Barriers to Engagement in Surgical Simulation Education

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted clinical experience and case volumes. Surgical simulation is now an even more powerful training tool and, to maximize potential, we must ensure learner engagement. Our aim was to identify barriers to surgical simulation engagement and strategies to mitigate these. Method(s): Scoping search was performed with a trained librarian of PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science. Title and screening were completed with inclusion criteria: articles describing barriers to engagement with surgical simulation. After full text screening, data was extracted from included articles: type of study, MERSQI score, type/number of participants, barriers to engagement and strategies to mitigate these. Result(s): Twenty-nine manuscripts were included with 951 faculty and 2,467 residents. The majority (86%) were in high income countries (HIC) and four in LMICs. Most were surveys (22/29), and five involved semi-structured interviews/focus groups. Mean adjusted MERSQI score was 8. Commonest barriers to HIC engagement were learner clinical duties (9/25), lack of learner time (13/25), lack of learner interest/motivation (9/25) and lack of faculty time or interest to participate (12/25). In LMIC, commonest barriers were lack of simulation lab/equipment (4/4), cost (3/4) and inadequate supervision (3/4). Strategies to improve HIC engagement were mandatory/protected resident simulation training (9/25) and, in LMIC, low cost simulators (4/4) and sharing resources (2/4). Conclusion(s): Identification of barriers to simulation engagement is crucial for successful learning. Given the increased importance of simulation education due to the COVID-19 pandemic, surgical educators should strategize to maximize engagement.

Equitable Access

The COVID-19 epidemic has once again highlighted the challenges to achieve equitable access to critical antimicrobials and vaccines. The problem is particularly acute for antimicrobials. Despite recent investments improving the pipeline for new treatments, most new treatments are not available to populations most in need, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Once a drug is approved a range of factors may hinder access, from lack incentives to register and commercialize products due to unattractive market potential to unfunded national action plans that can help improve the uptake and appropriate use of new tools to combat antibiotic resistance. Previous studies have shown that the majority of the 18 new antibacterials approved and launched between 2010-2020 were accessible in only 3 out of 14 high-income countries (Sweden, UK, and US). In low- and middle-income countries, the problem is even worse, with only 10 of the 25 new antibiotics that entered the market between 1999 and 2014 registered in more than ten countries. While lack of equitable access to life-saving medicines, diagnostics, and vaccines is not a new problem for infectious diseases, emerging opportunities and innovative approaches can help improve access globally. This talk will review promising recent developments in governance and collaborations, policies, economic models and initiatives that may help correct deadly inequities. For example, the objectives of the Access to COVID-19 Tools Accelerator may serve as model that convenes diverse actors to mount a coordinated access response which may be applied to access to other antimicrobials and vaccines. In addition, novel licensing agreements for access and stewardship to cefiderocol, an antimicrobial that is on the WHO Essential Medicines List can help serve as a pathfinder to accelerate equitable access to novel antimicrobials. The talk will also surface critiques of ongoing initiatives and raise questions for further study and discussion.Copyright © 2023

Preparing Long-term care facilities for future pandemics-A systematic review of non-pharmacological interventions

Background Due to climate change, the likelihood of an extreme infectious disease events-similar to the COVID-19 pandemic-is very likely to increase. Anticipating and preparing for such events Is therefore essential. A setting of high risk in such an event are long-term care facilities (LTCF), which accounted for 30-60 % of all COVID-19 related deaths in most high-income countries (HIC). To prevent, mitigate, and avoid potential adverse consequences of future outbreaks of viral respiratory pathogens with pandemic potential (e.g., SARSCoV-2, SARS, MERS, influenza) in LTCFs, a systematic review will analyze which non-pharmacological interventions (NPI) are effective in LTCFs. Methods We conducted literature searches in Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and two comprehensive specialized registries focused on COVID-19-related literature. We included experimental, quasi-experimental, and specific observational studies assessing the effect of NPIs implemented in LTCFs regarding the outcomes: infections, outbreaks, hospitalizations and deaths due to the viral pathogens of interest and adverse consequences. Screening for eligibility and risk-of-bias (RoB) assessment was done in duplicate. For RoB assessment, we used the RoB2 and ROBINS-I tool. We synthesized findings narratively, focusing on the direction of effect. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE. Results We included 16 observational studies, 14 of which focused on intervention effectiveness. All were conducted in HIC and most focused on SARSCoV-2 (n = 14). There were serious concerns regarding RoB in almost all studies. We found low/very low certainty of evidence for the effectiveness of entry regulation measures (n = 1), regular testing of residents/staff (n = 5), combined outbreak control measures (n = 2), and for combinations of multiple NPIs (n = 3) in preventing outbreaks or mitigating their consequences. The evidence on the effectiveness of hand and surface hygiene interventions showed mixed results (n = 4). We found mixed results regarding adverse mental health outcomes due to visiting restrictions. Conclusion This review indicates a number of measures which could be effective in protecting residents and staff in LTCFs in upcoming extreme infectious disease epidemics, which are expected to become more likely in the future. Furthermore, we can point out several gaps in the evidence which require further research and specific study designs to improve pandemic preparedness in LTCFs.

Patient-Centered Surveillance of Drug-Resistant Infections

Drug resistance or multidrug resistance is multidimensional and complex. Over the past decade and especially during the covid-19 pandemic, the incidence of drug resistant infections increased despite the implementation of infection control precautions. This was most commonly seen in low- and middle-income countries, due to the higher burden of infectious diseases, lack of proper infrastructure, unregulated antimicrobial prescriptions over the counter, limited surveillance of antimicrobial use and resistance patterns. This was further compounded by the dearth of healthcare personnel trained in appropriate infectious disease management. Strategies in high income countries to prevent and manage drug resistant infections are unfortunately, not implementable in LMICs due to differences in antimicrobial resistance (AMR) burden, access to newer antibiotics, limited infrastructure and human resources with requisite expertise with lack of economic investment by regulatory authorities to tackle AMR. During the covid-19 pandemic, the lack of therapeutic options and the similar clinical picture initially led to rampant antimicrobial use which in turn contributed to rise in multi-drug resistant infections (MDR). Along with inappropriate antimicrobial use, redistribution of staff assigned to enforce infection control practices, shortage of personnel protective equipment, overcrowded healthcare settings, use of prolonged broad-spectrum antimicrobials in patients requiring during intensive care and mechanical ventilation contributed to the rise in hospital transmission of multidrug resistant infections during the pandemic. To mitigate the effects of drug resistance, healthcare systems must ensure effective implementation of surveillance of antimicrobials, AMR patterns especially in MDR HAIs and antimicrobial stewardship interventions to promote optimal antimicrobial use. National level investment to improve diagnostics must be given priority as it can limit drug resistance and promote the role of biomarkers in streamlining antimicrobial use. These need to be planned to facilitate future integration with any future pandemic surveillance.Copyright © 2023

Bacterial Infectious Diseases in the Covid-19 Era

The outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 in December 2019 in China quickly spread to the rest of the world. By March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 pandemic, and several mitigation strategies were implemented worldwide, highlighting social distancing, quarantine and the use of face masks. Since then, many studies have reported the impact of these interventions on the occurrence of other infectious diseases, especially bacterial infectious diseases disseminated through airborne. Invasive infections with respiratory bacterial pathogens, such as Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, Neisseria meningitidis, Bordetella pertussis, Chlamydia pneumoniae and Mycoplasma pneumoniae have had a marked decline in several countries of the world. Low- and middle-income (LMIC) and high-income countries (HIC) were at different seasons of the year when COVID-19 started and interventions were implemented, but long-lasting consequences of seasonal differences are yet to be elucidated. In this session, we aim to describe the impact of COVID-19 and related intervention strategies in bacterial infectious diseases between LMIC and HIC;determine whether and how the onset of COVID-19 pandemic has changed the broader scenario of infectious diseases;and envision future and emerging infectious diseases in the post-pandemic world.Copyright © 2023

High-Cited Papers in Global COVID-19 Vaccine Research

Aim and Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) virus pandemic is still ravaging the world with its ongoing resurgence and the continuous mutation, suggesting the need for continuous research on safe and effective novel vaccines. Presently several types of vaccines have been developed and emerged in the global market to control COVID-19 virus. Consequently, the knowledge and information on COVID-19 have been expanding at a high level. Researchers need to gain relevant knowledge regarding the different vaccines;however scattered information makes this process time-consuming and laborious. The present study aimed to evaluate the characteristics and trends in global COVID-19 vaccine high-cited literature using bibliometric and visualizations methods and offer some directions and suggestions for future research. Methodology: Studies published between December 2019 and 22 Nov 2022 on COVID-19 vaccines were retrieved from the Scopus database. From the 16026 studies retrieved, 406 were identified as high-cited papers (HCPs) having received 100 or more citations. From the 406 HCPs, information about publications outputs, countries, institutions, journals, keywords, and citation counts was identified. Data analysis and visualization were conducted using Microsoft Excel, VOSviewer and Bibliometrix R software. Result(s): The 406 global HCPs on COVID-19 vaccines research were identified in Scopus database since Dec 2019 till 30 Nov 2022 using a search strategy, which received 123614 citations, averaging 304.17 citations per publication (CPP). An external funding was received by 53.20% (216 publications), which were cited 76107 times (with an average of 352.35 CPP). The 7086 authors from 694 organizations affiliated to 76 countries and publishing in 121 journals were involved in global COVID-19 vaccine research. The most productive countries were USA (n=213), U.K (n=91), China (n=36) and Germany (n=35). The most impactful countries in terms of citations per paper (CPP) and relative citation index (RCI) were South Africa (794.68 and 2.61), Germany (507.11 and 1.67), U.K. (396.59 and 1.30) and Spain (367.5 and 1.121). The most productive organizations were University of Oxford, U.K., Imperial College London, U.K. (n=25 each), Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), USA and Tel Aviv University (n=19 each) and the most impactful organizations were University of Cambridge, U.K (783.4 and 2.57), Emory University, USA (780.1 and 2.56), John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, USA (702.67 and 2.31) and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. USA (676.41 and 2.22). The most productive authors were A.J. Pollard (n=16) and T. Lambe (n=14) (of University of Oxford), O. Tureci and P.R. Dormitzer (n=12 each) (of BioNTechSE, Germany) and the most impactful were D. Cooper (1239.22 and 4.07), K.J. Janseu (1228.11 and 4.03) (BioNTechSE, Germany, K.A. Swanson (987.0 and 3.24) (University of Oxford, U.K.) and P.R. Dormitzer (983 and 3.23) (BioNTechSE, Germany). The most productive journals were New England Journal of Medicine (n=53), The Lancet (n=28), Nature (n=22) and JAMA (N=17). The most impactful journals (as per citations per paper) were New England Journal of Medicine (613.15), Lancet (496.39), Human Vaccines and Immunotherapeutics (369.67) and Nature (360.64). Among population age groups, the major focus was on adults (51.48%) and Middle Aged (39.16%). Among publication types, the major focus was Clinical Studies (26.85%), Epidemiology (22.66%) and Genetics (21.92%). The most significant keywords by frequency of appearances were "Covid-19" (n=388), "Covid-19 Vaccines" (n=357), "Vaccination" (n=221), "Prevention and Control" (n=181) and "Vaccine Immunogenicity" (n=133), Conclusion(s): The HCPs in COVID-19 vaccine research was done mainly by the authors and institutions of high-income Countries (HIC) and was published in high-impact medical journals. Our research has identified the leading countries, institutions, journals, hotspots and development trend in the field that could provide the foundati n for further investigations. The bibliometric analysis will help the clinicians to rapidly identify the potential collaborative partners, identify significant studies, and research topics within their domains of COVID-19 vaccines.Copyright Author (s) 2023.

The Ethical Obligation to Prevent Maternal Mortality during the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond

The United States of America (USA) has the highest maternal mortality rate of all high-income countries, with over 80% found to be preventable. After leveling off around 2015, maternal mortality rates in the USA further increased due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related deaths starting in 2020 by about 20% from about 17-18/100,000 live births to about 24/100,000 live births with about one in seven maternal deaths due to COVID-19 infections. The vast majority of COVID-19-related maternal deaths were among unvaccinated pregnant patients. A total of 11% of postpartum maternal deaths were found to be associated with mental health issues, with the remainder usually due to medical issues such as hemorrhage and hypertension. As physicians, we have the ethical obligation to address perinatal and maternal mortality, especially preventable maternal mortalities, reduce the discrepancy between different races and ethnicities, recommend COVID-19 vaccinations, and develop approaches to address the causes.Copyright © The Author(s). 2023.

Prescribing of oral antibacterial drugs in primary care out-of-hours services: a scoping review

Introduction: The rapid spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), which causes a serious threat to both human health and the global economy, is primarily linked to the overuse and misuse of antibacterial drugs. The AMR crisis is significantly impacted by the use of antibacterial drugs in primary care (1). Within these settings, oral antibacterial drugs are considered one of the most frequently prescribed group of medicines. It has been claimed that within primary care, the proportion of antibacterial drug prescribing is higher outside the regular working hours (out-of-hours (OOH) services) compared to in-hours (IH) services (2). Aim(s): To identify the existing body of literature around oral antibacterial drug prescribing within primary care OOH services. Method(s): The scoping review was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute manual and reported in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR. Seven electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Emcare, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) were systematically searched, and the results were screened against pre-defined eligibility criteria. Original and secondary analysis studies that addressed oral antibacterial prescribing in OOH primary care and were published in English were included. Titles and s were independently screened by three reviewers. A pre-piloted extraction form was used to extract relevant data. A narrative synthesis approach was used to summarise the results. Result(s): The initial search yielded 834 records. Upon screening, 28 publications fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Included studies originated from nine high-income countries, with the most frequent being the United Kingdom (six studies, 21.4%) followed by Belgium (five studies, 17.9%). Literature on antibacterial prescribing in OOH services was mostly from quantitative studies (23 studies, 82.14%), with only a few employing a qualitative design (five studies, 17.86%). Different themes and sub-themes were identified across these studies. The majority discussed antibacterial prescribing data in terms of the commonly prescribed medications and/or associated conditions. Eleven studies provided a comparison between IH and OOH settings. Seven studies reported the trends of prescribing over time;of these, three explored prescribing trends before and during COVID-19. The impact of intervention implementation on prescribing was investigated in two studies, an educational intervention in one study and the use of an interactive booklet in the other study. Four studies assessed the quality/appropriateness of prescribing either by adherence to guidelines or antibiotic prescribing quality indicators. Limited studies explored prescribing predictors and patients' expectations and satisfaction with OOH services. In contrast, qualitative studies focussed more on exploring prescribers' experiences, perspectives, behaviours, and the challenges they face during consultations within OOH settings which may influence their decision-making process. Of these, one study explored why patients consult OOH services and how they communicate their problems. Conclusion(s): This review shows the key areas around oral antibacterial prescribing in primary care OOH services. While there is a satisfactory number of published articles covering various areas within OOH, the use of different approaches to OOH across countries may confound the comparison of practice. A strength of this work is using three reviewers to screen identified records independently. Further research is needed to provide a better understanding of current practice in these settings and how it may be contributing to AMR.

EPH118 Healthcare Systems Sustainability and Resilience: Creating an Index

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for sustainable and resilient healthcare systems to protect population health. This requires measuring the relative progress of health systems towards becoming more sustainable and resilient. In this research, we design, construct and estimate a country-level healthcare system sustainability and resilience index (HSSRI) that reflects and combines the two dimensions. Method(s): The HSSRI aims to summarise the performance of a health system in the different domains contributing to its sustainability and resilience. These domains are: i) health system governance, ii) health system financing, iii) health system workforce, iv) medicines and technologies, v) health service delivery, vi) population health and social determinants, and vii) environmental sustainability. As part of our analyses, we conduct a rapid evidence assessment to identify indicators reflecting the domains included in the sustainability and resilience dimensions. We assess the domain indicators' suitability by the quantity and quality of the literature supporting their inclusion. The variables in each indicator are extracted from publicly available data sources, such as the OECD, World Bank, and others. The period covered is from 2000 to 2020. Weighted means of the indicators are used to construct the domains' indices in each dimension. We apply a geometric mean to combine the domain indices into one final index. Result(s): The HSSRI is piloted using data from five high-income countries, providing a credible instrument for measuring and reporting healthcare system sustainability and resilience. The results enable policy-makers and stakeholders to observe how different domains of sustainability and resilience have evolved across countries and time. Conclusion(s): The HSSRI will facilitate better understanding and monitoring of the healthcare system's relative weaknesses and strengths, and empower policy-makers to design interventions that improve its resilience and sustainability.Copyright © 2022

Autoimmune multimorbidity and fatigue in women with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: an international, patient-reported, e-survey

Background: Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies are a group of rare systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases with substantial heterogeneity. We aimed to investigate gender differences in patient-reported outcomes and treatment regimens of people with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. Method(s): This international, patient-reported, e-survey was conducted worldwide. We used data from the COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD) study, a large-scale, international, self-reported e-survey assessing the safety of COVID-19 vaccination in patients older than 18 years with autoimmune rheumatic diseases, including idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. The COVAD study was conducted in more than 80 health-care centres, including hospitals, clinics, and universities located in more than 50 countries worldwide and on social media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter. The COVAD e-survey was open between April 1, 2021, and Dec 31, 2021. We extracted survey data regarding demographics;autoimmune rheumatic disease diagnosis;autoimmune multimorbidity (three or more autoimmune rheumatic disease diagnoses for each patient);current corticosteroid or immunosuppressant use;and patient-reported outcomes, including fatigue and pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and PROMIS short form-physical function 10a (PF-10a). Gender was reported by participants with three options (men, women, or do not wish to disclose). Patient-reported outcomes and corticosteroid or immunosuppressant use were compared between men and women. Participants with inclusion body myositis were analysed separately due to the substantial difference in treatment and disease outcomes compared with other idiopathic inflammatory myopathy subtypes. Factors affecting each patient-reported outcome were determined using multivariable analysis. Finding(s): The survey data were extracted on Aug 31, 2021, and 1202 complete responses from participants with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies were analysed. Five patients who did not wish to disclose gender were excluded. 845 (70.6%) of the remaining 1197 were women. Women were younger than men (median 58 years [IQR 48-68] vs 69 years [58-75];p=0.00010). Autoimmune multimorbidity was more common in women than in men (94 [11.1%] of 845 vs 11 [3.1%] of 352;p<0.0001). Corticosteroid use was similar in men and women with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (except for inclusion body myositis), whereas the distribution of immunosuppressants was different, with higher hydroxychloroquine use in women (131 [18.3%] of 717 vs 11 [6.9%] of 159 in men;p=0.0082). The median fatigue VAS was significantly higher in women than in men (5 [IQR 3-7] vs 4 [2-6];p=0.0036), whereas the gender difference in pain VAS (median 3 [IQR 1-5] in women vs 2 [0-4] in men;p=0.064) and PROMIS PF-10a scores (38 [31-45] vs 39 [30-47];p=0.29) was non-significant. There were no significant differences in patient-reported outcomes and treatment in participants with inclusion body myositis. The multivariable analysis of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (except for inclusion body myositis) revealed that female sex, residence in high-income countries, a diagnosis of overlap myositis, and autoimmune multimorbidity were independent risk factors for higher fatigue VAS. Interpretation(s): Women with Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies frequently have autoimmune multimorbidity and increased fatigue compared with men, calling for greater attention and further research on targeted treatment approaches. Funding(s): None.Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd

CUMULATIVE INCIDENCE OF COVID-19 AND VACCINE PROFILES AMONG ASEAN PERITONEAL DIALYSIS POPULATIONS: A PRELIMINARY RESULT OF THE "InCoV-PD" STUDY GROUP

Introduction: Although there are several reports of COVID-19 in patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD), all of them were retrospective and mono-national-state designs, and none reported vaccination profiles. Method(s): The incidence of COVID-19 infection among PD patients and vaccination profiles of COVID-19 from 1 January 2020 to 30 September 2021 were retrieved from the survey of PD leaders in the ASEAN countries. Countries were excluded if their infection rates (IR) in PD populations were smaller than the lower limit value of 95% confidence interval (CI) of the overall pooled prevalence of 1.25 reported in kidney failure patients with COVID-19 infection globally, considering the possibility of under-reporting and if the number of PD population is less than 50 cases. Thus, Burma (45 cases, unknown IR), Cambodia (1 case, IR 0%), Indonesia (2,692 cases, unknown IR), Laos PDR (3 cases, IR 33%), and Vietnam (PD 1,500 cases, IR <1%) were excluded. Result(s): Figure 1 demonstrates the incidence of COVID-19 infection in PD populations in selected ASEAN members. The cumulative incidence of COVID-19 has gradually increased in all reported countries. The cumulative incidence rate of Singapore reached a plateau in the second quarter of 2020 but has since seen a surge in the third quarter of 2021 with an average incidence of 0.5-1.5 cases per 100 population. Overall IR ranged from 0.1% in Singapore to 23.8% in the Philippines with an average ASEAN IR of 2.6%. The majority of ASEAN had less than half of their populations fully vaccinated, ranging from only 13% in Vietnam to 46% in Brunei. Despite Laos being a low-income country, it was the first ASEAN to vaccinate its population. Singapore had the highest vaccination rates, with 83% and 81% of its population partially and completely vaccinated, respectively. Brunei, albeit being a high-income country, is the last country to roll out vaccination with a tardy vaccination rate, possibly due to the under-preparedness of the government and a false sense of security as Brunei had 15 months of zero cases before the latest wave. The incidence of ASEAN PD patients with COVID-19 infection surged during the second and third quartiles of 2021 despite the vaccine roll-out (Table 1). [Formula presented] Abbreviations: Ad26, Ad26.COV2.S;BBIBP, BBIBP-CorV;BNT, BNT162b2;Covishield, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (Covishield);Gam, Gam-COVID-Vac;mRNA, mRNA-1273;Vaxzeria, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (Vaxzeria) Remarks: Yellow, Conventional inactivated vaccines (BBIBP-CorV [Sinopharm], CoronaVac [Sinovac]);Green, RNA vaccines (BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech], mRNA-1273 [Moderna]);Pink, Viral vector vaccines (Gam-COVID-Vac [Sputnik], ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 [Covishield], ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 [Vaxzeria] and Ad26.COV2.S [Johnson & Johnson]) [Formula presented] Figure 1. Cumulative incidence of COVID-19 infected PD patients in selected ASEAN Conclusion(s): Overall IR of the ASEAN PD population varied widely among countries. However, the rollout rate of vaccination lagged behind that of western countries. This should increase efforts to educate their population on the benefits of timely vaccination. There remain a lot of uncertainties regarding COVID-19, and hence there is an urgent need for large prospective studies with international collaboration, to address these questions. No conflict of interestCopyright © 2023

Feasibility study of home-based pulmonary rehabilitation (PR)in Bangladesh

Aim: PR is an integral part of chronic respiratory disease (CRD) management. Evidence on the effectiveness, applicable components, and deliverable models have generated from high-income countries a different clinical context from low- and middle-income countries. Informed by global PR guidelines, a systematic review and stakeholder engagement, we adapted a PR programme to home-based (because of COVID) in a low-resource setting. This feasibility study tested the PR programme in Bangladesh. Method(s): Intervention was, assessment at the PR centre, twice-weekly tele-supervised sessions for 8 weeks at home. Primary outcomes were Endurance Shuttle Walk Test (ESWT) and COPD Assessment Test (CAT). Nonparametric tests were used to compare pre-and post- outcomes using SPSS version 26. Result(s): 51 participants (33 male;mean age 55yrs (SD 12)) were recruited with a range of CRDs. 40 completed the final assessment (COVID deterred eight follow-ups). Both ESWT and CAT improved by more than the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). Conclusion(s): Home-based PR is feasible in the Bangladesh context and associated with significant improvements in functional exercise capacity and health-related quality of life.

On race, human variation, and who gets and dies of sepsis

COVID-19 has highlighted a brutal reality known for decades, that Black, Indigenous, and People of Color bear a disproportionate burden of US annual sepsis cases. While plentiful research funds have been spent investigating genetic reasons for racial disparities in sepsis, an abundance of research shows that sepsis incidence and mortality maps to indicators of colonial practices including residential segregation, economic and marginalization sepsis, and denial of care. Here we argue that sepsis risk is an immunological embodiment of racism in colonial states, that the factors contributing to sepsis disparities are insidious and systemic. We show that regardless of causative pathogen, or host ancestry, racialized people get and die of sepsis most frequently in a pattern repeatedly reiterated worldwide. Lastly, we argue that while alleviation of sepsis disparities requires radical, multiscale intervention, biological anthropologists have a responsibility in this crisis. While some of us can harness our expertise to take on the ground action in sepsis prevention, all of us can leverage our positions as the first point of contact for in depth human biology instruction on most college campuses. As a leading cause of death worldwide, and a syndrome that exhibits the interplay between human physiology, race and environment, sepsis is at the nexus of major themes in biological anthropology and is a natural fit for the field's curriculum. In adopting a discussion of race and sepsis in our courses, we not only develop new research areas but increase public awareness of both sepsis and the factors contributing to uneven sepsis burden.Copyright © 2022 The Authors. American Journal of Biological Anthropology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Barriers to Accessing Essential Medicines in Nephrology and Related Non-Communicable Diseases: A Scoping Review

Introduction: Access to safe, effective, quality, and affordable essential medicines (EM) for all is one of the World Health Organization's Sustainable Development Goals for health. However, access to EM for the treatment of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) is lacking in many low-income (LICs) and lower-middle income countries (LMICs). Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is often a downstream consequence of other NCDs, such as diabetes (DM) and cardiovascular disease (CVD), further exacerbating the economic burden on healthcare systems and societies. In nephrology, access to EM is especially important to reduce the risk of CKD progression because kidney replacement therapy is unavailable or cost-prohibitive in many regions of the world. As members of the International Society of Nephrology (ISN) Emerging Leaders Program 2021 cohort, we conducted a scoping review to assess the breadth of evidence regarding EMs for management of CKD and related NCDs, with identification of barriers to EM access as one of our main aims. Method(s): We included English-language articles of any study design that addressed barriers to accessing essential medicines in populations with CKD (all stages, causes, and ages), CVD, hypertension, and/or DM. All ISN geographical regions and World Bank income categories were considered. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to May 2021. Titles and abstracts were screened, and full texts were retrieved for potentially relevant publications. Each full-text article was assessed for inclusion. For included articles, data extraction was performed with a standardized form using Covidence software. Each step was performed by one reviewer and checked by a 2nd reviewer. Applying an ecological model, barriers were categorized as occurring at the national/health policy level, regional level, organization level, provider level, or patient level. Result(s): Ninety-six publications addressed barriers to access to essential medicines, including LICs (16 articles), LMICs (43 articles), upper-middle income countries (25 articles), high-income countries (10 articles), plus 21 articles which did not specify countries. Most publications assessed barriers at the health policy-level, which included high EM prices in the setting of current patent laws;lack of effective systems for public procurement of EM, resulting in large out-of-pocket household expenditure for medicines in LIC/LMIC;inefficient distribution systems with multiple price mark-ups;and lack of regulatory systems, giving rise to counterfeit medications. Regional-level barriers included lack of governance of supply chain logistics, lack of regional coordination, and poor transportation infrastructure, especially in rural settings. Organization-level barriers included medication stock-outs at facilities, and health care worker shortages. Provider-level barriers included irrational prescribing, lack of CKD identification, and poor communication with patients. Patient-level barriers included poverty, informational barriers/health literacy, and negative perception of generic medicines (Figure). [Formula presented] Conclusion(s): Barriers to accessing EM exist at several levels, particularly the health system-level, and affect LICs and LMICs disproportionately. This scoping review serves as an initial step towards designing implementation studies to address barriers to improve EM access. Conflict of interest Potential conflict of interest: MMMY has a consultancy agreement with George Clinical and served on a CKD advisory board sponsored by AstraZenecaCopyright © 2023