Care for Older Adults in India: Living Arrangements and Quality of Life by Ajay Bailey, Martin Hyde and K.S. James (eds) (2022)
In: International journal of care and caring, Band 7, Heft 4, S. 756-757
ISSN: 2397-883X
11 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: International journal of care and caring, Band 7, Heft 4, S. 756-757
ISSN: 2397-883X
In: Antropológica, Band 39, Heft 47, S. 29-71
ISSN: 2224-6428
Este artículo hace una revisión crítica y sistemática de 72 investigaciones cualitativas y cuantitativas relacionadas con la violencia ejercida contra mujeres mayores de América Latina y el Caribe (ALC) entre los años 2000 y 2020 con el objetivo de evaluar en qué medida han logrado analizar este fenómeno desde un enfoque interseccional—vinculado con el género y la edad en simultáneo— y cuáles son sus brechas, limitaciones y principales hallazgos. Esta investigación demuestra que el estudio sobre este tema ha sido dominado por los marcos conceptuales del «maltrato a las personas adultas mayores» y la «violencia contra la mujer», así como también por una perspectiva médica y cuantitativa que no permiten comprender este problema cabalmente, pues abordan la violencia de manera fragmentada. En comparación, un grupo novedoso de estudios sociales utilizó un marco conceptual interseccional abordando la violencia desde un enfoque de curso vital y una perspectiva fenomenológica. A modo de conclusión se plantea que los estudios interseccionales, a pesar de ser aún escasos en ALC, poseen un gran potencial para la comprensión de la naturaleza acumulativa y la interconexión entre diferentes experiencias de abuso, así como explorar los sistemas de creencias de mujeres mayores, sus experiencias cotidianas de abuso, y sus dilemas, barreras y estrategias para buscar ayuda. Esta perspectiva permitirá la construcción de teoría adaptada a nuestros contextos culturales de forma inductiva y basada en evidencia contextualizada es un arma poderosa para enfrentar falencias de los marcos teóricos anteriores.
In: Antropológica, Band 34, Heft 37, S. 139-169
ISSN: 2224-6428
At the end of World War II, France, Holland and Britain ended the long period of colonial domination in the region and set up new structures in their territories. This essay explores the problems and challenges facing contemporary European possessions in the Caribbean. The text describes the different routes taken by the colonial metropolis, the existing antagonisms between the metropolitan powers and its territories, and the challenges they face in the current regional scenario. ; Al finalizar la Segunda Guerra Mundial, Francia, Holanda y Gran Bretaña culminaron el largo periodo de dominación colonial en la región e instalaron nuevas estructuras en sus territorios. Este ensayo explora los problemas y desafíos que enfrentan las posesiones europeas del Caribe contemporáneo. El texto describe las diferentes rutas seguidas por las metrópolis coloniales, los antagonismos actuales entre las metrópolis y sus territorios, y los desafíos que enfrentan en el escenario regional actual.
BASE
In: Antropológica, Band 39, Heft 47, S. 5-27
ISSN: 2224-6428
La población mayor de sesenta años está creciendo en el mundo a un ritmo más veloz que el resto de segmentos poblacionales. Según datos de las Naciones Unidas (2019)1, la proporción de personas adultas mayores —en adelante PAM— se duplicará entre los años 2000 y 2050, cuando subirá del 11% al 22% de la población total del planeta. Esto en números absolutos implicaría que este grupo de edad se incrementará de 605 millones a 2000 millones en el transcurso de medio siglo2. Este fenómeno —denominado envejecimiento poblacional, que consiste en el incremento del número y proporción de personas de sesenta años a más y en la disminución de los grupos de edades más jóvenes— es una de lasrevoluciones demográficas más importantes de nuestros tiempos. A pesar de que este proceso se considera una expresión del desarrollo económico, social y científico, también impone importantes desafíos sociales, políticos y económicos para las sociedades e individuos alrededor del mundo.
In: Anthropology & Aging: journal of the Association for Anthropology & Gerontology, Band 39, Heft 1, S. 105-111
ISSN: 2374-2267
No Abstract
In: Risk analysis: an international journal, Band 37, Heft 4, S. 733-743
ISSN: 1539-6924
The Bogotá River receives untreated wastewater from the city of Bogotá and many other towns. Downstream from Bogotá, water from the river is used for irrigation of crops. Concentrations of indicator organisms in the river are high, which is consistent with fecal contamination. To investigate the probability of illness due to exposure to enteric pathogens from the river, specifically Salmonella, we took water samples from the Bogotá River at six sampling locations in an area where untreated water from the river is used for irrigation of lettuce, broccoli, and cabbage. Salmonella concentrations were quantified by direct isolation and qPCR. Concentrations differed, depending on the quantification technique used, ranging between 107.7 and 109.9 number of copies of gene invA per L and 105.3 and 108.4 CFU/L, for qPCR and direct isolation, respectively. A quantitative microbial risk assessment model that estimates the daily risk of illness with Salmonella resulting from consuming raw unwashed vegetables irrigated with water from the Bogotá River was constructed using the Salmonella concentration data. The daily probability of illness from eating raw unwashed vegetables ranged between 0.62 and 0.85, 0.64 and 0.86, and 0.64 and 0.85 based on concentrations estimated by qPCR (0.47–0.85, 0.47–0.86, and 0.41–0.85 based on concentrations estimated by direct isolation) for lettuce, cabbage, and broccoli, respectively, which are all above the commonly propounded benchmark of 10−4 per year. Results obtained in this study highlight the necessity for appropriate wastewater treatment in the region, and emphasize the importance of postharvest practices, such as washing, disinfecting, and cooking.
In: The annals of occupational hygiene: an international journal published for the British Occupational Hygiene Society, Band 60, Heft 8, S. 1020-1035
ISSN: 1475-3162
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
BASE
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long- term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
BASE
Background: Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods: This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings: Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16-30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77-0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50-0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80-0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54-0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation: Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services.
BASE