Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are currently the leading cause of mortality worldwide, with coronary heart disease being the primary cause. The Mediterranean Diet (MD) has been highlighted for its potential in providing greater protection against CVDs. This study aims to present an updated systematic review that examines the impact of MD on mortality and CVDs, both in the general population and in patients with a prior CVD, while also considering the potential influence of gender. We conducted a systematic review. After the selection process, 24 studies met the inclusion criteria. The findings from these studies consistently demonstrate that higher adherence to the MD is associated with a reduced risk of overall mortality, both in the general population and in patients with previous CVDs. Moreover, evidence suggests that following this dietary pattern likely decreases the risk of CVDs such as heart attacks, various types of coronary artery disease, stroke, and cardiovascular mortality. While some studies have identified differences in the benefits of the MD between men and women, it is important to note that these disparities may be attributed to lower event rates and a generally lower cardiovascular risk profile in women. Thus, the observed variations in outcomes should be interpreted in the context of these factors. Adherence to the MD has the potential to improve survival rates and reduce the risk of CVDs in both the general population and individuals with a prior CVD. Further research is needed to explore the specific mechanisms underlying the protective effects of this dietary pattern and to better understand the role gender-related differences in its outcomes. Nevertheless, promoting the adoption of the MD could be an effective strategy for mitigating the burden of CVDs globally.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic is a public health emergency that has affected health professionals around the world, causing physical and mental exhaustion with a greater probability of developing mental disorders in professionals who provide healthcare. Objective: The objective of this study was to know the psychological impact of the SARS-CoV-2 virus on the nursing professionals working for the Rioja Health Service. Methods: We conducted an observational and descriptive cross-sectional study. The nursing staff at the Rioja Health Service were invited to respond to a self-administered questionnaire between June and August 2020. Results: A total of 605 health professionals participated in the questionnaire; 91.9% were women, 63.14% were registered nurses, and 36.28% were auxiliary nurses. Risk factors for mental health professionals were identified in more than 90% of nurses (p = 0.009), affecting their psychological state with feelings of exhaustion, emotional overload (p = 0.002), and less use of coping strategies among women. Younger professionals with less experience had higher levels of stress compared to those with more than five years of experience, who showed a progressive reduction in the impact of stressors (p < 0.001). Professionals with dependent family members presented higher levels of emotional overload and coping problems (p = 0.009). Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant psychological impact on health professionals in terms of stress, emotional well-being, and the use of coping strategies. Female health professionals with dependents, a temporary contract, and less work experience have been more psychologically affected.

To validate two measurement instruments, the UDI-6 and the IIQ-7, for the study of urinary incontinence and its impact on the quality of life of pregnant women. We carried out a validation study of a diagnostic tool. A total of 181 pregnant women completed the UDI-6 and IIQ-7 questionnaires. Feasibility, internal consistency, reliability, and construct and criteria validity were analyzed. Self-administration of the short forms of the UDI-6 and IIQ-7 questionnaires took less than 5minutes and the maximum rate of no answer per item was 3.3%. Cronbach's alpha was 0.667 for the UDI-6 and was 0.910 for the IIQ-7. The reliability of the UDI-6 in the diagnosis of urinary incontinence showed Kappa statistic values of between 0.856 and 0.966, and the intra-class correlation coefficients of the UDI-6 and IIQ-7 were 0.902 and 0.954, respectively. Average values of the UDI-6 and IIQ-7 were higher in women with mixed incontinence, were lower in women with stress incontinence and increased with daily losses (p<0.01). The correlation between the UDI-6 and the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire - Short Form (ICIQ-SF) (CCI=0.497; 95% CI: 0.326-0.625) and between the IIQ-7 and ICIQ-SF (CCI=0.472; 95% CI: 0.268-0.619) was moderate. The sensitivity and specificity of the UDI-6 for the diagnosis of urinary incontinence was 98.9% and 86.5%, respectively. The Spanish versions of the IIQ-7 and UDI-6 are feasible, reliable, consistent and valid in the measurement of symptoms and quality of life in pregnant Spanish women with urinary incontinence.

Objective: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to determine the effect of ultrasound-guided percutaneous electrolysis (PE) alone or as an adjunct to other interventions on pain intensity generated by musculoskeletal disorders, depending on the intensity of the technique.Data sources: PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, SCOPUS, Health Medical Collection, and CINALH from inception to September 2022 were searched to identify documents.Study selection: Publications investigating the effect of ultrasound-guided PE in musculoskeletal pain.Data extraction: Data were extracted into predesigned data extraction and tables. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (Rob 2.0). Thirteen articles met inclusion criteria.Data analysis: Random-effects meta-analysis models were used to quantify the difference in pain between the PE and control groups.Data synthesis: A significant reduction in pain was found in favor of low- (−1.89; 95% CI: −2.69; −1.10; p < 0.001) and high-intensity PE (−0.74; 95% CI: −1.36; −0.11; p: 0.02) compared to control group. Low-intensity PE showed significant reduction in pain in the short (−1.73; 95% CI: −3.13; −0.34; p < 0.02) and long term (−2.10; 95% CI: −2.93; −1.28; p = 0.005), with large effect sizes compared to control group. High-intensity PE only showed significant lower pain than control group in the long term (−0.92; 95% CI: −1.78; −0.07; p < 0.03), with a small effect size, but not in the short term.Conclusion: We found small evidence suggesting that low-intensity PE could be more effective for musculoskeletal pain reduction than high-intensity PE. Nevertheless, scientific evidence on this subject is still scarce and studies comparing the two modalities are warranted.Systematic review registration: www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, identifier CRD42022366935.