Introduction: Stigmatization of tuberculosis (TB) patients is well-documented, and several health-related organizations have also reported the stigmatization of COVID-19 patients.Because stigmatization can have many adverse consequences, we performed a qualitative study to evaluate the stigmatization of TB and COVID-19 patients. We examined changes in stigmatization throughout the pandemic; perceptions of stigmatization by patients with these diseases before and during COVID-19 pandemic; and differences in stigmatization perceived by individuals who had both diseases.Methods: A semi-structured interview was developed based on the available literature, and was administered to a convenience sample during April 2022. All participants were adults who have/had pulmonary TB and/or COVID-19, and were from a single Portuguese Outpatient TB Center. All participants provided written informed consent. Patients who had latent TB, asymptomatic TB, or asymptomatic COVID-19 were excluded. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results:We interviewed 9 patients (6 females and 3 males; median age: 51±14.7 years-old).Three had TB and COVID-19, 4 had TB alone, and 2 had COVID-19 alone. Interviews allowed to identify 8 main themes: knowledge and beliefs, with several misconceptions identification; attitudes towards the disease, from social support to exclusion; knowledge and education, assumed to be very important; internalized stigmatization, with self-rejection; experience of stigmatization, with discrimination episodes; anticipated stigmatization, with modifying actions for prevention; perceived stigmatization, in which judgment by others prevailed; and temporal changes in stigmatization.Conclusions: Individuals who had TB or COVID-19 reported they were stigmatized. Destigmatization of these diseases is crucial for improving the well-being of affected patients.

Objectives: Early identification of patients with the novel coronavirus induced-disease 2019 (COVID-19) and pneumonia is currently challenging. Few data are available on validated scores predictive of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The Portuguese Society of Intensive Care (PSIC) proposed a risk score whose main goals were to predict a higher probability of COVID-19 and optimize hospital resources, adjusting patients' intervention. This study aimed to validate the PSIC risk score applied to inpatients with pneumonia. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 207 patients with pneumonia admitted to a suspected/confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection specialized ward (20/03 to 20/05/2020) was performed. Score variables were analyzed to determine the significance of the independent predictive variables on the probability of a positive SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR test. The binary logistic regression modeling approach was selected. The best cut-off value was obtained with the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve together with the evaluation of the discriminatory power through the Area Under the Curve (AUC). Results: The validation cohort included 145 patients. Typical chest computed-tomography features (OR, 12.16; 95% CI, 3.32 -44.50) and contact with a positive SARS-CoV-2 patient (OR, 6.56; 95% CI, 1.33 -32.30) were the most significant independent predictive variables. A score ≥ 10 increased suspicion for SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. The AUC was 0.82 (95% CI, 0.73 -0.91) demonstrating the good discriminating power for COVID-19 probability stratification in inpatients with pneumonia. Conclusions: The application of the PSIC score to inpatients with pneumonia may be of value in predicting the risk of COVID-19. Further studies from other centers are needed to validate this score widely.

No abstract

No abstract

Objective: To correlate the 2-minute step test (2MST) with anthropometric variables and habitual physical activity. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study. Sixty young adult participants of both sexes were classified into three groups with 20 participants each according to their body mass index (BMI): eutrophic, with a BMI between 18.5 and 24.9 kg/m2; overweight, with a BMI between 25 and 29.9 kg/m2; and obese type I, with a BMI between 30 and 34.9 kg/m2. In addition to personal and clinical data, we collected height, weight, BMI, waist and neck circumference measurements. The Baecke Questionnaire (BQ) and 2-minute step test (2MST) were used to measure habitual physical activity and functional capacity, respectively. Results: There was no difference between groups (p > 0.05) for the 2MST and BQ. There was no significant correlation between 2MST, anthropometric variables and habitual physical activity (p > 0.05, r = 0.005 to 0.248). Regarding the accuracy of 2MST in differentiating non-obese from obese subjects, there was insufficient accuracy, with an area under the curve of 0.54. Conclusion: 2MST does not relate to body mass index, abdominal and neck circumference, or habitual physical activity.