BACKGROUND: Hesitancy to get vaccinated during the COVID-19 pandemic may decrease vaccination coverage and facilitate the occurrence of local or global outbreaks. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in Catalonia on 3 aspects: the decision to get vaccinated against COVID-19, changes in opinion about vaccination in general, and the decision to get vaccinated against other diseases. METHODS: We performed an observational study with the population of Catalonia aged 18 years or over, obtaining information through a self-completed questionnaire in electronic format. Differences between groups were determined using the chi-square test, Mann-Whitney U test, or the Student t test. RESULTS: We analyzed the answers from 1188 respondents, of which 870 were women, 47.0% (558/1187) had sons or daughters under the age of 14 years, and 71.7% (852/1188) had studied at university. Regarding vaccination, 16.3% (193/1187) stated that they had refused a vaccine on some occasion, 76.3% (907/1188) totally agreed with vaccines, 1.9% (23/1188) were indifferent, and 3.5% (41/1188) and 1.2% (14/1188) slightly or totally disagreed with vaccination, respectively. As a result of the pandemic, 90.8% (1069/1177) stated that they would get vaccinated against COVID-19 when they are asked, while 9.2% (108/1177) stated the opposite. A greater intention to get vaccinated was observed among women; people older than 50 years; people without children under 15 years of age; people with beliefs, culture, or family in favor of vaccination; respondents who had not previously rejected other vaccines, were totally in favor of vaccines, or had not increased their doubts about vaccination; and respondents who had not changed their decision about vaccines as a result of the pandemic. Finally, 30.3% (359/1183) reported an increase in their doubts regarding vaccination, and 13.0% (154/1182) stated that they had changed their decision about routinely recommended vaccines as a result of the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The population studied was predominantly in favor of vaccination; however, the percentage of people specifically rejecting vaccination against COVID-19 was high. As a result of the pandemic, we detected an increase in doubts about vaccines. Although the final decision about vaccination did not primarily change, some of the respondents did change their opinion about routine vaccinations. This seed of doubt about vaccines may be worrisome as we aim to maintain high vaccination coverage.

Introduction: The health emergency caused by COVID-19 has led to substantial changes in the usual working system of primary healthcare centers and in relations with users. The Catalan Society of Family and Community Medicine designed a survey that aimed to collect the opinions and facilitate the participation of its partners on what the future work model of general practitioners (GPs) should look like post-COVID-19. Methodology: Online survey of Family and Community Medicine members consisting of filiation data, 22 Likert-type multiple-choice questions grouped in five thematic axes, and a free text question. Results: The number of respondents to the questionnaire was 1051 (22.6% of all members): 83.2% said they spent excessive time on bureaucratic tasks; 91.8% were against call center systems; 66% believed that home care is the responsibility of every family doctor; 77.5% supported continuity of care as a fundamental value of patient-centered care; and >90% defended the contracting of complementary tests and first hospital visits from primary healthcare (PHC). Conclusions: The survey responses describe a strong consensus on the identity and competencies of the GP and on the needs of and the threats to the PHC system. The demand for an increase in health resources, greater professional leadership, elimination of bureaucracy, an increase in the number of health professionals, and greater management autonomy, are the axes towards which a new era in PHC should be directed.

There is controversial information about the accumulation of advanced glycation end-products (AGEs) in obesity. We assessed the impact of total and abdominal adiposity on AGE levels via a cross-sectional investigation with 4254 middle-aged subjects from the ILERVAS project. Skin autofluorescence (SAF), a non-invasive assessment of subcutaneous AGEs, was measured. Total adiposity indices (BMI and Clinica Universidad de Navarra-Body Adiposity Estimator (CUN-BAE)) and abdominal adiposity (waist circumference and body roundness index (BRI)) were assessed. Lean mass was estimated using the Hume index. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was evaluated for each index. Different cardiovascular risk factors (smoking, prediabetes, hypertension and dyslipidemia) were evaluated. In the study population, 26.2% showed elevated SAF values. No differences in total body fat, visceral adiposity and lean body mass were detected between patients with normal and high SAF values. SAF levels showed a very slight but positive correlation with total body fat percentage (estimated by the CUN-BAE formula) and abdominal adiposity (estimated by the BRI). However, none of them had sufficient power to identify patients with high SAF levels (area under the ROC curve <0.52 in all cases). Finally, a progressive increase in SAF levels was observed in parallel with cardiovascular risk factors in the entire population and when patients with normal weight, overweight and obesity were evaluated separately. In conclusion, total obesity and visceral adiposity are not associated with a greater deposit of AGE. The elevation of AGE in obesity is related to the presence of cardiometabolic risk.

BackgroundThe Covid-19 pandemic has increased stress levels in GPs, who have resorted to different coping strategies to deal with this crisis. Gender differences in coping styles may be contributing factors in the development of psychological distress.ObjectivesTo identify differences by gender and by stress level in coping strategies of GPs during the Covid-19 pandemic.MethodsA cross-sectional, web-based survey conducted with GPs in Catalonia (Spain), in June-July 2021. via the institution’s email distribution list, all GPs members of the Catalan Society of Family and Community Medicine were invited to complete a survey assessing sociodemographic, health and work-related characteristics, experienced stress (Stress scale of the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scales-DASS 21) and the frequency of use of a range of coping strategies (Brief-COPE) classified as problem-focused, emotion-focused and avoidant strategies, some of which are adaptive and others maladaptive. We compared the scores of each strategy by gender and stress level using Student’s t-test.ResultsOf 4739 members, 522 GPs participated in the study (response rate 11%; 79.1% women; mean age = 46.9 years, SD = 10.5). Of these, 41.9% reported moderate-severe stress levels. The most common coping strategies were acceptance, active coping, planning, positive reframing and venting. More frequently than men, women resorted to emotional and instrumental support, venting, distraction and self-blame, whereas men used acceptance and humour more commonly than women. Moderate-severe stress levels were associated with non-adaptive coping, with increased use of avoidance strategies, self-blame, religion and venting, and decreased use of positive reframing and acceptance.ConclusionThe most common coping strategies were adaptive and differed by gender. However, highly stressful situations caused maladaptive strategies to emerge.