Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 28(13): S181-S190, 2022 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2215185

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for resilient health systems with the capacity to effectively detect and respond to disease outbreaks and ensure continuity of health service delivery. The pandemic has disproportionately affected resource-limited settings with inadequate health capacity, resulting in disruptions in health service delivery and worsened outcomes for key health indicators. As part of the US government's goal of ensuring health security, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has used its scientific and technical expertise to build health capacity and address health threats globally. We describe how capacity developed through global health programs of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Cameroon was leveraged to respond to coronavirus disease and maintain health service delivery. The health system strengthening efforts in Cameroon can be applied in similar settings to ensure preparedness for future global public health threats and improve health outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , United States/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Global Health , COVID-19/prevention & control , Capacity Building , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.
2.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 28(13): S59-S68, 2022 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2162913

ABSTRACT

The US President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) supports molecular HIV and tuberculosis diagnostic networks and information management systems in low- and middle-income countries. We describe how national programs leveraged these PEPFAR-supported laboratory resources for SARS-CoV-2 testing during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sent a spreadsheet template consisting of 46 indicators for assessing the use of PEPFAR-supported diagnostic networks for COVID-19 pandemic response activities during April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2021, to 27 PEPFAR-supported countries or regions. A total of 109 PEPFAR-supported centralized HIV viral load and early infant diagnosis laboratories and 138 decentralized HIV and TB sites reported performing SARS-CoV-2 testing in 16 countries. Together, these sites contributed to >3.4 million SARS-CoV-2 tests during the 1-year period. Our findings illustrate that PEPFAR-supported diagnostic networks provided a wide range of resources to respond to emergency COVID-19 diagnostic testing in 16 low- and middle-income countries.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , HIV Infections , Humans , COVID-19 Testing , Pathology, Molecular , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/diagnosis
3.
Lancet Infect Dis ; 21(8): 1089-1096, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1328820

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Real-time PCR is recommended to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, PCR availability is restricted in most countries. Rapid diagnostic tests are considered acceptable alternatives, but data are lacking on their performance. We assessed the performance of four antibody-based rapid diagnostic tests and one antigen-based rapid diagnostic test for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection in the community in Cameroon. METHODS: In this clinical, prospective, diagnostic accuracy study, we enrolled individuals aged at least 21 years who were either symptomatic and suspected of having COVID-19 or asymptomatic and presented for screening. We tested peripheral blood for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies using the Innovita (Biological Technology; Beijing, China), Wondfo (Guangzhou Wondfo Biotech; Guangzhou, China), SD Biosensor (SD Biosensor; Gyeonggi-do, South Korea), and Runkun tests (Runkun Pharmaceutical; Hunan, China), and nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 antigen using the SD Biosensor test. Antigen rapid diagnostic tests were compared with Abbott PCR testing (Abbott; Abbott Park, IL, USA), and antibody rapid diagnostic tests were compared with Biomerieux immunoassays (Biomerieux; Marcy l'Etoile, France). We retrospectively tested two diagnostic algorithms that incorporated rapid diagnostic tests for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients using simulation modelling. FINDINGS: 1195 participants were enrolled in the study. 347 (29%) tested SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive, 223 (19%) rapid diagnostic test antigen-positive, and 478 (40%) rapid diagnostic test antibody-positive. Antigen-based rapid diagnostic test sensitivity was 80·0% (95% CI 71·0-88·0) in the first 7 days after symptom onset, but antibody-based rapid diagnostic tests had only 26·8% sensitivity (18·3-36·8). Antibody rapid diagnostic test sensitivity increased to 76·4% (70·1-82·0) 14 days after symptom onset. Among asymptomatic participants, the sensitivity of antigen-based and antibody-based rapid diagnostic tests were 37·0% (27·0-48·0) and 50·7% (42·2-59·1), respectively. Cohen's κ showed substantial agreement between Wondfo antibody rapid diagnostic test and gold-standard ELISA (κ=0·76; sensitivity 0·98) and between Biosensor and ELISA (κ=0·60; sensitivity 0·94). Innovita (κ=0·47; sensitivity 0·93) and Runkun (κ=0·43; sensitivity 0·76) showed moderate agreement. An antigen-based retrospective algorithm applied to symptomatic patients showed 94·0% sensitivity and 91·0% specificity in the first 7 days after symptom onset. For asymptomatic participants, the algorithm showed a sensitivity of 34% (95% CI 23·0-44·0) and a specificity of 92·0% (88·0-96·0). INTERPRETATION: Rapid diagnostic tests had good overall sensitivity for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection. Rapid diagnostic tests could be incorporated into efficient testing algorithms as an alternative to PCR to decrease diagnostic delays and onward viral transmission. FUNDING: Médecins Sans Frontières WACA and Médecins Sans Frontières OCG. TRANSLATIONS: For the French and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antigens, Viral/analysis , Asymptomatic Infections , COVID-19 Serological Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Feasibility Studies , Humans , Prospective Studies , Sensitivity and Specificity
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL