Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 11 de 11
Filter
1.
BMJ Open ; 12(11): e064578, 2022 11 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2137771

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, substance use health services for treatment of alcohol use disorder and problematic alcohol use (AUD/PAU) were fragmented and challenging to access. The pandemic magnified system weaknesses, often resulting in disruptions of treatment as alcohol use during the pandemic rose. When treatment services were available, utilisation was often low for various reasons. Virtual care was implemented to offset the drop in in-person care, however accessibility was not universal. Identification of the characteristics of treatment services for AUD/PAU that impact accessibility, as perceived by the individuals accessing or providing the services, will provide insights to enable improved access. We will perform a scoping review that will identify characteristics of services for treatment of AUD/PAU that have been identified as barriers to or facilitators of service access from the perspectives of these groups. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will follow scoping review methodological guidance from the Joanna Briggs Institute. Using the OVID platform, we will search Ovid MEDLINE including Epub Ahead of Print and In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Embase Classic+Embase, APA PsychInfo, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and CINAHL (Ebsco Platform). Multiple reviewers will screen citations. We will seek studies reporting data collected from individuals with AUD/PAU or providers of treatment for AUD/PAU on service-level factors affecting access to care. We will map barriers to and facilitators of access to AUD/PAU treatment services identified in the relevant studies, stratified by service type and key measures of inequity across service users. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This research will enhance awareness of existing evidence regarding barriers to and facilitators of access to services for the treatment of alcohol use disorder and problematic alcohol use. Findings will be disseminated through publications, conference presentations and a stakeholder meeting. As this is a scoping review of published literature, no ethics approval was required.


Subject(s)
Alcoholism , COVID-19 , Humans , Alcoholism/therapy , Pandemics , COVID-19/therapy , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Health Services , Review Literature as Topic
2.
J Am Pharm Assoc (2003) ; 62(5): 1499-1513.e16, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2074144

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The underutilization of immunization services remains a big public health concern. Pharmacists can address this concern by playing an active role in immunization administration. OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the impact of pharmacist-involved interventions on immunization rates and other outcomes indirectly related to vaccine uptake. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases from inception to February 2022 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies in which pharmacists were involved in the immunization process. Studies were excluded if no comparator was reported. Two reviewers independently completed data extraction and bias assessments using standardized forms. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model. RESULTS: A total of 14 RCTs and 79 observational studies were included. Several types of immunizations were provided, including influenza, pneumococcal, herpes zoster, Tdap, and others in a variety of settings (community pharmacy, hospital, clinic, others). Pooled analyses from RCTs indicated that a pharmacist as immunizer (risk ratio 1.14 [95% CI 1.12-1.15]), advocator (1.31 [1.17-1.48]), or both (1.14 [1.12-1.15]) significantly increased immunization rates compared with usual care or non-pharmacist-involved interventions. The quality of evidence was assessed as moderate or low for those meta-analyses. Evidence from observational studies was consistent with the results found in the analysis of the RCTs. CONCLUSION: Pharmacist involvement as immunizer, advocator, or both roles has favorable effects on immunization uptake, especially with influenza vaccines in the United States and some high-income countries. As the practice of pharmacists in immunization has been expanded globally, further research on investigating the impact of pharmacist involvement in immunization in other countries, especially developing ones, is warranted.


Subject(s)
Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Humans , Immunization , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Pharmacists , United States , Vaccination
3.
Hum Vaccin Immunother ; : 2095823, 2022 Jul 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1927248

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a dramatic impact on society, but little is known about how the pandemic affects the vaccine policy landscape and public perception of vaccines in Thailand. This study aims to describe potential changes in Thailand's policy landscape post-pandemic. We performed a literature review and in-depth interviews with 12 key informants to understand the policy landscape in Thailand. The findings were shared in a policy forum in December 2021. Several key findings were summarized. Funding and development have been thriving during the pandemic. However, a long-term commitment from all stakeholders is required to maintain policy continuation. A public-private partnership should be considered. The regulatory body needs to be prepared for product authorization. The vaccine introduction decision-making process, and investment in prevention and promotion, should further be discussed. In summary, it is important to reshape the environment and mentality of all stakeholders to create a sustainable and self-sufficient vaccine ecosystem.

6.
Front Pharmacol ; 12: 807446, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1686522

ABSTRACT

Background: With the increased availability of safe antiretroviral therapy (ART) in recent years, achieving optimal adherence and patient retention is becoming the biggest challenge for people living with HIV (PLWH). Care retention is influenced by several socioeconomic, socio-cultural, and government policies during the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, we aim to explore barriers and facilitators to adherence to ART among PLWH in Pakistan in general and COVID-19 pandemic related in particular. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted among 25 PLWH from December 2020 to April 2021 in the local language (Urdu) at the ART centre of Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences, Islamabad, Pakistan. Interviews were audio-recorded in the local Urdu language, and bilingual expert (English, Urdu) transcribed verbatim, coded for themes and sub-themes, and analyzed using a phenomenological approach for thematic content analysis. Results: Stigma and discrimination, fear of HIV disclosure, economic constraints, forgetfulness, religion (Ramadan, spiritual healing), adverse drug reactions, lack of social support, alternative therapies, and COVID-19-related lock-down and fear of lesser COVID-19 care due to HIV associated stigma were identified as barriers affecting the retention in HIV care. At the same time, positive social support, family responsibilities, use of reminders, the beneficial impact of ART, and initiation of telephone consultations, courier delivery, and long-term delivery of antiretrovirals during COVID-19 were identified as facilitators of HIV retention. Conclusion: Improving adherence and retention is even more challenging due to COVID-19; therefore, it requires the integration of enhanced access to treatment with improved employment and social support. HIV care providers must understand these reported factors comprehensively and treat patients accordingly to ensure the continuum of HIV care. A coordinated approach including different stakeholders is required to facilitate patient retention in HIV care and consequently improve the clinical outcomes of PLWH.

8.
Nat Med ; 27(12): 2120-2126, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1493152

ABSTRACT

The role that traditional and hybrid in-person schooling modes contribute to the community incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections relative to fully remote schooling is unknown. We conducted an event study using a retrospective nationwide cohort evaluating the effect of school mode on SARS-CoV-2 cases during the 12 weeks after school opening (July-September 2020, before the Delta variant was predominant), stratified by US Census region. After controlling for case rate trends before school start, state-level mitigation measures and community activity level, SARS-CoV-2 incidence rates were not statistically different in counties with in-person learning versus remote school modes in most regions of the United States. In the South, there was a significant and sustained increase in cases per week among counties that opened in a hybrid or traditional mode versus remote, with weekly effects ranging from 9.8 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.7-16.1) to 21.3 (95% CI = 9.9-32.7) additional cases per 100,000 persons, driven by increasing cases among 0-9 year olds and adults. Schools can reopen for in-person learning without substantially increasing community case rates of SARS-CoV-2; however, the impacts are variable. Additional studies are needed to elucidate the underlying reasons for the observed regional differences more fully.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , Schools/organization & administration , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/transmission , Child , Child, Preschool , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Risk , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Teaching , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
9.
Br J Clin Pharmacol ; 88(4): 1551-1566, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1462736

ABSTRACT

AIMS: The aim was to perform an umbrella review to summarise the existing evidence on proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) use and adverse outcomes and to grade the certainty of evidence. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched up to July 2021 for meta-analyses of cohort studies and/or randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Summary effect sizes from a random-effects model, between-study heterogeneity, 95% prediction interval, small-study effect, excess significance and credibility ceilings were devised to classify the credibility of evidence from meta-analyses of cohort studies, whereas the GRADE approach was used for meta-analyses of RCTs. RESULTS: In meta-analyses of cohort studies, 52 of the 91 examined associations were statistically significant (P ≤ .05). Convincing evidence emerged from main analysis for the association between PPI use and risk of all-site fracture and chronic kidney disease in the elderly population. However, none of these associations remained supported by convincing evidence after sensitivity analyses. The use of PPI is also associated with an increased risk of mortality due to COVID-19 infection and other related adverse outcomes, but the quality of evidence was weak. In meta-analyses of RCTs, 38 of the 63 examined associations were statistically significant. However, no associations were supported by high or moderate-quality evidence. CONCLUSION: This study's findings imply that most putative adverse outcomes associated with PPI use may not be supported by high-quality evidence and are likely to have been affected by underlying confounding factors. Future research is needed to confirm the causal association between PPI use and risk of fracture and chronic kidney disease.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Renal Insufficiency, Chronic , Aged , Cohort Studies , Humans , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Proton Pump Inhibitors/adverse effects , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
10.
BMC Public Health ; 21(1): 1682, 2021 09 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1412024

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: There is increasing evidence that COVID-19 has unmasked the true magnitude of health inequity worldwide. Policies and guidance for containing the infection and reducing the COVID-19 related deaths have proven to be effective, however the extent to which health inequity factors were considered in these policies is rather unknown. The aim of this study is to measure the extent to which COVID-19 related policies reflect equity considerations by focusing on the global policy landscape around wearing masks and personal protection equipment (PPE). METHODS: A systematic search for published documents on COVID-19 and masks/PPE was conducted across six databases: PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, ERIC, ASSIA and Psycinfo. Reviews, policy documents, briefs related to COVID-19 and masks/PPE were included in the review. To assess the extent of incorporation of equity in the policy documents, a guidance framework known as 'PROGRESS-Plus': Place of residence, Race/ethnicity, Occupation, Gender/sex, Religion, Education, Socioeconomic status, Social capital, Plus (age, disability etc.) was utilized. RESULTS: This review included 212 policy documents. Out of 212 policy documents, 190 policy documents (89.62%) included at least one PROGRESS-plus component. Most of the policy documents (n = 163, 85.79%) focused on "occupation" component of the PROGRESS-plus followed by personal characteristics associated with discrimination (n = 4;2.11%), place of residence (n = 2;1.05%) and education (n = 1;0.53%). Subgroup analysis revealed that most of the policy documents (n = 176, 83.01%) were focused on "workers" such as healthcare workers, mortuary workers, school workers, transportation workers, essential workers etc. Of the remaining policy documents, most were targeted towards whole population (n = 30; 14.15%). Contrary to "worker focused" policy documents, most of the 'whole population focused' policy documents didn't have a PROGRESS-plus equity component rendering them equity limiting for the society. CONCLUSION: Our review highlights even if policies considered health inequity during the design/implementation, this consideration was often one dimensional in nature. In addition, population wide policies should be carefully designed and implemented after identifying relevant equity related barriers in order to produce better outcomes for the whole society.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Health Equity , Humans , Personal Protective Equipment , Policy , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Med Care ; 59(3): 213-219, 2021 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1020325

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In anticipation of a demand surge for hospital beds attributed to the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) many US states have mandated that hospitals postpone elective admissions. OBJECTIVES: To estimate excess demand for hospital beds due to COVID-19, the net financial impact of eliminating elective admissions in order to meet demand, and to explore the scenario when demand remains below capacity. RESEARCH DESIGN: An economic simulation to estimate the net financial impact of halting elective admissions, combining epidemiological reports, the US Census, American Hospital Association Annual Survey, and the National Inpatient Sample. Deterministic sensitivity analyses explored the results while varying assumptions for demand and capacity. SUBJECTS: Inputs regarding disease prevalence and inpatient utilization were representative of the US population. Our base case relied on a hospital admission rate reported by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention of 137.6 per 100,000, with the highest rates in people aged 65 years and older (378.8 per 100,000) and 50-64 years (207.4 per 100,000). On average, elective admissions accounted for 20% of total hospital admissions, and the average rate of unoccupied beds across hospitals was 30%. MEASURES: Net financial impact of halting elective admissions. RESULTS: On average, hospitals COVID-19 demand for hospital bed-days fell well short of hospital capacity, resulting in a substantial financial loss. The net financial impact of a 90-day COVID surge on a hospital was only favorable under a narrow circumstance when capacity was filled by a high proportion of COVID-19 cases among hospitals with low rates of elective admissions. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals that restricted elective care took on a substantial financial risk, potentially threatening viability. A sustainable public policy should therefore consider support to hospitals that responsibly served their communities through the crisis.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Economics, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Elective Surgical Procedures/economics , Adult , Aged , Bed Occupancy/economics , Bed Occupancy/statistics & numerical data , Female , Hospital Bed Capacity/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Insurance, Health, Reimbursement/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Monte Carlo Method , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL