The impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on tuberculosis control in China.

BACKGROUND: In response to the COVID-19 epidemic, China implemented a series of interventions that impacted tuberculosis (TB) control in the country. METHODS: Based on routine surveillance data and questionnaires, the study analyzed TB notification, follow-up examinations, and treatment outcomes. The data were split into three phases in relation to outbreak, lockdown and reopen when the nationwide COVID-19 response started in 2020: control (11 weeks prior), intensive (11 weeks during and immediately after), and regular (4 additional weeks). Data from 2017-2019 were used as baseline. FINDINGS: The notified number of TB patients decreased sharply in the 1st week of the intensive period but took significantly longer to rebound in 2020 compared with baseline. The percentages of TB patients undergoing sputum examination within one week after 2 months treatment and full treatment course in the intensive period were most affected and decreased by 8% in comparison with control period. 75•2% (221/294) of counties reallocated CDC and primary health care workers to fight the COVID-19 epidemic, 26•9% (725/2694) of TB patients had postponed or missed their follow-up examinations due to travel restrictions and fear of contracting COVID-19. INTERPRETATION: In the short term, the COVID-19 epidemic mostly affected TB notification and follow-up examinations in China, which may lead to a surge of demand for TB services in the near future. To cope with this future challenge, an emergency response mechanism for TB should be established. FUNDING: National Health Commission of China-Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation TB Collaboration project (OPP1137180).

COVID-19 vaccine boosters for young adults: a risk benefit assessment and ethical analysis of mandate policies at universities.

In 2022, students at North American universities with third-dose COVID-19 vaccine mandates risk disenrolment if unvaccinated. To assess the appropriateness of booster mandates in this age group, we combine empirical risk-benefit assessment and ethical analysis. To prevent one COVID-19 hospitalisation over a 6-month period, we estimate that 31 207-42 836 young adults aged 18-29 years must receive a third mRNA vaccine. Booster mandates in young adults are expected to cause a net harm: per COVID-19 hospitalisation prevented, we anticipate at least 18.5 serious adverse events from mRNA vaccines, including 1.5-4.6 booster-associated myopericarditis cases in males (typically requiring hospitalisation). We also anticipate 1430-4626 cases of grade ≥3 reactogenicity interfering with daily activities (although typically not requiring hospitalisation). University booster mandates are unethical because they: (1) are not based on an updated (Omicron era) stratified risk-benefit assessment for this age group; (2) may result in a net harm to healthy young adults; (3) are not proportionate: expected harms are not outweighed by public health benefits given modest and transient effectiveness of vaccines against transmission; (4) violate the reciprocity principle because serious vaccine-related harms are not reliably compensated due to gaps in vaccine injury schemes; and (5) may result in wider social harms. We consider counterarguments including efforts to increase safety on campus but find these are fraught with limitations and little scientific support. Finally, we discuss the policy relevance of our analysis for primary series COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

Re-evaluating the merits of decentralization as a core strategy for effective delivery of drug-resistant tuberculosis care in Pakistan.

Decentralized, person-centred models of care delivery for drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) continue to be under-resourced in high-burden TB countries. The implementation of such models-made increasingly urgent by the COVID-19 pandemic-are key to addressing gaps in DR-TB care. We abstracted data of rifampicin-resistant (RR)/multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) patients initiated on treatment at 11 facilities between 2010 and 2017 in Sindh and Balochistan provinces of Pakistan. We analysed trends in treatment outcomes relating to programme expansion to peri-urban and rural areas and estimated driving distance from patient residence to treatment facility. Among the 5586 RR/MDR-TB patients in the analysis, overall treatment success decreased from 82% to 66% between 2010 and 2017, as the programme expanded. The adjusted risk ratio for unfavourable outcomes was 1.013 (95% confidence interval 1.005-1.021) for every 20 km of driving distance. Our analysis suggests that expanding DR-TB care to centralized hubs added to increased unfavourable outcomes for people accessing care in peri-urban and rural districts. We propose that as enrolments increase, expanding DR-TB services close to or within affected communities is essential.

The unintended consequences of COVID-19 vaccine policy: why mandates, passports and restrictions may cause more harm than good.

Vaccination policies have shifted dramatically during COVID-19 with the rapid emergence of population-wide vaccine mandates, domestic vaccine passports and differential restrictions based on vaccination status. While these policies have prompted ethical, scientific, practical, legal and political debate, there has been limited evaluation of their potential unintended consequences. Here, we outline a comprehensive set of hypotheses for why these policies may ultimately be counterproductive and harmful. Our framework considers four domains: (1) behavioural psychology, (2) politics and law, (3) socioeconomics, and (4) the integrity of science and public health. While current vaccines appear to have had a significant impact on decreasing COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality burdens, we argue that current mandatory vaccine policies are scientifically questionable and are likely to cause more societal harm than good. Restricting people's access to work, education, public transport and social life based on COVID-19 vaccination status impinges on human rights, promotes stigma and social polarisation, and adversely affects health and well-being. Current policies may lead to a widening of health and economic inequalities, detrimental long-term impacts on trust in government and scientific institutions, and reduce the uptake of future public health measures, including COVID-19 vaccines as well as routine immunisations. Mandating vaccination is one of the most powerful interventions in public health and should be used sparingly and carefully to uphold ethical norms and trust in institutions. We argue that current COVID-19 vaccine policies should be re-evaluated in light of the negative consequences that we outline. Leveraging empowering strategies based on trust and public consultation, and improving healthcare services and infrastructure, represent a more sustainable approach to optimising COVID-19 vaccination programmes and, more broadly, the health and well-being of the public.

The need for protecting and enhancing TB health policies and services for forcibly displaced and migrant populations during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Disruption of health services due to the COVID-19 pandemic threatens to derail progress being made in tuberculosis control efforts. Forcibly displaced people and migrant populations face particular vulnerabilities as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, which leaves them at further risk of developing TB. They inhabit environments where measures such as "physical distancing" are impossible to realize and where facilities like camps and informal temporary settlements can easily become sites of rapid disease transmission. In this viewpoint we utilize three case studies-from Peru, South Africa, and Syria-to illustrate the lived experience of forced migration and mobile populations, and the impact of COVID-19 on TB among these populations. We discuss the dual pandemics of TB and COVID-19 in the context of migration through a syndemic lens, to systematically address the upstream social, economic, structural and political factors that - in often deleterious dynamics - foster increased vulnerabilities and risk. Addressing TB, COVID-19 and migration from a syndemic perspective, not only draws systematic attention to comorbidity and the relevance of social and structural context, but also helps to find solutions: the true reality of syndemic interactions can only be fully understood by considering a particular population and bio- social context, and ensuring that they receive the comprehensive care that they need. It also provides avenues for strengthening and expanding the existing infrastructure for TB care to tackle both COVID-19 and TB in migrants and refugees in an integrated and synergistic manner.

COVID-19 reveals weak health systems by design: Why we must re-make global health in this historic moment.

The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrates the critical need to reimagine and repair the broken systems of global health. Specifically, the pandemic demonstrates the hollowness of the global health rhetoric of equity, the weaknesses of a health security-driven global health agenda, and the negative health impacts of power differentials not only globally, but also regionally and locally. This article analyses the effects of these inequities and calls on governments, multilateral agencies, universities, and NGOs to engage in true collaboration and partnership in this historic moment. Before this pandemic spreads further - including in the Global South - with potentially extreme impact, we must work together to rectify the field and practice of global health.

Siamit: A Novel Academic-Tribal Health Partnership in Northwest Alaska.

PROBLEM: American Indians and Alaska Natives hold a state-conferred right to health, yet significant health and health care disparities persist. Academic medical centers are resource-rich institutions committed to public service, yet few are engaged in responsive, equitable, and lasting tribal health partnerships to address these challenges. APPROACH: Maniilaq Association, a rural and remote tribal health organization in Northwest Alaska, partnered with Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School to address health care needs through physician staffing, training, and quality improvement initiatives. This partnership, called Siamit, falls under tribal governance, focuses on supporting community health leaders, addresses challenges shaped by extreme geographic remoteness, and advances the mission of academic medicine in the context of tribal health priorities. OUTCOMES: Throughout the 2019-2020 academic year, Siamit augmented local physician staffing, mentored health professions trainees, provided continuing medical education courses, implemented quality improvement initiatives, and provided clinical care and operational support during the COVID-19 pandemic. Siamit began with a small budget and limited human resources, demonstrating that relatively small investments in academic-tribal health partnerships can support meaningful and positive outcomes. NEXT STEPS: During the 2020-2021 academic year, the authors plan to expand Siamit's efforts with a broader social medicine curriculum, additional attending staff, more frequent trainee rotations, an increasingly robust mentorship network for Indigenous health professions trainees, and further study of the impact of these efforts. Such partnerships may be replicable in other settings and represent a significant opportunity to advance community health priorities, strengthen tribal health systems, support the next generation of Indigenous health leaders, and carry out the academic medicine mission of teaching, research, and service.