BackgroundA method of determining the initial symptoms and main prognostic identifiers for COVID-19 can be a key tool for physicians, especially primary care physicians. Therefore, the objective of this study was to examine the prognosis of patients with COVID-19 from two different demographic regions according to baseline and main symptoms, age, and sex.MethodsAll individuals selected from both urban and rural health centers were over 18 years of age, had COVID-19 before 2 March 2021, and were followed up with a primary care physician. All patients included in this study were recruited in terms of sex, age at the time of infection, type of contact, baseline symptoms, primary and secondary symptomatology, emergency assistance, hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and death.ResultsA total of 219 and 214 subjects were recruited from rural and urban health centers, respectively. Subjects with COVID-19 from rural areas were significantly older in age, with a higher proportion of men, and had significantly lower baseline and main symptoms than those from urban areas. In addition, the presence of both fever and dyspnea as the initial or main symptom is significantly associated with emergency assistance, hospitalization, and death, regardless of sex, age, and demographic area. This type of illness was reported to be significantly less frequent in the rural population than in the urban population.ConclusionThe presence of both fever and dyspnea as both initial and main symptoms is a poor prognostic factor for COVID-19, regardless of age, sex, and demographic areas. In addition, women reported lower levels of fever and dyspnea, requiring minimal emergency assistance and fewer hospitalization, and a lower rate of mortality than men. During a COVID-19 infection follow-up, subjects in rural areas seem to have less access to medical care than those in urban areas.

Mindfulness-, compassion-, and acceptance-based (i.e., “third wave”) psychotherapies are effective for treating chronic pain conditions. Many of these programs require that patients engage in the systematic home practice of meditation experiences so they can develop meditation skills. This systematic review aimed at evaluating the frequency, duration, and effects of home practice in patients with chronic pain undergoing a “third wave” psychotherapy. A comprehensive database search for quantitative studies was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Sciences Core Collection; 31 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The reviewed studies tended to indicate a pattern of moderately frequent practice (around four days/week), with very high variability in terms of time invested; most studies observed significant associations between the amount of practice and positive health outcomes. Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction and Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy were the most common interventions and presented low levels of adherence to home practice (39.6% of the recommended time). Some studies were conducted on samples of adolescents, who practiced very few minutes, and a few tested eHealth interventions with heterogeneous adherence levels. In conclusion, some adaptations may be required so that patients with chronic pain can engage more easily and, thus, effectively in home meditation practices.

AimsTo evaluate the effectiveness of eHealth interventions to reduce stress and promote mental health in healthcare professionals, and to compare the efficacy of different types of programs (guided vs. self‐guided; ‘third‐wave’ psychotherapies vs. other types).BackgroundHealthcare workers present high levels of stress, which constitutes a risk factor for developing mental health problems such as depression and anxiety. eHealth interventions have been designed to reduce these professional's stress considering that the characteristics of this delivery method make it a cost‐effective and very appealing alternative because of its fast and easy access.DesignA systematic review of quantitative studies.MethodsA comprehensive database search for quantitative studies was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane (until 1 April 2022). The systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA and SWiM reporting guidelines. The quality of the studies was assessed using the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute tools.ResultsThe abstracts of 6349 articles were assessed and 60 underwent in‐depth review, with 27 fulfilling the inclusion criteria. The interventions were classified according to their format (self‐guided vs. guided) and contents (‘third‐wave’ psychotherapies vs. others). Twenty‐two interventions emerged, 13 of which produced significant posttreatment reductions in stress levels of health professionals (9 self‐guided, 8 ‘third wave’ psychotherapies). Significant effects in improving depressive symptomatology, anxiety, burnout, resilience and mindfulness, amongst others, were also found.ConclusionThe evidence gathered in this review highlights the heterogeneity of the eHealth interventions that have been studied; self‐guided and ‘third‐wave’ psychotherapy programs are the most common, often with promising results, although the methodological shortcomings of most studies hinder the extraction of sound conclusions.Protocol registrationPROSPERO CRD42022310199. No Patient or Public Contribution.

Introduction The efficacy of interventions based on mindfulness and compassion has been demonstrated in both clinical and general population, and in different social contexts. These interventions include so-called attentional and constructive meditation practices, respectively. However, there is a third group, known as deconstructive meditation practices, which has not been scientifically studied. Deconstructive practices aim to undo maladaptive cognitive patterns and generate knowledge about internal models of oneself, others and the world. Although there are theoretical and philosophical studies on the origin of addiction to the self or on the mechanisms of action associated with the deconstruction of the self, there are no randomized controlled trials evaluating these techniques in either a healthy population or clinical samples. This study aims to evaluate the effect of three deconstructive techniques by comparing them to mindfulness in the general population. Methods and analysis A randomized controlled clinical trial will be conducted with about 240 participants allocated to four groups: (a) mindful breathing, (b) prostrations, according to Tibetan Buddhist tradition; (c) the Koan Mu, according to Zen Buddhist tradition; and (d) the mirror exercise, according to Toltec tradition. The primary outcome will be the qualities of the non-dual experience and spiritual awakening, measured by the Nondual Embodiment Thematic Inventory, assessed at pre- and post-treatment and at 3- and 6-month follow-ups. Other outcomes will be mindfulness, happiness, compassion, affectivity and altered state of consciousness. Quantitative data will be compared using mixed-effects linear regression models, and qualitative data will be analysed through thematic analysis and using the constant comparative method from grounded theory. Ethics and dissemination Approval was obtained from the Research Ethics Committee of Aragon, Spain. The results will be submitted to peer-reviewed specialized journals, and brief reports will be sent to participants on request. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05317754. Registered on August 2,2022.