Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
Virol J ; 20(1): 56, 2023 03 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2270501

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: One year after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the focus of attention has shifted to the emergence and spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern (VOCs). The aim of the study was to assess the frequency of VOCs in patients followed for COVID-19 at Kinshasa university hospital (KUH) during the 3rd and 4th waves of the pandemic in Kinshasa. Hospital mortality was compared to that of the first two waves. METHOD: The present study included all patients in whom the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed by the polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The laboratory team sequenced a subset of all SARS-CoV-2 positive samples with high viral loads define as Ct < 25 to ensure the chances to generate complete genome sequence. RNA extraction was performed using the Viral RNA Mini Kit (Qiagen). Depending on the platform, we used the iVar bioinformatics or artic environments to generate consensus genomes from the raw sequencing output in FASTQ format. RESULTS: During the study period, the original strain of the virus was no longer circulating. The Delta VOC was predominant from June (92%) until November 2021 (3rd wave). The Omicron VOC, which appeared in December 2021, became largely predominant one month later (96%) corresponding the 4th wave. In-hospital mortality associated with COVID-19 fell during the 2nd wave (7% vs. 21% 1st wave), had risen during the 3rd (16%) wave before falling again during the 4th wave (7%) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The Delta (during the 3rd wave) and Omicron VOCs (during the 4th wave) were very predominant among patients followed for Covid-19 in our hospital. Contrary to data in the general population, hospital mortality associated with severe and critical forms of COVID-19 had increased during the 3rd wave of the pandemic in Kinshasa.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , RNA, Viral , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Democratic Republic of the Congo , Hospitals, University , Mutation
2.
Lancet Infect Dis ; 2022 Nov 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2274480

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In its earliest phases, Ebola virus disease's rapid-onset, high fever, and gastrointestinal symptoms are largely indistinguishable from other infectious illnesses. We aimed to characterise the clinical indicators associated with Ebola virus disease to improve outbreak response. METHODS: In this retrospective analysis, we assessed routinely collected data from individuals with possible Ebola virus disease attending 30 Ebola health facilities in two provinces of the Democratic Republic of the Congo between Aug 1, 2018, and Aug 28, 2019. We used logistic regression analysis to model the probability of Ebola infection across 34 clinical variables and four types of possible Ebola virus disease exposures: contact with an individual known to have Ebola virus disease, attendance at any funeral, health facility consultation, or consultation with an informal health practitioner. FINDINGS: Data for 24 666 individuals were included. If a patient presented to care in the early symptomatic phase (ie, days 0-2), Ebola virus disease positivity was most associated with previous exposure to an individual with Ebola virus disease (odds ratio [OR] 11·9, 95% CI 9·1-15·8), funeral attendance (2·1, 1·6-2·7), or health facility consultations (2·1, 1·6-2·8), rather than clinical parameters. If presentation occurred on day 3 or later (after symptom onset), bleeding at an injection site (OR 33·9, 95% CI 12·7-101·3), bleeding gums (7·5, 3·7-15·4), conjunctivitis (2·4, 1·7-3·4), asthenia (1·9, 1·5-2·3), sore throat (1·8, 1·3-2·4), dysphagia (1·8, 1·4-2·3), and diarrhoea (1·6, 1·3-1·9) were additional strong predictors of Ebola virus disease. Some Ebola virus disease-specific signs were less prevalent among vaccinated individuals who were positive for Ebola virus disease when compared with the unvaccinated, such as dysphagia (-47%, p=0·0024), haematemesis (-90%, p=0·0131), and bleeding gums (-100%, p=0·0035). INTERPRETATION: Establishing the exact time an individual first had symptoms is essential to assessing their infection risk. An individual's exposure history remains of paramount importance, especially in the early phase. Ebola virus disease vaccination reduces symptom severity and should also be considered when assessing the likelihood of infection. These findings about symptomatology should be translated into practice during triage and should inform testing and quarantine procedures. FUNDING: Médecins Sans Frontières and its research affiliate Epicentre.

3.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 10(7)2022 Jul 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1917874

ABSTRACT

We performed a cross-sectional survey on vaccination-related knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) among randomly selected parents of <5 years-old children, elderly populations (aged ≥ 55 years), and health care workers (HCWs) in 10 health zones from 4 provinces of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Questionnaires targeted both routine (BCG, measles, polio) and outbreak-related (cholera, Ebola, COVID-19) vaccinations. In total, 2751 participants were included, 1165 parents, 1040 elderly, and 546 HCWs. In general, KAP expressed were supportive of vaccination uptake, although concerns regarding side effects and feelings of being insufficiently informed were more prevalent among parents and the elderly. Vaccine acceptance was lower for outbreak vaccinations (57%) than for routine vaccinations (90%). HCWs expressed the highest vaccine acceptance. Problems with the vaccine supply chain were reported by 20% of respondents. Despite a high level of positive KAP towards vaccination, parents and the elderly expressed a need to be better informed and had concerns regarding vaccine side-effects. A high acceptance for routine vaccinations was reported by participants, but somewhat less for outbreak vaccinations. In conclusion, HCWs in the communities could play a key role in the increased uptake of routine vaccinations and in optimizing uptake during outbreaks, provided that the supply chain is functioning well.

4.
Vaccine ; 40(34): 4998-5009, 2022 08 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1915071

ABSTRACT

Hesitancy to receive the COVID-19 vaccine among healthcare workers (HCWs) in low-resource settings, such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), is a major global health challenge. This study identifies changes in willingness to receive vaccination among 588 HCWs in the DRC and reported influences on COVID-19 vaccination intentions. Up to 25 repeated measures were collected from participants between August 2020 to August 2021. Among the overall cohort, between August 2020 and mid-March 2021, the proportion of HCWs in each period of data collection reporting COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy ranged from 8.6% (95% CI: 5.97, 11.24) to 24.3% (95% CI: 20.12, 28.55). By early April 2021, the proportion reporting hesitancy more than doubled (52.0%; 95% CI: 46.22, 57.83). While hesitancy in the cohort began to decline by late-June 2021, 22.6% (95% CI: 18.05, 27.18) respondents indicated hesitancy in late-August 2021 which remains greater than the proportion of hesitancy at any time prior to early-March 2021. Patterns in reported influences on COVID-19 vaccination were varied with the proportion reporting some influences (e.g., no serious side effects, country of vaccine production) remaining stable throughout the year and other factors (e.g., recommendation of Ministry of Health, ease of vaccination) falling in popularity among respondents. Agreement that the national vaccination schedule should be followed apart from the COVID-19 vaccine remained high among respondents throughout the study period. This study shows that, among a cohort of HCWs in the DRC who have likely been influenced by regional, national, and global factors, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has fluctuated during the pandemic and should not be treated as a static factor. Additional research to determine which factors most influence HCWs' willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine offers opportunities to reduce vaccine hesitancy among this important population through tailored public health messaging.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Democratic Republic of the Congo , Health Personnel , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
5.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(5): 882-890, 2022 03 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1692246

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In October 2020, after the first wave of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), only 8290 confirmed cases were reported in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo, but the real prevalence remains unknown. To guide public health policies, we aimed to describe the prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies in the general population in Kinshasa. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, household-based serosurvey between 22 October 2020 and 8 November 2020. Participants were interviewed at home and tested for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 spike and nucleocapsid proteins in a Luminex-based assay. A positive serology was defined as a sample that reacted with both SARS-CoV-2 proteins (100% sensitivity, 99.7% specificity). The overall weighted, age-standardized prevalence was estimated and the infection-to-case ratio was calculated to determine the proportion of undiagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infections. RESULTS: A total of 1233 participants from 292 households were included (mean age, 32.4 years; 764 [61.2%] women). The overall weighted, age-standardized SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was 16.6% (95% CI: 14.0-19.5%). The estimated infection-to-case ratio was 292:1. Prevalence was higher among participants ≥40 years than among those <18 years (21.2% vs 14.9%, respectively; P < .05). It was also higher in participants who reported hospitalization than among those who did not (29.8% vs 16.0%, respectively; P < .05). However, differences were not significant in the multivariate model (P = .1). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 is much higher than the number of COVID-19 cases reported. These results justify the organization of a sequential series of serosurveys by public health authorities to adapt response measures to the dynamics of the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Democratic Republic of the Congo/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Prevalence , SARS-CoV-2 , Seroepidemiologic Studies
6.
BMC Infect Dis ; 22(1): 21, 2022 Jan 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1606369

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In symptomatic patients, the diagnostic approach of COVID-19 should be holistic. We aimed to evaluate the concordance between RT-PCR and serological tests (IgM/IgG), and identify the factors that best predict mortality (clinical stages or viral load). METHODS: The study included 242 patients referred to the University hospital of Kinshasa for suspected COVID-19, dyspnea or ARDS between June 1st, 2020 and August 02, 2020. Both antibody-SARS-CoV2 IgM/IgG and RT-PCR method were performed on the day of admission to hospital. The clinical stages were established according to the COVID-19 WHO classification. The viral load was expressed by the CtN2 (cycle threshold value of the nucleoproteins) and the CtE (envelope) genes of SARS- CoV-2 detected using GeneXpert. Kappa test and Cox regression were used as appropriate. RESULTS: The GeneXpert was positive in 74 patients (30.6%). Seventy two patients (29.8%) had positive IgM and 34 patients (14.0%) had positive IgG. The combination of RT-PCR and serological tests made it possible to treat 104 patients as having COVID-19, which represented an increase in cases of around 41% compared to the result based on GeneXpert alone. The comparison between the two tests has shown that 57 patients (23.5%) had discordant results. The Kappa coefficient was 0.451 (p < 0.001). We recorded 23 deaths (22.1%) among the COVID-19 patients vs 8 deaths (5.8%) among other patients. The severe-critical clinical stage increased the risk of mortality vs. mild-moderate stage (aHR: 26.8, p < 0.001). The values of CtE and CtN2 did not influence mortality significantly. CONCLUSION: In symptomatic patients, serological tests are a support which makes it possible to refer patients to the dedicated COVID-19 units and treat a greater number of COVID-19 patients. WHO Clinical classification seems to predict mortality better than SARS-Cov2 viral load.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , RNA, Viral , Antibodies, Viral , Democratic Republic of the Congo/epidemiology , Humans , Immunoglobulin M , SARS-CoV-2 , Serologic Tests
7.
Clin Infect Dis ; 72(2): 327-331, 2021 01 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1050126

ABSTRACT

The arrival of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the African continent resulted in a range of lockdown measures that curtailed the spread of the infection but caused economic hardship. African countries now face difficult choices regarding easing of lockdowns and sustaining effective public health control measures and surveillance. Pandemic control will require efficient community screening, testing, and contact tracing; behavioral change interventions; adequate resources; and well-supported, community-based teams of trained, protected personnel. We discuss COVID-19 control approaches in selected African countries and the need for shared, affordable, innovative methods to overcome challenges and minimize mortality. This crisis presents a unique opportunity to align COVID-19 services with those already in place for human immunodeficiency virus, tuberculosis, malaria, and non communicable diseases through mobilization of Africa's interprofessional healthcare workforce. By addressing the challenges, the detrimental effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on African citizens can be minimized.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Africa/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control , Contact Tracing , Humans , Morbidity , SARS-CoV-2
8.
BMJ Glob Health ; 5(7)2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-689115

ABSTRACT

It is very exceptional that a new disease becomes a true pandemic. Since its emergence in Wuhan, China, in late 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes COVID-19, has spread to nearly all countries of the world in only a few months. However, in different countries, the COVID-19 epidemic takes variable shapes and forms in how it affects communities. Until now, the insights gained on COVID-19 have been largely dominated by the COVID-19 epidemics and the lockdowns in China, Europe and the USA. But this variety of global trajectories is little described, analysed or understood. In only a few months, an enormous amount of scientific evidence on SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 has been uncovered (knowns). But important knowledge gaps remain (unknowns). Learning from the variety of ways the COVID-19 epidemic is unfolding across the globe can potentially contribute to solving the COVID-19 puzzle. This paper tries to make sense of this variability-by exploring the important role that context plays in these different COVID-19 epidemics; by comparing COVID-19 epidemics with other respiratory diseases, including other coronaviruses that circulate continuously; and by highlighting the critical unknowns and uncertainties that remain. These unknowns and uncertainties require a deeper understanding of the variable trajectories of COVID-19. Unravelling them will be important for discerning potential future scenarios, such as the first wave in virgin territories still untouched by COVID-19 and for future waves elsewhere.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Global Health , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , China/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Europe/epidemiology , Humans , Infection Control , Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype , Influenza Pandemic, 1918-1919 , Influenza, Human , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL