizumab group and 13 of 64 (20%) in the standard care group were receiving mechanical ventilation or died at day 15 (odds ratio 1.54, 95% confidence interval 0.66 to 3.66; P=0.32). Death at 15 days occurred in 11 (17%) patients in the tocilizumab group compared with 2 (3%) in the standard care group (odds ratio 6.42, 95% confidence interval 1.59 to 43.2). Adverse events were reported in 29 of 67 (43%) patients who received tocilizumab and 21 of 62 (34%) who did not receive tocilizumab.ConclusionsIn patients with severe or critical covid-19, tocilizumab plus standard care was not superior to standard care alone in improving clinical outcomes at 15 days, and it might increase mortality.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04403685.