Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 434
Filter
1.
rev. cuid. (Bucaramanga. 2010) ; 12(2): 1-13, mayo 1, 2021.
Article in Portuguese | WHO COVID, LILACS (Americas) | ID: covidwho-1811623

ABSTRACT

Introdução: A Coronavirus Disease-2019 é uma doença infectocontagiosa que afeta o sistema respiratório, que surgiu na China e logo se espalhou pelo mundo. Objetivo: Avaliar a qualidade metodológica e transparência das Diretrizes de Prática Clínica brasileiras para o tratamento da Coronavirus Disease-2019. Materiais e Métodos: Trata-se de uma revisão sistemática realizada em 2020 nas fontes de dados: MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, Scopus e Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde, National Guideline Clearinghouse e Guidelines International Network, e sites do Ministério da Saúde do Brasil, Sociedades Médicas Brasileiras, Conselhos de Medicina, Conselho Federal de Enfermagem e Conselho Federal de Fisioterapia. A avaliação da qualidade metodológica e da transparência das diretrizes ocorreu por meio do instrumento Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation, versão II, realizada por quatro autores. Resultados: Foram encontradas 33 diretrizes, das quais foram incluídas 14 para análise. Somente uma diretriz apresentou pontuações acima de 60% em todos os domínios. Entre os seis domínios, três apresentaram maiores pontuações: Escopo e finalidade, Envolvimento das partes interessadas e Clareza da apresentação. Discussão: Apesar da fragilidade metodológica, os autores se preocuparam em apresentar as recomendações de forma clara e concisa, através de informações-chave e opções terapêuticas que facilitam a tomada de decisão. Conclusão: As diretrizes brasileiras apresentaram baixa qualidade metodológica, em que somente uma diretriz foi recomendada e classificada com alta qualidade e transparência metodológica.


Introduction: Coronavirus disease (Covid-19) is an infectious disease affecting the respiratory tract, which emerged in China and spread rapidly throughout the world. Objective: To evaluate the methodological quality and transparency of Brazilian clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of coronavirus disease (Covid-19). Materials and Methods: A systematic review was conducted in 2020 on Medline (via PubMed), Embase, Scopus, LILACS, National Guideline Clearinghouse and Guidelines International Network databases, in addition to online searches on the Brazilian Ministry of Health, Brazilian Medical Association, Federal Council of Medicine, Federal Council of Nursing and Federal Council of Physical Therapy websites. The methodological quality and transparency of the guidelines were assessed using the second version of the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument developed by four authors. Results: 33 guidelines were found of which 14 were included in the analysis. There was only one guideline that scored above 60% in all domains. Among the six domains, higher scores were found in the following three domains: scope and objective, stakeholder involvement and clarity of presentation. Discussion: Despite methodological weakness found, the authors were keen to provide clear and concise recommendations through key information and therapeutic options to facilitate decision making. Conclusions: Brazilian clinical practice guidelines were found to be of poor methodological quality, from which only one guideline was recommended and classified as to be of high methodological quality and transparency.


Introducción: La enfermedad por coronavirus (Covid-19) es una patología infecciosa que afecta al sistema respiratorio, la cual se originó en China y se extendió rápidamente por todo el mundo. Objetivo: Evaluar la calidad metodológica y la transparencia de las guías de práctica clínica brasileñas para el tratamiento de la enfermedad por coronavirus (Covid-19). Materiales y métodos: Se realizó una revisión sistemática en 2020 en las bases de datos Medline (vía PubMed), Embase, Scopus, LILACS, National Guideline Clearinghouse y Guidelines International Network, además de consultas en los sitios web del Ministerio de Salud de Brasil, Asociación Médicas Brasileña, Consejo Federal de Medicina, Consejo Federal de Enfermería y Consejo Federal de Fisioterapia. La evaluación de la calidad metodológica y la transparencia de las guías se realizó con el instrumento Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE), segunda versión realizada por cuatro autores. Resultados: Se encontraron 33 guías, de las que se incluyeron 14 en el análisis. Hubo una sola guía que obtuvo una puntuación superior al 60% en todos los dominios. Entre los seis dominios, se presentaron puntuaciones más altas en los siguientes tres dominios: alcance y objetivo, participación de las partes interesadas y claridad de la presentación. Discusión: A pesar de la fragilidad metodológica, los autores se interesaron por presentar las recomendaciones de forma clara y concisa a través de información clave y opciones terapéuticas que faciliten la toma de decisiones. Conclusión: Las guías de práctica clínica brasileñas mostraron tener una baja calidad metodológica, de las que solamente una guía fue recomendada y clasificada como de alta calidad y transparencia metodológica.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Therapeutics , Guidelines as Topic , Coronavirus Infections , Pandemics , Systematic Review
2.
BMC Psychiatry ; 22(1): 228, 2022 Mar 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1770512

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: People with substance use disorders may be at a greater risk of contracting COVID-19 infection and developing medical complications. Several institutional and governmental health agencies across the world developed ad hoc guidance for substance use disorder services and care of individuals misusing substances. We aimed to synthesise the best available recommendations on management and care of people with or at risk of substance use disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic from existing guidelines published in UK, USA, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and Singapore. METHODS: We systematically searched existing guidelines and websites from 28 international institutions and governmental bodies in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic (May 4th 2021). We summarized the extracted data as answers to specific clinical questions. RESULTS: We organised the available recommendations from 19 sources in three sections. First, we focused on general advice and recommendations for people who misuse alcohol or drugs during the COVID-19 pandemic, the design of contingency plans, safeguarding issues for children and families of service users and advice to the public, patients, and carers. Then, we summarised specific guidelines for people who use illicit drugs and related services, such as opioid substitution treatment and needle and syringe programmes. Finally, we provided a synthesis on specific recommendations for services supporting people who misuse alcohol and key topics in the field, such as management of alcohol detoxification and safe transition between supervised and unsupervised consumption. CONCLUSIONS: Available guidance reflected different approaches, ranging from being extremely cautious in providing recommendations other than generic statements to proposing adaptation of previously available guidelines to confront the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic. After the early phase, guidance focused on reduction of infection transmission and service delivery. Guidance did not provide advice on infection prevention via vaccination programmes and service access strategies tailored to individuals with substance use disorders.


Subject(s)
Alcoholism , COVID-19 , Substance-Related Disorders , Alcoholism/psychology , Alcoholism/therapy , Child , Guidelines as Topic , Health Personnel , Humans , Pandemics , Substance-Related Disorders/psychology
3.
BMC Med Res Methodol ; 22(1): 89, 2022 Apr 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1770484

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Rapid Advice Guidelines (RAG) provide decision makers with guidance to respond to public health emergencies by developing evidence-based recommendations in a short period of time with a scientific and standardized approach. However, the experience from the development process of a RAG has so far not been systematically summarized. Therefore, our working group will take the experience of the development of the RAG for children with COVID-19 as an example to systematically explore the methodology, advantages, and challenges in the development of the RAG. We shall propose suggestions and reflections for future research, in order to provide a more detailed reference for future development of RAGs. RESULT: The development of the RAG by a group of 67 researchers from 11 countries took 50 days from the official commencement of the work (January 28, 2020) to submission (March 17, 2020). A total of 21 meetings were held with a total duration of 48 h (average 2.3 h per meeting) and an average of 16.5 participants attending. Only two of the ten recommendations were fully supported by direct evidence for COVID-19, three recommendations were supported by indirect evidence only, and the proportion of COVID-19 studies among the body of evidence in the remaining five recommendations ranged between 10 and 83%. Six of the ten recommendations used COVID-19 preprints as evidence support, and up to 50% of the studies with direct evidence on COVID-19 were preprints. CONCLUSIONS: In order to respond to public health emergencies, the development of RAG also requires a clear and transparent formulation process, usually using a large amount of indirect and non-peer-reviewed evidence to support the formation of recommendations. Strict following of the WHO RAG handbook does not only enhance the transparency and clarity of the guideline, but also can speed up the guideline development process, thereby saving time and labor costs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Disease Outbreaks , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Public Health
4.
J Sci Med Sport ; 23(7): 639-663, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1720499

ABSTRACT

Sport makes an important contribution to the physical, psychological and emotional well-being of Australians. The economic contribution of sport is equivalent to 2-3% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The COVID-19 pandemic has had devastating effects on communities globally, leading to significant restrictions on all sectors of society, including sport. Resumption of sport can significantly contribute to the re-establishment of normality in Australian society. The Australian Institute of Sport (AIS), in consultation with sport partners (National Institute Network (NIN) Directors, NIN Chief Medical Officers (CMOs), National Sporting Organisation (NSO) Presidents, NSO Performance Directors and NSO CMOs), has developed a framework to inform the resumption of sport. National Principles for Resumption of Sport were used as a guide in the development of 'the AIS Framework for Rebooting Sport in a COVID-19 Environment' (the AIS Framework); and based on current best evidence, and guidelines from the Australian Federal Government, extrapolated into the sporting context by specialists in sport and exercise medicine, infectious diseases and public health. The principles outlined in this document apply to high performance/professional, community and individual passive (non-contact) sport. The AIS Framework is a timely tool of minimum baseline of standards, for 'how' reintroduction of sport activity will occur in a cautious and methodical manner, based on the best available evidence to optimise athlete and community safety. Decisions regarding the timing of resumption (the 'when') of sporting activity must be made in close consultation with Federal, State/Territory and/or Local Public Health Authorities. The priority at all times must be to preserve public health, minimising the risk of community transmission.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Return to Sport/standards , Sports , Australia , Basic Reproduction Number , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Communicable Disease Control , Decision Making , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2
5.
Brain Behav Immun ; 87: 8-9, 2020 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1719343

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to high levels of psychological distress in the general public, including symptoms of anxiety and depression. Such distress is associated with alterations in immune function, including an elevated risk of viral respiratory tract infections. In this light, the possible effects of Ayurveda, a traditional system of medicine promoted by the Indian government as an "immune booster", are examined from the point of view of psychoneuroimmune mechanisms as well as the "meaning response" described by Moerman. It was found that many of the measures advocated in their guidelines could positively influence immunity either by direct effects on symptoms of depression or anxiety, or through their symbolic significance. Therefore, it is possible that such traditional practices could be beneficial both in terms of psychological quality of life, and in terms of moderating the risk of infection.


Subject(s)
Anxiety/immunology , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Depression/immunology , Medicine, Ayurvedic , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Psychoneuroimmunology , Stress, Psychological/immunology , Anxiety/epidemiology , Anxiety/psychology , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coriandrum , Cuminum , Curcuma , Depression/epidemiology , Depression/psychology , Garlic , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , India/epidemiology , Pandemics , Plant Preparations , Psychological Distress , SARS-CoV-2 , Spices , Stress, Psychological/epidemiology , Stress, Psychological/psychology , Teas, Herbal , Yoga
8.
PLoS One ; 17(2): e0245182, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1674002

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Working under pandemic conditions exposes health care workers (HCWs) to infection risk and psychological strain. A better understanding of HCWs' experiences of following local infection prevention and control (IPC) procedures during COVID-19 is urgently needed to inform strategies for protecting the psychical and psychological health of HCWs. The objective of this study was therefore to capture the perceptions of hospital HCWs on local IPC procedures and the impact on their emotional wellbeing during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe. METHODS: Participants were recruited in two sampling rounds of an international cross-sectional survey. Sampling took place between 31 March and 17 April 2020 via existing research networks and between 14 May and 31 August 2020 via online convenience sampling. Main outcome measures were behavioural determinants of HCWs' adherence to IPC guidelines and the WHO-5 Well-Being Index, a validated scale of 0-100 reflecting emotional wellbeing. The WHO-5 was interpreted as a score below or above 50 points, a cut-off score used in previous literature to screen for depression. RESULTS: 2289 HCWs from 40 countries in Europe participated. Mean age was 42 (±11) years, 66% were female, 47% and 39% were medical doctors and nurses, respectively. 74% (n = 1699) of HCWs were directly treating patients with COVID-19, of which 32% (n = 527) reported they were fearful of caring for these patients. HCWs reported high levels of concern about COVID-19 infection risk to themselves (71%) and their family (82%) as a result of their job. 40% of HCWs considered that getting infected with COVID-19 was not within their control. This feeling was more common among junior than senior HCWs (46% versus 38%, P value < .01). Sufficient COVID-19-specific IPC training, confidence in PPE use and institutional trust were positively associated with the feeling that becoming infected with COVID-19 was within their control. Female HCWs were more likely than males to report a WHO-5 score below 50 points (aOR 1.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2-1.8). CONCLUSIONS: In Europe, the COVID-19 pandemic has had a differential impact on those providing direct COVID-19 patient care, junior staff and women. Health facilities must be aware of these differential impacts, build trust and provide tailored support for this vital workforce during the current COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Guidelines as Topic/standards , Health Personnel/psychology , Hospitals/standards , Infection Control/statistics & numerical data , Personal Protective Equipment/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19/virology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Europe/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Patient Care/methods , Patient Care/standards
9.
PLoS One ; 17(1): e0259851, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1648799

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cases of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) are increasing at an alarming rate throughout the world, including Ethiopia. Food handlers in food and drink establishments are at high risk of exposure to the virus due to their many daily contacts with customers. Since there is a paucity of evidence about infection prevention practices and associated factors among this high-risk group in Ethiopia including in Dessie City and Kombolcha Town, this study was designed to address this gap. METHOD: An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 422 food handlers in Dessie City and Kombolcha Town food and drink establishments in July and August 2020. The study participants were selected using a simple random sampling technique. Data were collected by trained data collectors using a pretested structured questionnaire and an on-the-spot observational checklist. Data were entered into EpiData version 4.6 and exported to STATA version 14.0 for data cleaning and analysis. Data were analyzed using bivariable and multivariable logistic regression model at 95% confidence interval (CI). From the bivariable analysis, variables with a p-value <0.25 were retained into multivariable analysis. Finally, variables that had a p-value <0.05 were declared as factors significantly associated with good infection prevention practices of COVID-19 among food handlers. MAIN FINDINGS: The overall rate of good practice in infection prevention among food handlers was 43.9% (95% CI: 39.2-48.4%). Among the total 401 food handlers, 79.8% had good knowledge and 58.4% had a favorable attitude about COVID-19 infection prevention. Factors significantly associated with good COVID-19 infection prevention practices were: educational status of college or above (AOR = 1.97; 95% CI: 1.32-3.75), food handling work experience greater than five years (AOR = 2.55; 95% CI: 1.43-5.77), availability of written guidelines within the food and drink establishment (AOR = 2.68; 95% CI: 1.52-4.75), and taking training about infection prevention (AOR = 3.26; 95% CI: 1.61-6.61). CONCLUSION: Our findings showed that around one-third of food handlers had good infection prevention practices. Thus, to reduce COVID-19 transmission, integrated work is urgently needed to further improve food handlers' good practices, knowledge and attitude about infection prevention through providing health education, training and by making written infection prevention guidelines available in food and drink establishments.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Food Handling/methods , Foodborne Diseases/prevention & control , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Infection Control/methods , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Educational Status , Ethiopia/epidemiology , Female , Food Handling/ethics , Foodborne Diseases/epidemiology , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Surveys and Questionnaires
10.
Rev Bras Enferm ; 74(suppl 1): e20201080, 2021.
Article in English, Portuguese | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1626609

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: to describe the experience of a private outpatient network for hematology and oncology treatment in the adoption of management tools to face the risk of contamination by SARS-CoV-2. METHOD: an experience report on the use of a root cause analysis method to identify potential risks of contamination by COVID-19 among patients and employees. Through the risks identified through the Ishikawa Diagram, we built an action plan, linked to the 5W2H tool, for planning and decision-making implemented. RESULTS: the number of attendances in person and people circulating in the units was reduced, protective distance measures and new protection barriers were fundamental to control the risks of spreading COVID-19 in patients and employees. FINAL CONSIDERATIONS: the management tools served as a valuable tool in the construction of measures, making the measures in question more clearly and applicable.


Subject(s)
Adaptation, Psychological , Ambulatory Care Facilities/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/psychology , Medical Oncology/methods , Occupational Health , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Pandemics , Personal Protective Equipment , SARS-CoV-2
11.
Malar J ; 20(1): 481, 2021 Dec 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1623634

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Malaria causes more than 200 million cases of illness and 400,000 deaths each year across 90 countries. The World Health Organization (WHO) set a goal for 35 countries to eliminate malaria by 2030, with an intermediate milestone of 10 countries by 2020. In 2017, the WHO established the Elimination-2020 (E-2020) initiative to help countries achieve their malaria elimination goals and included 21 countries with the potential to eliminate malaria by 2020. METHODS: Across its three levels of activity (country, region and global), the WHO developed normative and implementation guidance on strategies and activities to eliminate malaria; provided technical support and subnational operational assistance; convened national malaria programme managers at three global meetings to share innovations and best practices; advised countries on strengthening their strategy to prevent re-establishment and preparing for WHO malaria certification; and contributed to maintaining momentum towards elimination through periodic evaluations, monitoring and oversight of progress in the E-2020 countries. Changes in the number of indigenous cases in E-2020 countries between 2016 and 2020 are reported, along with the number of countries that eliminated malaria and received WHO certification. RESULTS: The median number of indigenous cases in the E-2020 countries declined from 165.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 14.25-563.75) in 2016 to 78 (IQR 0-356) in 2020; 12 (57%) countries reported reductions in indigenous cases over that period, of which 7 (33%) interrupted malaria transmission and maintained a malaria-free status through 2020 and 4 (19%) were certified malaria-free by the WHO. Two countries experienced outbreaks of malaria in 2020 and 2021 attributed, in part, to the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Although the E-2020 countries contributed to the achievement of the 2020 global elimination milestone, the initiative highlights the difficulties countries face to interrupt malaria transmission, even when numbers of cases are very low. The 2025 global elimination milestone is now approaching, and the lessons learned, experience gained, and updated guidance developed during the E-2020 initiative will help serve the countries seeking to eliminate malaria by 2025.


Subject(s)
Disease Eradication , Global Health , Malaria/epidemiology , Malaria/prevention & control , World Health Organization , Endemic Diseases/prevention & control , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Malaria/transmission , Population Surveillance
12.
Am J Public Health ; 112(1): 169-178, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1591240

ABSTRACT

Objectives. To assess the association between individual-level adherence to social-distancing and personal hygiene behaviors recommended by public health experts and subsequent risk of COVID-19 diagnosis in the United States. Methods. Data are from waves 7 through 26 (June 10, 2020-April 26, 2021) of the Understanding America Study COVID-19 survey. We used Cox models to assess the relationship between engaging in behaviors considered high risk and risk of COVID-19 diagnosis. Results. Individuals engaging in behaviors indicating lack of adherence to social-distancing guidelines, especially those related to large gatherings or public interactions, had a significantly higher risk of COVID-19 diagnosis than did those who did not engage in these behaviors. Each additional risk behavior was associated with a 9% higher risk of COVID-19 diagnosis (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.05, 1.13). Results were similar after adjustment for sociodemographic characteristics and local infection rates. Conclusions. Personal mitigation behaviors appear to influence the risk of COVID-19, even in the presence of social factors related to infection risk. Public Health Implications. Our findings emphasize the importance of individual behaviors for preventing COVID-19, which may be relevant in contexts with low vaccination. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(1):169-178. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306565).


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Health Risk Behaviors , Hygiene , Patient Compliance/statistics & numerical data , Physical Distancing , Adult , Aged , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Female , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Proportional Hazards Models , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States/epidemiology
13.
Am J Public Health ; 111(12): 2133-2140, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1562412

ABSTRACT

The National Center for Health Statistics' (NCHS's) National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) collects, processes, codes, and reviews death certificate data and disseminates the data in annual data files and reports. With the global rise of COVID-19 in early 2020, the NCHS mobilized to rapidly respond to the growing need for reliable, accurate, and complete real-time data on COVID-19 deaths. Within weeks of the first reported US cases, NCHS developed certification guidance, adjusted internal data processing systems, and stood up a surveillance system to release daily updates of COVID-19 deaths to track the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on US mortality. This report describes the processes that NCHS took to produce timely mortality data in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. (Am J Public Health. 2021;111(12):2133-2140. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306519).


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Data Collection/standards , Public Health Surveillance/methods , Vital Statistics , Cause of Death , Clinical Coding/standards , Guidelines as Topic , Health Status Disparities , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Time Factors , United States/epidemiology
14.
Am J Public Health ; 111(12): 2127-2132, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1561284

ABSTRACT

More than a year after the first domestic COVID-19 cases, the United States does not have national standards for COVID-19 surveillance data analysis and public reporting. This has led to dramatic variations in surveillance practices among public health agencies, which analyze and present newly confirmed cases by a wide variety of dates. The choice of which date to use should be guided by a balance between interpretability and epidemiological relevance. Report date is easily interpretable, generally representative of outbreak trends, and available in surveillance data sets. These features make it a preferred date for public reporting and visualization of surveillance data, although it is not appropriate for epidemiological analyses of outbreak dynamics. Symptom onset date is better suited for such analyses because of its clinical and epidemiological relevance. However, using symptom onset for public reporting of new confirmed cases can cause confusion because reporting lags result in an artificial decline in recent cases. We hope this discussion is a starting point toward a more standardized approach to date-based surveillance. Such standardization could improve public comprehension, policymaking, and outbreak response. (Am J Public Health. 2021;111(12):2127-2132. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306520).


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Data Collection/methods , Data Collection/standards , Public Health Surveillance/methods , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S./standards , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Time Factors , United States/epidemiology
17.
Pan Afr Med J ; 40: 63, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1513184

ABSTRACT

The objectives of this study were to explore the content of web-based communication on COVID-19 by religious authorities (RAs) in Uganda and to assess the level of integration of the Uganda Ministry of Health (MoH) and World Health Organisation (WHO) COVID-19 risk communication guidelines into the statements released by these RAs. A grey literature review was conducted by searching the websites of intra- and inter-religious bodies for the terms "COVID-19" and "coronavirus". Thematic analysis was used to assess the content of RA statements which were also mapped to the items of the MoH and WHO statements. Results indicate that RA communications were centred on COVID-19 description and management; the need to adhere to established guidelines; and the adoption of health-protective behaviours, notably, social distancing and avoidance of misinformation. RAs also discussed the effects of COVID-19 and its control measures on the population and spoke against pandemic-aggravated injustices (gender-based violence and embezzlement). The RA messages incorporated the WHO statement to a greater extent than the MoH statement. In conclusion, RAs played a critical role in delivering public health messages in Uganda during the COVID-19 pandemic, a position we believe should be maximized by public health authorities for effective communication during emergencies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Communication , Public Health , Guideline Adherence , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Internet , Religion , Uganda
18.
Elife ; 102021 08 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1513052

ABSTRACT

Monitoring local mosquito populations for insecticide resistance is critical for effective vector-borne disease control. However, widely used phenotypic assays, which are designed to monitor the emergence and spread of insecticide resistance (technical resistance), do not translate well to the efficacy of vector control products to suppress mosquito numbers in the field (practical resistance). This is because standard testing conditions such as environmental conditions, exposure dose, and type of substrate differ dramatically from those experienced by mosquitoes under field conditions. In addition, field mosquitoes have considerably different physiological characteristics such as age and blood-feeding status. Beyond this, indirect impacts of insecticide resistance and/or exposure on mosquito longevity, pathogen development, host-seeking behavior, and blood-feeding success impact disease transmission. Given the limited number of active ingredients currently available and the observed discordance between resistance and disease transmission, we conclude that additional testing guidelines are needed to determine practical resistance-the efficacy of vector control tools under relevant local conditions- in order to obtain programmatic impact.


Subject(s)
Culicidae , Insecticide Resistance , Insecticides , Mosquito Control , Mosquito Vectors , Vector Borne Diseases/prevention & control , Animals , Guidelines as Topic
19.
Heart Surg Forum ; 24(5): E906-E908, 2021 Oct 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1502125

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a highly contagious respiratory disease that threatens global health. During the pandemic period of COVID-19, the task for prevention in the general ward of cardiovascular surgery is fairly arduous. The present study intends to summarize our experience with infection control, including ward setting, admission procedures, personnel management, health education, and so on, to provide references for clinical management.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Cardiac Surgical Procedures/standards , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Guidelines as Topic , Pandemics/prevention & control , Patients' Rooms/standards , Tertiary Care Centers , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/surgery , China/epidemiology , Comorbidity , Humans , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
20.
Int J Prison Health ; ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print)2021 03 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1501269

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: This study aims to examine steps taken by correctional staff to prevent COVID-19 from spreading through correctional facilities and explores strategies used by incarcerated individuals to reduce their own risk of contracting COVID-19 during confinement. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Data were drawn from interviews with 327 individuals incarcerated after March 16, 2020, in Midwest1, Midwest2 and Southeast state using a questionnaire developed for this purpose. All study participants were actively involved in a randomized controlled trial of a behavioral health reentry intervention and the human subjects board approved the supplement of this study on COVID-19; interviews were conducted from April 15 to November 19, 2020. FINDINGS: Overall, 9.89% of participants contracted COVID-19. Most (68.50%) individuals learned about COVID-19 from television compared to official correctional facility announcements (32.42%). Participants wore face masks (85.02%), washed hands (84.40%) and practiced physical distancing when possible (66.36%). Participants reported that facilities suspended visitation (89.60%) and volunteers (82.57%), provided face masks (83.18%), sanitized (68.20%), conducted temperature checks (55.35%) and released individuals early (7.34%). SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Longitudinal observational study on the implementation and effectiveness of public health guidelines in prisons and jails may identify best practices for containing the infectious disease. Maximizing transparent communications, as well as COVID-19 prevention and mitigation efforts, are critical to achieving universal best practices for virus containment and amplifying public health. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: Data presented indicate the early adoption of many Centers for Disease Control guidelines by individuals and correctional facilities, although broad variation existed. Data support the identification of containment strategies for feasible implementation in a range of correctional spaces.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Correctional Facilities , Guideline Adherence , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Interviews as Topic , Prisoners/psychology , Adult , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Female , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States , World Health Organization
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL