Shortage of iodinated contrast media: Status and possible chances - A systematic review.

PURPOSE: Covid-19 related lockdowns have resulted in a shortage of iodinated contrast media (ICM) in 2022. Health care providers have reacted with implementing conservation strategies to stay operational without compromising patient care. Although articles describing the implemented Interventions have been published, possible chances of the shortage have not yet been mentioned in the literature. METHODS: We conducted a literature search in PubMed and Google Scholar, and analysed the background, interventions, and possible benefits of low-dose ICM regimens. RESULTS: We included 22 articles dealing with "ICM shortage" for the analysis. The delivery bottlenecks in the USA and Australia led to two different countermeasures, 1. reduction of the number of contrast-enhanced image-guided examinations and 2. reduction of the (single) ICM dose. Interventions from both groups have resulted in significant reduction of ICM usage; however, group 1 has contributed more to overall ICM reduction. As benefit of the ICM reduction, we revealed an increased safety for patients at risk (e.g. hypersensitivity reactions, contrast-induced acute kidney injury, thyroid toxic effects). CONCLUSION: The ICM shortage of 2022 has forced health care providers to implement conservation strategies to stay operational. Although there were already proposals for dose reduction before the corona pandemic and the associated supply bottlenecks, this situation led to the use of a reduced amount of contrast agent on a large scale. This presents a good opportunity to reconsider protocols and the use of contrast-enhanced imaging in general for future practice as it offers chances and advantages regarding costs, environmental impact, and patient safety.

COVID-19 vaccination acceptance and adherence among pregnant and lactating high-risk group individuals of Maharashtra State, India.

BACKGROUND: Since the outbreak of the pandemic, the release of the COVID (Corona Virus Disease)-19 vaccine was highly anticipated. Nevertheless, vaccine availability does not symbolize the end of pandemic due to ongoing vaccine hesitancy and anti-vaccination movements. The objective of this study is to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among pregnant and lactating individuals in Maharashtra state, India. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted via a hybrid approach using various digital portals such as Whatsapp, telegram, and physical distribution to those who did not have access to smartphone devices. A probability proportional sampling strategy was deployed. A pre-validated structured self-administered questionnaire tool designed by Freeman et al. 2020 (Oxford COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale) was used, which consisted of seven close-ended targeted and focused questions. Analysis of several survey items and vaccine acceptance was conducted using the Chi-square test. RESULTS: Analysis revealed that 58% of individuals were willing to take vaccines after government approval and 26% of individuals showed hesitancy toward vaccination. When compared, lactating individuals showed less vaccine hesitancy (22%) than pregnant individuals (27%). The maximum vaccine hesitancy was observed in the third trimester of pregnancy (29.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Trust in vaccines is a crucial factor and is dependent on the ability of the government in promoting vaccines through effective communication; this can be one of the reasons for the high level of acceptance and awareness toward COVID-19 vaccination in this study.

Breastfeeding women's attitudes towards and acceptance and rejection of COVID-19 vaccination: Implementation research.

OBJECTIVE: There are few data on lactating women's concerns about receiving COVID-19 vaccination during breastfeeding. This research investigated breastfeeding women's attitudes towards and acceptance or rejection of vaccination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective, descriptive, implementation study was conducted in the postpartum ward of Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand. In Phase I, 40 breastfeeding women in the postpartum ward at Siriraj Hospital who were willing to participate in the study were interviewed. Phase II comprised questionnaire development and data validation. The combined multiple choice and scaling questionnaires designed based on the results from comprehensive interviews of phase I were used in the study. The questionnaire was administered to 400 participants in Phase III. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Breastfeeding women's attitudes towards and acceptance and rejection of COVID-19 vaccination. RESULTS: The vast majority of participants (372/400 [93.0 %]) were vaccinated predelivery. Most of the subgroup of women rejecting vaccination while breastfeeding were unsure whether too frequent vaccination would harm their unborn child (52/99 [52.5 %]; crude odds ratio [cOR], 6.50; 95 % CI, 1.47-28.68; P < 0.001). The level of immunity to the COVID-19 virus did not influence their vaccination decisions (19/99 [19.2 %]; cOR, 2.38; 95 % CI, 1.26-4.47; P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis found a significant association for women agreeing with the proposition that vaccination during pregnancy should not be performed (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 4.83; 95 % CI, 1.41-16.57; P = 0.043). Most women who rejected vaccination knew its benefits (aOR, 31.84; 95 % CI, 7.16-141.65; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Breastfeeding women generally believed that vaccines reduce infection and disease severity. The women's COVID-19 immunity levels did not affect their acceptance or rejection of vaccination. Some mothers rejected vaccination because of concerns about possible harm to them or their newborns.

Do not forget the children: a model-based analysis on the potential impact of COVID-19-associated interruptions in paediatric HIV prevention and care.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected women and children globally, disrupting antiretroviral therapy (ART) services and exacerbating pre-existing barriers to care for both pregnant women and paediatric populations. METHODS: We used the Spectrum modelling package and the CEPAC-Pediatric model to project the impact of COVID-19-associated care disruptions on three key populations in the 21 Global Plan priority countries in sub-Saharan Africa: (1) pregnant and breastfeeding women living with HIV and their children, (2) all children (aged 0-14 years) living with HIV (CLWH), regardless of their engagement in care and (3) CLWH who were engaged in care and on ART prior to the start of the pandemic. We projected clinical outcomes over the 12-month period of 1 March 2020 to 1 March 2021. RESULTS: Compared to a scenario with no care disruption, in a 3-month lockdown with complete service disruption, followed by 3 additional months of partial (50%) service disruption, a projected 755,400 women would have received PMTCT care (a 21% decrease), 187,800 new paediatric HIV infections would have occurred (a 77% increase) and 516,800 children would have received ART (a 35% decrease). For children on ART as of March 2020, we projected 507,200 would have experienced ART failure (an 80% increase). Additionally, a projected 88,400 AIDS-related deaths would have occurred (a 27% increase) between March 2020 and March 2021, with 51,700 of those deaths occurring among children engaged in care as of March 2020 (a 54% increase). CONCLUSIONS: While efforts will continue to curb morbidity and mortality stemming directly from COVID-19 itself, it is critical that providers also consider the immediate and indirect harms of this pandemic, particularly among vulnerable populations. Well-informed, timely action is critical to meet the health needs of pregnant women and children if the global community is to maintain momentum towards an AIDS-free generation.