Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
Ther Clin Risk Manag ; 17: 1187-1198, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1523573


INTRODUCTION: Though chloroquine derivatives are used in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in many countries worldwide, doubts remain about the safety and efficacy of these drugs, especially in African communities where published data are scarce. METHODS: We conducted an observational prospective cohort study from April 24 to September 03, 2020, in Burkina Faso to assess (as primary outcome) the clinical, biological, and cardiac (electrocardiographic) safety of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin administered to COVID-19 patients. The main secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality and median time of viral clearance. RESULTS: A total of 153 patients were enrolled and followed for 21 days. Among patients who took at least one dose of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine (90.1% [138/153]), few clinical adverse events were reported and were mainly rash/pruritus, diarrhea, chest pain, and palpitations. No statistically significant increase in hepatic, renal, and hematological parameters or electrolyte disorders were reported. However, there was a significant increase in the QTc value without exceeding 500ms, especially in those who received chloroquine phosphate. Three adverse events of special interest classified as serious (known from chloroquine derivatives) were recorded namely pruritus, paresthesia, and drowsiness. One case of death occurred. The average onset of SARS-CoV-2 PCR negativity was estimated at 7.0 (95% CI: 5.0-10.0) days. CONCLUSION: Hydroxychloroquine appeared to be well tolerated in treated COVID-19 patients in Burkina Faso. In the absence of a robust methodological approach that could generate a high level of scientific evidence, our results could at least contribute to guide health decisions that should be made based on different sources of scientific evidence including those from our study.

Glob Public Health ; 16(8-9): 1439-1453, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1364687


Responses to COVID-19 have included top-down, command-and-control measures, laissez-faire approaches, and bottom-up, community-driven solidarity and support, reflecting long-standing contradictions around how people and populations are imagined in public health-as a 'problem' to be managed, as 'free agents' who make their own choices, or as a potential 'solution' to be engaged and empowered for comprehensive public health. In this rapid review, we examine community-engaged responses that move beyond risk communication and instead meaningfully integrate communities into decision-making and multi-sectoral action on various dimensions of the response to COVID-19. Based on a rapid, global review of 42 case studies of diverse forms of substantive community engagement in response to COVID-19, this paper identifies promising models of effective community-engaged responses and highlights the factors enabling or disabling these responses. The paper reflects on the ways in which these community-engaged responses contribute to comprehensive approaches and address social determinants and rights, within dynamics of relational power and inequality, and how they are sometimes able to take advantage of the ruptures and uncertainties of a new pandemic to refashion some of these dynamics.

COVID-19 , Community Participation , Pandemics , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control
Health Promot Perspect ; 11(2): 171-178, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1273805


Background: To end the COVID-19 pandemic, a large part of the world must be immune to the virus by vaccination. Therefore, this study aimed to gauge intent to be vaccinated against COVID-19 among ordinary people and to identify attitudes towards vaccines and barriers for vaccine acceptance. Methods: The study population comprises 1880 people residing in different countries that answer a prepared questionnaire. The questionnaire topics are demographics, historical issues, participants' attitudes and beliefs regarding vaccines, concerns, and vaccine hesitancy. Results: Attitudes and beliefs relating to vaccines in general, and the COVID-19 vaccine, were ascertained. Overall, 66.81% of the contributors would like to be vaccinated against COVID-19, while %33.19 did not intend to be vaccinated. Reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy included concern regarding vaccine side effects, fear of getting sick from the uptake of the vaccine, and the absence of accurate vaccine promotion news. Individuals with higher education believe that India (68.6%) produces the best vaccine (P <0.001), while healthcare workers think the Chinese vaccine (44.2%) is the best (P =0.020). Individuals with higher education have not been vaccinated, not be healthcare workers, and females were the most contributors to effective of the vaccine in reducing mortality from COVID-19 disease. Conclusion: Given the degree of hesitancy against COVID-19 vaccination, a multifaceted approach to facilitate vaccine uptake that includes vaccine education, behavioral change strategies, and health promotion, is paramount.