Risk factors for disruptions in tuberculosis care in Uganda during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, TB mortality increased while diagnoses decreased, likely due to care disruption. In March, 2020, Uganda-a country with high TB burden, implemented a COVID-19 lockdown with associated decrease in TB diagnoses. This study aims to examine patient level risk factors for disruption in TB care during the COVID-19 pandemic in Uganda. This retrospective cross-sectional cohort study included six TB clinics in Uganda. Clustered sampling included phases of TB care and three time-periods: pre-lockdown, lockdown and post-lockdown. Characteristics of patients with TB care disruption (TBCD), defined as those with > 2 months of symptoms prior to diagnosis or who missed a TB clinic, and those without TB care disruption (non-TBCD) were analyzed between time-periods. 1,624 charts were reviewed; 1322 were contacted, 672 consented and completed phone interview; pre-lockdown (n = 213), lockdown (n = 189) and post-lockdown (n = 270). TBCD occurred in 57% (385/672) of patients. There was an increase in the proportion of urban patients in the TBCD and non-TBCD groups during post-lockdown (p <0.001). There was no difference in demographics, HIV co-infection, socioeconomic status, or distance to TB clinic between TBCD and non-TBCD groups or within TBCD by time-period. There were few differences amongst TBCD and all TB patients by time-period. The increase in urban patients' post-lockdown may represent a portion of urban patients who delayed care until post-lockdown. Insignificant trends suggesting more TBCD amongst those who lived further from clinics and those without HIV-coinfection require more investigation.

Additive value of lung ultrasound to clinical parameters for prognosticating COVID-19.

The inclusion of LUS with simple, point-of-care clinical parameters have potential to improve COVID-19 prognostication above that from standard clinical care delivery. https://bit.ly/3InePYK.

Do worsening lung ultrasound scans identify severe COVID-19 trajectories?

Background: While point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has been used to track worsening COVID-19 disease it is unclear if there are dynamic differences between severity trajectories. Methods: We studied 12-lung zone protocol scans from 244 participants [with repeat scans obtained in 3 days (N = 114), 7 days (N = 53), and weekly (N = 9)] ≥ 18 years of age hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia. Differences in mean lung ultrasound (LUS) scores and percent of lung fields with A-lines over time were compared between peak severity levels (as defined by the WHO clinical progression scale) using linear mixed-effects models. Results: Mean LUS scores were elevated by 0.19 (p = 0.035) and A-lines were present in 14.7% fewer lung fields (p = 0.02) among those with ICU-level or fatal peak illness compared to less severe hospitalized illness, regardless of duration of illness. There were no differences between severity groups in the trajectories of mean LUS score 0.19 (p = 0.66) or percent A-lines (p = 0.40). Discussion: Our results do not support the use of serial LUS scans to monitor COVID-19 disease progression among hospitalized adults.

Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasound Predicts Severe Disease and Death Due to COVID-19: A Prospective Cohort Study.

The clinical utility of point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is unclear. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: A large tertiary care center in Maryland, between April 2020 and September 2021. PATIENTS: Hospitalized adults (≥ 18 yr old) with positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction results. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: All patients were scanned using a standardized protocol including 12 lung zones and followed to determine clinical outcomes until hospital discharge and vital status at 28 days. Ultrasounds were independently reviewed for lung and pleural line artifacts and abnormalities, and the mean LUS Score (mLUSS) (ranging from 0 to 3) across lung zones was determined. The primary outcome was time to ICU-level care, defined as high-flow oxygen, noninvasive, or invasive mechanical ventilation, within 28 days of the initial ultrasound. Cox proportional hazards regression models adjusted for age and sex were fit for mLUSS and each ultrasound covariate. A total of 264 participants were enrolled in the study; the median age was 61 years and 114 participants (43.2%) were female. The median mLUSS was 1.0 (interquartile range, 0.5-1.3). Following enrollment, 27 participants (10.0%) went on to require ICU-level care, and 14 (5.3%) subsequently died by 28 days. Each increase in mLUSS at enrollment was associated with disease progression to ICU-level care (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 3.61; 95% CI, 1.27-10.2) and 28-day mortality (aHR, 3.10; 95% CI, 1.29-7.50). Pleural line abnormalities were independently associated with disease progression to death (aHR, 20.93; CI, 3.33-131.30). CONCLUSIONS: Participants with a mLUSS greater than or equal to 1 or pleural line changes on LUS had an increased likelihood of subsequent requirement of high-flow oxygen or greater. LUS is a promising tool for assessing risk of COVID-19 progression at the bedside.

Do worsening lung ultrasound scans identify severe COVID-19 trajectories?

Background While point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has been used to track worsening COVID-19 disease it is unclear if there are dynamic differences between severity trajectories. Methods We studied 12-lung zone protocol scans from 244 participants [with repeat scans obtained in 3 days (N = 114), 7 days (N = 53), and weekly (N = 9)] ≥ 18 years of age hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia. Differences in mean lung ultrasound (LUS) scores and percent of lung fields with A-lines over time were compared between peak severity levels (as defined by the WHO clinical progression scale) using linear mixed-effects models. Results Mean LUS scores were elevated by 0.19 (p = 0.035) and A-lines were present in 14.7% fewer lung fields (p = 0.02) among those with ICU-level or fatal peak illness compared to less severe hospitalized illness, regardless of duration of illness. There were no differences between severity groups in the trajectories of mean LUS score 0.19 (p = 0.66) or percent A-lines (p = 0.40). Discussion Our results do not support the use of serial LUS scans to monitor COVID-19 disease progression among hospitalized adults.

Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasound Predicts Severe Disease and Death Due to COVID-19: A Prospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES: The clinical utility of point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is unclear. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: A large tertiary care center in Maryland, between April 2020 and September 2021. PATIENTS: Hospitalized adults (≥ 18 yr old) with positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction results. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: All patients were scanned using a standardized protocol including 12 lung zones and followed to determine clinical outcomes until hospital discharge and vital status at 28 days. Ultrasounds were independently reviewed for lung and pleural line artifacts and abnormalities, and the mean LUS Score (mLUSS) (ranging from 0 to 3) across lung zones was determined. The primary outcome was time to ICU-level care, defined as high-flow oxygen, noninvasive, or invasive mechanical ventilation, within 28 days of the initial ultrasound. Cox proportional hazards regression models adjusted for age and sex were fit for mLUSS and each ultrasound covariate. A total of 264 participants were enrolled in the study;the median age was 61 years and 114 participants (43.2%) were female. The median mLUSS was 1.0 (interquartile range, 0.5–1.3). Following enrollment, 27 participants (10.0%) went on to require ICU-level care, and 14 (5.3%) subsequently died by 28 days. Each increase in mLUSS at enrollment was associated with disease progression to ICU-level care (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 3.61;95% CI, 1.27–10.2) and 28-day mortality (aHR, 3.10;95% CI, 1.29–7.50). Pleural line abnormalities were independently associated with disease progression to death (aHR, 20.93;CI, 3.33–131.30). CONCLUSIONS: Participants with a mLUSS greater than or equal to 1 or pleural line changes on LUS had an increased likelihood of subsequent requirement of high-flow oxygen or greater. LUS is a promising tool for assessing risk of COVID-19 progression at the bedside.

Developing and Implementing Noninvasive Ventilator Training in Haiti during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background: Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is an important component of respiratory therapy for a range of cardiopulmonary conditions. The World Health Organization recommends NIV use to decrease the use of intensive care unit resources and improve outcomes among patients with respiratory failure during periods of high patient capacity from coronavirus disease (COVID-19). However, healthcare providers in many low- and middle-income countries, including Haiti, do not have experience with NIV. We conducted NIV training and evaluation in Port-au-Prince, Haiti. Objectives: To design and implement a multimodal NIV training program in Haiti that would improve confidence and knowledge of NIV use for respiratory failure. Methods: In January 2021, we conducted a 3-day multimodal NIV training consisting of didactic sessions, team-based learning, and multistation simulation for 36 Haitian healthcare workers. The course included 5 didactic session and 10 problem-based and simulation sessions. All course material was independently created by the study team on the basis of Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education-approved content and review of available evidence. All participants completed pre- and post-training knowledge-based examinations and confidence surveys, which used a 5-point Likert scale. Results: A total of 36 participants were included in the training and analysis, mean age was 39.94 years (standard deviation [SD] = 9.45), and participants had an average of 14.32 years (SD = 1.21) of clinical experience. Most trainees (75%, n = 27) were physicians. Other specialties included nursing (19%, n = 7), nurse anesthesia (3%, n = 1), and respiratory therapy (3%, n = 1). Fifty percent (n = 18) of participants stated they had previous experience with NIV. The majority of trainees (77%) had an increase in confidence survey score; the mean confidence survey score increased significantly after training from 2.75 (SD = 0.77) to 3.70 (SD = 0.85) (P < 0.05). The mean knowledge examination score increased by 39.63% (SD = 15.99%) after training, which was also significant (P < 0.001). Conclusion: This multimodal NIV training, which included didactic, simulation, and team-based learning, was feasible and resulted in significant increases in trainee confidence and knowledge with NIV. This curriculum has the potential to provide NIV training to numerous low- and middle-income countries as they manage the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and rising burden of noncommunicable disease. Further research is necessary to ensure the sustainability of these improvements and adaptability to other low- and middle-income settings.

Efficacy of convalescent plasma for treatment of COVID-19 in Uganda.

RATIONALE: Convalescent plasma (CCP) has been studied as a potential therapy for COVID-19, but data on its efficacy in Africa are limited. OBJECTIVE: In this trial we set out to determine the efficacy of CCP for treatment of COVID-19 in Uganda. MEASUREMENTS: Patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcriptase (RT)-PCR test irrespective of disease severity were hospitalised and randomised to receive either COVID-19 CCP plus standard of care (SOC) or SOC alone. The primary outcome was time to viral clearance, defined as having two consecutive RT-PCR-negative tests by day 28. Secondary outcomes included time to symptom resolution, clinical status on the modified WHO Ordinal Clinical Scale (≥1-point increase), progression to severe/critical condition (defined as oxygen saturation <93% or needing oxygen), mortality and safety. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 136 patients were randomised, 69 to CCP+SOC and 67 to SOC only. The median age was 50 years (IQR: 38.5-62.0), 71.3% were male and the median duration of symptom was 7 days (IQR=4-8). Time to viral clearance was not different between the CCP+SOC and SOC arms (median of 6 days (IQR=4-11) vs 4 (IQR=4-6), p=0.196). There were no statistically significant differences in secondary outcomes in CCP+SOC versus SOC: time to symptom resolution (median=7 (IQR=5-7) vs 7 (IQR=5-10) days, p=0.450), disease progression (9 (22.0%) vs 7 (24.0%) patients, p=0.830) and mortality (10 (14.5%) vs 8 (11.9%) deaths, p=0.476). CONCLUSION: In this African trial, CCP therapy did not result in beneficial virological or clinical improvements. Further trials are needed to determine subgroups of patients who may benefit from CCP in Africa.Trial registration number NCT04542941.

Feasibility of collecting and processing of COVID-19 convalescent plasma for treatment of COVID-19 in Uganda.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence that supports the use of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) for treatment of COVID-19 is increasingly emerging. However, very few African countries have undertaken the collection and processing of CCP. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of collecting and processing of CCP, in preparation for a randomized clinical trial of CCP for treatment of COVID-19 in Uganda. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, persons with documented evidence of recovery from COVID-19 in Uganda were contacted and screened for blood donation via telephone calls. Those found eligible were asked to come to the blood donation centre for further screening and consent. Whole blood collection was undertaken from which plasma was processed. Plasma was tested for transfusion transmissible infections (TTIs) and anti-SARS CoV-2 antibody titers. SARS-CoV-2 testing was also done on nasopharyngeal swabs from the donors. RESULTS: 192 participants were contacted of whom 179 (93.2%) were eligible to donate. Of the 179 eligible, 23 (12.8%) were not willing to donate and reasons given included: having no time 7(30.4%), fear of being retained at the COVID-19 treatment center 10 (43.5%), fear of stigma in the community 1 (4.3%), phobia for donating blood 1 (4.3%), religious issues 1 (4.4%), lack of interest 2 (8.7%) and transport challenges 1 (4.3%). The median age was 30 years and females accounted for 3.7% of the donors. A total of 30 (18.5%) donors tested positive for different TTIs. Antibody titer testing demonstrated titers of more than 1:320 for all the 72 samples tested. Age greater than 46 years and female gender were associated with higher titers though not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: CCP collection and processing is possible in Uganda. However, concerns about stigma and lack of time, interest or transport need to be addressed in order to maximize donations.

Characteristics and outcomes of admitted patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 in Uganda.

RATIONALE: Detailed data on the characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 in sub-Saharan Africa are limited. OBJECTIVE: We determined the clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in Uganda. MEASUREMENTS: As of the 16 May 2020, a total of 203 cases had been confirmed. We report on the first 56 patients; 29 received hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and 27 did not. Endpoints included admission to intensive care, mechanical ventilation or death during hospitalisation. MAIN RESULTS: The median age was 34.2 years; 67.9% were male; and 14.6% were <18 years. Up 57.1% of the patients were asymptomatic. The most common symptoms were fever (21.4%), cough (19.6%), rhinorrhea (16.1%), headache (12.5%), muscle ache (7.1%) and fatigue (7.1%). Rates of comorbidities were 10.7% (pre-existing hypertension), 10.7% (diabetes) and 7.1% (HIV), Body Mass Index (BMI) of ≥30 36.6%. 37.0% had a blood pressure (BP) of >130/90 mm Hg, and 27.8% had BP of >140/90 mm Hg. Laboratory derangements were leucopenia (10.6%), lymphopenia (11.1%) and thrombocytopenia (26.3%). Abnormal chest X-ray was observed in 14.3%. No patients reached the primary endpoint. Time to clinical recovery was shorter among patients who received HCQ, but this difference did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Most of the patients with COVID-19 presented with mild disease and exhibited a clinical trajectory not similar to other countries. Outcomes did not differ by HCQ treatment status in line with other concluded studies on the benefit of using HCQ in the treatment of COVID-19.