Martínez-Redondo Javier, Crespo Pons Montserrat, Mateu Llevadot Alicia, Pujol Salud Jesús, Comas Carles
Primary Health Care Area of Balaguer, Institut Català de la Salut [ICS], 25600 Lleida, Spain.
Instituto de Investigación Biomédica [IRB Lleida], Universidad de Lleida [UdL], 25198 Lleida, Spain.
J Clin Med. 2024 Nov 28;13(23):7244. doi: 10.3390/jcm13237244.
: Many studies have analyzed the impact of rurality on the incidence and consequences of COVID-19 infection. However, these studies have not considered the impact of different numbers of nursing homes in rural, semi-urban, or urban areas. Our objective was to analyze the effect of the factor of rurality on the incidence and mortality of COVID-19 while accounting for the impact of the variable of nursing home residency. In addition, we performed a comparative analysis of the infected population in semi-urban and rural areas. : We first analyzed COVID-19 infection in all populations in the Balaguer Primary Health Care Area before examining the impact of rurality using Bayesian logistic regression analysis, specifically excluding the population living in nursing homes. We also performed an epidemiological and clinical analysis comparing rural and semi-urban areas. : We found higher incidence of and higher relative and absolute mortality from COVID-19 infection in semi-urban areas than in rural areas. After excluding nursing home residents from our sample, the Bayesian analysis indicated that rurality was not protective against COVID-19 infection or mortality. The incidence rates, specific mortality rates, and case fatality rates were similar in semi-urban and rural areas. All comorbidities, except chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, were associated with higher mortality, while no symptoms were associated with higher mortality. : Excluding the population residing in nursing homes from the analysis, we found that rurality was not a protective factor against either infection or mortality during the first COVID-19 wave. Our Bayesian model analysis confirmed that rurality alone did not enhance survival among residents of rural areas.
许多研究分析了农村地区对新冠病毒感染的发病率和后果的影响。然而,这些研究没有考虑农村、半城市或城市地区不同数量养老院的影响。我们的目标是分析农村因素对新冠病毒发病率和死亡率的影响,同时考虑养老院居住这一变量的影响。此外,我们对半城市和农村地区的感染人群进行了比较分析。
我们首先在巴拉格尔初级卫生保健区对所有人群的新冠病毒感染情况进行了分析,然后使用贝叶斯逻辑回归分析研究农村因素的影响,特别排除了居住在养老院的人群。我们还进行了一项流行病学和临床分析,比较农村和半城市地区。
我们发现,半城市地区新冠病毒感染的发病率、相对死亡率和绝对死亡率均高于农村地区。在从样本中排除养老院居民后,贝叶斯分析表明,农村地区对新冠病毒感染或死亡率并无防护作用。半城市和农村地区的发病率、特定死亡率和病死率相似。除慢性阻塞性肺疾病外,所有合并症都与较高的死亡率相关,而无症状与较高的死亡率无关。
在分析中排除居住在养老院的人群后,我们发现,在新冠疫情第一波期间,农村地区对感染或死亡率均不是一个防护因素。我们的贝叶斯模型分析证实,仅农村地区这一因素并不能提高农村居民的生存率。