Trends of cannabis use and related harms before and after legalization for recreational purpose in a developing country in Asia.

BACKGROUND: Thailand was the first country in Asia to legalize the use and purchase of cannabis leaves in February 2021 and the whole plant in June 2022 after the 2019 allowance for medical purposes. The study explored trends in cannabis use in Thailand before and after the recreational cannabis allowance was imposed. METHODS: Cannabis and other variables of substance use, cannabis use disorder, and attitude towards cannabis of the Thai population aged 18 to 65 years in 2019 (n = 5,002), 2020 (n = 5,389) and 2021 (n = 5,669) were obtained from annual surveys conducted in the last two months of each year by the Centre for Addiction Studies. The surveys were repeat cross-sectional surveys of the general population of Thailand. Repeated variables from at least two annual surveys were included for analysis using the Chi-square test and the t-test. RESULTS: The prevalence of cannabis use in the past year had increased from 2.2% in 2019 to 2.5% and 4.2% in 2020 and 2021 respectively, while those of methamphetamine, alcohol, and tobacco use had decreased. Trends in past-year drinking/eating cannabis products had increased, especially among the middle age group (40-49 years) from 2.1% (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.3, 3.1) in 2019 and 1.1% (95% CI: 0.6, 1.9) in 2020 to 3.8% (95% CI: 2.8, 5.0) in 2021. The younger population aged 18-19 had an increase in cannabis smoking from 0.9% (95% CI: 0.1, 3.3) in 2019 to 2.0% (95% CI: 0.5, 5.1) and 2.2% (95% CI: 0.7, 5.1) in 2020 and 2021 respectively. Symptoms of cannabis use disorder among cannabis users increased from 2019 to 2020 and then reversed afterwards in 2021. Thais had greater health knowledge about the benefits and harms of cannabis and had attitudes toward more harm of cannabis in 2021; however, 35.6% or a third of the sample in 2021 truly believed that cannabis was a cure for cancer, and 23.2% or one-fourth were uncertain or did not believe that cannabis was addictive. CONCLUSIONS: Although most of the substances had a lower prevalence of use during the COVID-19 pandemic in Thailand, cannabis had a higher use after legalization. Thai youth had a growing trend to smoke cannabis.

Pregnancy exposure registries for drugs and vaccines in low-income and middle-income countries: scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Data regarding the safety of drugs and vaccines in pregnant women are typically unavailable before licensure. Pregnancy exposure registries (PERs) are an important source of postmarketing safety information. PERs in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) are uncommon but can provide valuable safety data regarding their distinct contexts and will become more relevant as the introduction and use of new drugs and vaccines in pregnancy increase worldwide. Strategies to support PERs in LMICs must be based on a better understanding of their current status. We developed a scoping review protocol to assess the landscape of PERs that operate in LMICs and characterise their strengths and challenges. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review protocol follows the Joanna Briggs Institute manual for scoping reviews. The search strategy will be reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist. We will search PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and WHO's Global Index Medicus, as well as the reference lists of retrieved full-text records, for articles published between 2000 and 2022 that describe PERs or other resources that systematically record exposures to medical products during pregnancy and maternal and infant outcomes in LMICs. Title and abstracts will be screened by two authors and data extracted using a standardised form. We will undertake a grey literature search using Google Scholar and targeted websites. We will distribute an online survey to selected experts and conduct semistructured interviews with key informants. Identified PERs will be summarised in tables and analysed. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this activity, as it was determined not to involve human subjects research. Findings will be submitted to an open access peer-reviewed journal and may be presented at conferences, with underlying data and other materials made publicly available.

Quantification of impact of COVID-19 pandemic on cancer screening programmes - a case study from Argentina, Bangladesh, Colombia, Morocco, Sri Lanka, and Thailand.

It is quite well documented that the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted cancer screening services in all countries, irrespective of their resources and healthcare settings. While quantitative estimates on reduction in volume of screening tests or diagnostic evaluation are readily available from the high-income countries, very little data are available from the low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). From the CanScreen5 global cancer screening data repository we identified six LMICs through purposive sampling based on the availability of cancer screening data at least for the years 2019 and 2020. These countries represented those in high human development index (HDI) categories (Argentina, Colombia, Sri Lanka, and Thailand) and medium HDI categories (Bangladesh and Morocco). No data were available from low HDI countries to perform similar analysis. The reduction in the volume of tests in 2020 compared to the previous year ranged from 14.1% in Bangladesh to 72.9% in Argentina (regional programme) for cervical screening, from 14.2% in Bangladesh to 49.4% in Morocco for breast cancer screening and 30.7% in Thailand for colorectal cancer screening. Number of colposcopies was reduced in 2020 compared to previous year by 88.9% in Argentina, 38.2% in Colombia, 27.4% in Bangladesh, and 52.2% in Morocco. The reduction in detection rates of CIN 2 or worse lesions ranged from 20.7% in Morocco to 45.4% in Argentina. Reduction of breast cancer detection by 19.1% was reported from Morocco. No association of the impact of pandemic could be seen with HDI categories. Quantifying the impact of service disruptions in screening and diagnostic tests will allow the programmes to strategize how to ramp up services to clear the backlogs in screening and more crucially in further evaluation of screen positives. The data can be used to estimate the impact on stage distribution and avoidable mortality from these common cancers.

Rituximab in Myasthenia Gravis- Experience from a Low- and Middle-Income Country (LMIC) Setting.

Background: Myasthenia gravis (MG) is an immune-mediated disorder of the neuromuscular junction. About 10% are refractory to immunosuppressive therapy. Aims: To analyze the response of patients with generalized MG to rituximab. Methods and Materials: A retrospective review of patients with MG who received rituximab was carried out (n = 13, M:F = 6:7, mean age: 44.84 ± 15.73 years). Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA), MGFA post-intervention status (MGFA-PIS), and Myasthenia Gravis Status and Treatment Intensity (MGSTI) were assessed before and after rituximab. Results: The duration of MG was 104.07 ± 92.25 months. Before rituximab, the MGFA was IIA/IIB/IIIA/IIIB/IVB/V in 1/1/2/6/2/1 patients and MGSTI was four in eight patients and six in three patients. The mean duration of follow up was 20.92 ± 14.06 months (range, 4 to 42 months). Dose reduction or discontinuation of cholinesterase inhibitors could be achieved 12 patients. Complete stable remission (CSR) and pharmacologic remission (PR) were achieved in one and four patients respectively and five patients had minimal manifestations. Most patients attained level 0, 1 or 2 MGSTI at last follow up. No rituximab infusion-related adverse events were noted. Three patients had exacerbation of MG between one to five weeks after rituximab administration. Three patients died, one each due to a cardiac event unrelated to MG or treatment, complications related to myasthenic crisis, and coronavirus disease. Conclusions: Rituximab was effective in bringing about remission in MG and can be considered as a first-line agent. However, it has to be administered under close supervision as some patients develop exacerbation of MG akin to steroid-induced worsening.

Effectiveness of handwashing with soap for preventing acute respiratory infections in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory infection (ARI) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally, with 83% of ARI mortality occurring in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) before the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to estimate the effect of interventions promoting handwashing with soap on ARI in LMICs. METHODS: In our systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Global Health, and Global Index Medicus for studies of handwashing with soap interventions in LMICs from inception to May 25, 2021. We included randomised and non-randomised controlled studies of interventions conducted in domestic, school, or childcare settings. Interventions promoting hand hygiene methods other than handwashing with soap were excluded, as were interventions in health-care facilities or the workplace. The primary outcome was ARI morbidity arising from any pathogen for participants of any age. Secondary outcomes were lower respiratory infection, upper respiratory infection, influenza confirmed by diagnostic test, COVID-19 confirmed by diagnostic test, and all-cause mortality. We extracted relative risks (RRs), using random-effects meta-analysis to analyse study results, and metaregression to evaluate heterogeneity. We assessed risk of bias in individual studies using an adapted Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and assessed the overall body of evidence using a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021231414. FINDINGS: 26 studies with 161 659 participants met inclusion criteria, providing 27 comparisons (21 randomised). Interventions promoting handwashing with soap reduced any ARI compared with no handwashing intervention (RR 0·83 [95% CI 0·76-0·90], I2 88%; 27 comparisons). Interventions also reduced lower respiratory infections (0·78 [0·64-0·94], I2 64%; 12 comparisons) and upper respiratory infections (0·74 [0·59-0·93], I2 91%; seven comparisons), but not test-confirmed influenza (0·94 [0·42-2·11], I2 90%; three comparisons), test-confirmed COVID-19 (no comparisons), or all-cause mortality (prevalence ratio 0·95 [95% CI 0·71-1·27]; one comparison). For ARI, no heterogeneity covariates were significant at p<0·1 and the GRADE rating was moderate certainty evidence. INTERPRETATION: Interventions promoting handwashing with soap can reduce ARI in LMICs, and could help to prevent the large burden of respiratory disease. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Reckitt Global Hygiene Institute, and UK FCDO.

[Strategies for health services in women, newborns, children, and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic in countries of Americas]. / Estrategias de servicios de salud en mujeres, recién nacidos/as, niños/as y adolescentes durante la pandemia de COVID-19 en países de las Américas.

The article analyzes the perceived challenges and strategies implemented in five Latin American and Caribbean countries to ensure continuity of care and access to health services for women, newborns, children, and adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study corresponds to a quick assessment based on semi-structured interviews with key informants in countries selected by convenience: Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Grenada, and the Dominican Republic. Interviews were conducted with 23 key informants: (a) decision makers at the national and/or subnational level, (b) healthcare professionals, and (c) representatives of civil society organizations; from December 2020 to January 2021. Among the findings, at the beginning of the pandemic, priority was given to the COVID-19 care, with measures to limit the flow of people to health facilities in the countries involved, closing or limiting outpatient visits and restricting care schedule. For women, this affected family planning services and access to contraceptive methods, implying a reduction in prenatal check-ups. As a result of this deinstitutionalization of care, among newborns, a decrease in pediatric check-ups, a decrease in timely immunization and late detection of pathologies or growth problems were reported. Among adolescents, a strong restriction of family planning services, the limitation of other friendly counseling spaces and difficulties in accessing contraceptives were observed.

El artículo analiza los desafíos percibidos y las estrategias implementadas en cinco países de América Latina y el Caribe para garantizar la continuidad de los cuidados y el acceso a servicios de salud de mujeres, recién nacidos/as, niños/as y adolescentes durante la pandemia por COVID-19. El estudio corresponde a una evaluación rápida basada en entrevistas semi-estructuradas a informantes clave de países seleccionados por conveniencia: Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Granada y República Dominicana. Se realizaron entrevistas con 23 informantes clave: (a) referentes de la toma de decisión a nivel nacional y/o subnacional, (b) referentes de servicios de salud, y (c) representantes de organizaciones de la sociedad civil, durante diciembre de 2020 y enero de 2021. Entre los hallazgos, al inicio de la pandemia se priorizó la atención del COVID-19, con medidas para limitar la afluencia de personas a los establecimientos de salud en los países involucrados, procediendo al cierre o limitación de consultas externas y restricción de horarios de atención. Para las mujeres, esto impactó en los servicios de planificación familiar y el acceso a métodos anticonceptivos, e implicó una reducción de los controles prenatales. Por esta desinstitucionalización de la atención, entre recién nacidos/as fue reportada una disminución de los controles pediátricos, una disminución de su vacunación oportuna y una detección tardía de patologías o problemas de crecimiento. Entre adolescentes, se señaló una fuerte restricción de los servicios de planificación familiar, la limitación de otros espacios amigables de consejería y dificultades para acceder a anticonceptivos.

O artigo analisa os desafios observados e as estratégias implementadas em cinco países da América Latina e do Caribe para garantir a continuidade do atendimento e o acesso aos serviços de saúde para mulheres, recém-nascidos/as, crianças e adolescentes durante a pandemia de COVID-19. O estudo é uma avaliação rápida baseada em entrevistas semiestruturadas com informantes-chave em países selecionados por conveniência: Colômbia, Equador, Guatemala, Granada e República Dominicana. Foram realizadas entrevistas com 23 informantes-chave: (a) tomadores de decisão em nível nacional e/ou subnacional, (b) prestadores de serviços de saúde e (c) representantes de organizações da sociedade civil; durante dezembro de 2020 e janeiro de 2021. Entre as conclusões encontrou-se que, no início da pandemia, foi dada prioridade à COVID-19, com medidas para limitar o fluxo de pessoas às instalações de saúde nos países envolvidos, fechando ou limitando as consultas ambulatoriais e restringindo o horário de atendimento. Para as mulheres, a medida impactou os serviços de planejamento familiar e o acesso à contracepção, significando uma redução nos check-ups pré-natais. Como resultado desta desinstitucionalização dos cuidados, uma diminuição dos check-ups pediátricos, uma diminuição das vacinações no período correto e uma detecção tardia de patologias ou problemas de crescimento foram relatados entre os/as recém-nascidos/as. Entre os adolescentes, foi observada uma restrição severa dos serviços de planejamento familiar, a limitação de acesso a espaços de aconselhamento amigável e dificuldades de acesso a contraceptivos.

Disparities in COVID-19 clinical studies from high-income and low-and middle-income countries.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the disparities between COVID-19 studies conducted in high-income countries (HICs) and low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). METHODS: We used the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to identify COVID-19-related studies registered from December 31, 2019 to December 31, 2021. The World Bank definition was used to classify countries as high-, upper-middle-, lower-middle-, and low-income. The last three were considered to be LMICs. We examined the disparities in response speed, classification of medicines and vaccines, and registration and results reporting compliance between COVID-19 studies conducted in HICs and LMICs. RESULTS: We included 12,396 COVID-19 studies, with 6631 (53.5%) from HICs. HIC-registered studies reached a peak of 1039 in April 2020, whereas LMICs had only 440 studies. Of the 6969 interventional trials, those from HICs showed higher registration compliance (2199, 62.3% vs 1979, 57.6%, P <0.001) and results reporting compliance (hazard ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.28-0.55, P < 0.001) than LMICs. HICs also conducted significantly more small-molecule drug (956, 57.5% vs 868, 41.2%, P <0.001) and messenger RNA vaccine trials (135, 32.9% vs 19, 4.8%, P <0.001) than LMICs. CONCLUSION: HICs conducted COVID-19 trials with faster response speed and higher registration and publication compliance and produced more innovative pharmaceutical and vaccine products to combat COVID-19 than LMICs.

The pre-analytical process management status and influencing factors of laboratory test before prescribing antimicrobial in developing country.

INTRODUCTION: The results of laboratory testing are crucial basis for clinicians to prescribe antimicrobial. Laboratory testing is a highly complex process, and increasing evidence suggests that errors and obstacles in the pre-analytical process (PP) will affect reasonable antimicrobial use. However, PP was an easily neglected link in hospital infection management and the current situation of it and the influencing factors of management are not clear. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted in the department of clinical, specimen collection, transportation, and inspection in 109 secondary and tertiary hospitals in Central China. The rate of antimicrobial susceptibility test request (AST) and related indexes of above departments were calculated to describe the situation. Management characteristics (frequency of training etc.) were described as proportions and fractional probit regression analysis was used to determine the influencing factors. RESULTS: The average rate of non restricted-use antimicrobial was 63%, the restricted-use was 86%, the special-use was 95%. The zero obstacle rate of specimen collection was 27.3%, of specimen transportation was 19.4% and of inspection feedback was 61.7%. There was a difference between the secondary and tertiary hospitals on non restricted-use (X2 = 22.968, P < 0.001); restricted-use (X2 = 29.466, P < 0.001); special-use (X2 = 27.317, P < 0.001). Taking non restricted-use as an example, training (OR = 0.312, 95%CI: 0.148,0.429), low-frequency appraisal (OR = 0.153, 95%CI: 0.082,0.224), guidance (OR = 0.32, 95%CI: 0.237,0.403) and information technology (OR = 0.104, 95%CI: 0.009,0.199) were positive factors. CONCLUSIONS: There were substantial differences in the rate of AST request in clinical department between secondary and tertiary hospitals. The zero obstacle rate in collection, transportation and inspection department were still low. In most departments, training and performance appraisal were positive factors, guidance and information technology were positive supporting factors.

Defining measures of emergency care access in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Over 50% of annual deaths in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) could be averted through access to high-quality emergency care. OBJECTIVES: We performed a scoping review of the literature that described at least one measure of emergency care access in LMICs in order to understand relevant barriers to emergency care systems. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: English language studies published between 1 January 1990 and 30 December 2020, with one or more discrete measure(s) of access to emergency health services in LMICs described. SOURCE OF EVIDENCE: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL and the grey literature. CHARTING METHODS: A structured data extraction tool was used to identify and classify the number of 'unique' measures, and the number of times each unique measure was studied in the literature ('total' measures). Measures of access were categorised by access type, defined by Thomas and Penchansky, with further categorisation according to the 'Three Delay' model of seeking, reaching and receiving care, and the WHO's Emergency Care Systems Framework (ECSF). RESULTS: A total of 3103 articles were screened. 75 met full study inclusion. Articles were uniformly descriptive (n=75, 100%). 137 discrete measures of access were reported. Unique measures of accommodation (n=42, 30.7%) and availability (n=40, 29.2%) were most common. Measures of seeking, reaching and receiving care were 22 (16.0%), 46 (33.6%) and 69 (50.4%), respectively. According to the ECSF slightly more measures focused on prehospital care-inclusive of care at the scene and through transport to a facility (n=76, 55.4%) as compared with facility-based care (n=57, 41.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Numerous measures of emergency care access are described in the literature, but many measures are overaddressed. Development of a core set of access measures with associated minimum standards are necessary to aid in ensuring universal access to high-quality emergency care in all settings.

Clinical and Regulatory Challenges and Opportunities for Monoclonal Antibodies in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Lessons from COVID-19 and Beyond.

Monoclonal antibodies are an effective and growing class of pharmaceuticals for the treatment and prevention of a broad range of non-communicable and infectious diseases; however, most low- and middle-income countries have limited access to these innovative products. Many factors contribute to the global inequity of access to these products; however, in this report, we focus on clinical and regulatory complexities as further highlighted by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Despite a higher prevalence of many diseases in low- and middle-income countries, only 12% of clinical trials for monoclonal antibodies are conducted in these countries. Additionally, only a fraction of the available monoclonal antibodies in the USA and European Union are authorized for use in low- and middle-income countries. Through learnings from desk research and global symposia with international partners, we present recommendations to harmonize processes and facilitate regional and international collaborations for more rapid approval of fit-for-purpose innovative monoclonal antibodies and biosimilars in low- and middle-income countries.