Background: The purpose of this study was to measure the preventive and regenerative effect of glutamine and probiotics induced by alcohol injury in Holtzman rats. Methods: Analytical, experimental and prospective study. The population consisted of 56 male rats between 300 and 350 g, distributed in three experimental phases: Pre-pilot phase PPP (6 rats), Pilot phase PP (10 rats), and Experimental phase EP (40 rats). In the pilot phase, 10 rats were subjected to damage with 8.5% ethanol, which was given intragastrically. The dosage was calculated for 10 rats in two groups: the first with 7.5 mL/kg in 5 rats and the second with 8.5 mL/kg in 5 rats. The experimental phase was performed in 40 rats divided into 6 groups, the negative control group (healthy), positive control group (injured), preventive experimental group (glutamine and glutamine with probiotic) and regenerative experimental group (glutamine and glutamine with probiotic). At the end of each phase, the rats were sacrificed with sodium pentobarbital (Halathal) and a portion of their stomachs was stored in formol. Results: The evaluation of stomach tissue samples (desquamation, erythema, hyperemia) showed that in the preventive phase, glutamine shows effectiveness in comparison to glutamine with probiotic. In the regenerative phase, glutamine and glutamine with probiotic did not show significant differences. Conclusions: Glutamine and probiotics can potentially serve as a therapy for the treatment for gastritis.

Access to health services compromises therapeutic adherence in patients with HTN, which is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease and premature death. The aim of the research is to determine the influence of access to health services on adherence to antihypertensive treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. We included a cross-sectional analytical study. A survey was applied to 241 hypertensive patients at the Daniel Alcides Carrión Hospital, Callao-Peru. Data were analyzed using SPSS software. Absolute and relative frequencies were reported and the chi-square test was applied with a statistical significance level of p<0.05. In addition, multiple logistic regression analysis was performed using the Stepwise method. An association was found between non-adherence to treatment and health expenses (ORa: 1.9 CI 95% 1.7-2.2), not receiving care due to lack of a doctor (ORa: 2.8 CI 95% 1.5-3.2), having difficulty with schedules (ORa: 3.7 CI 95% 2. 3-5.5), fear of receiving care at the hospital (ORa: 4.5 CI 95 % 2.7-6.8), trust in health personnel (ORa: 7.5 CI 95% 2.3-10.5) and considering that the physician does not have enough knowledge (ORa: 3.1 CI 95% 2.4-7.8). Therapeutic adherence was associated with physician availability for care, difficulty with schedules, fear of being seen in the hospital, trust in health personnel, and waiting time.

The aim of this study was to estimate the association between fear of COVID-19 and risk perception with preventive behavior in health professionals from three Latin American countries. An analytical cross-sectional study was conducted. Health professionals with on-site care in Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, and Peru were surveyed. Information was collected through an online self-report questionnaire. The main variables were preventive behavior as the dependent variable and fear of COVID-19 and risk perception as independent variables. Linear regression was used, and Beta coefficients and p-values were calculated. 435 health professionals were included, the majority were aged 42 years or older (45.29%, 95%CI: 40.65%-50.01%) and female (67.82%, 95%CI: 63.27%-72.05%). It was shown that the greater the fear of COVID-19, the greater the preventive behavior of COVID-19 infection (B=2.21, p=0.002 for total behavior; B=1.12, p=0.037 for additional protection at work; B=1.11, p<0.010 for hand washing). The risk perception of COVID-19 infection had a slight direct relationship with preventive behaviors (B=0.28, p=0.021 for total behavior; B=0.13, p=0.015 for hand washing), with the exception of the preventive behavior of using additional protection at work (p=0.339). We found that fear and risk perception are associated with increased practice of hand washing and use of additional protection at work. Further studies are required on the influence of working conditions, job performance and the occurrence of mental health problems in frontline personnel with regard to COVID-19.