An assessment of the laboratory network in Ghana: A national-level ATLAS survey (2019-2020).

Background: Integrated health systems with strong laboratory networks are critical in improving public health. The current study assessed the laboratory network in Ghana and its functionality using the Assessment Tool for Laboratory Services (ATLAS). Intervention: A national-level laboratory network survey was conducted among stakeholders of the Ghanaian laboratory network in Accra. Face-to-face interviews were conducted from December 2019 to January 2020, with follow-up phone interviews between June and July 2020. Also, we reviewed supporting documents provided by stakeholders for supplementary information and transcribed these to identify themes. Where possible, we completed the Laboratory Network scorecard using data obtained from the ATLAS. Lessons learnt: The Laboratory Network (LABNET) scorecard assessment was a valuable addition to the ATLAS survey as it quantified the functionality of the laboratory network and its overall advancement toward achieving International Health Regulations (2005) and Global Health Security Agenda targets. Two significant challenges indicated by respondents were laboratory financing and delayed implementation of the Ghana National Health Laboratory Policy. Recommendations: Stakeholders recommended a review of the country's funding landscape, such as funding laboratory services from the country's internally generated funds. Also, they recommended laboratory policy implementation to ensure adequate laboratory workforce and standards.

Ending tuberculosis in a post-COVID-19 world: a person-centred, equity-oriented approach.

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted systems of care for infectious diseases-including tuberculosis-and has exposed pervasive inequities that have long marred efforts to combat these diseases. The resulting health disparities often intersect at the individual and community levels in ways that heighten vulnerability to tuberculosis. Effective responses to tuberculosis (and other infectious diseases) must respond to these realities. Unfortunately, current tuberculosis programmes are generally not designed from the perspectives of affected individuals and fail to address structural determinants of health disparities. We describe a person-centred, equity-oriented response that would identify and focus on communities affected by disparities, tailor interventions to the mechanisms by which disparities worsen tuberculosis, and address upstream determinants of those disparities. We detail four key elements of the approach (data collection, programme design, implementation, and sustainability). We then illustrate how organisations at multiple levels might partner and adapt current practices to incorporate these elements. Such an approach could generate more substantial, sustainable, and equitable reductions in tuberculosis burden at the community level, highlighting the urgency of restructuring post-COVID-19 health systems in a more person-centred, equity-oriented way.

Potential Effects of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic on Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Transmission: A Modeling Study in 32 US Cities.

BACKGROUND: The degree to which the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic will affect the US human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic is unclear. METHODS: We used the Johns Hopkins Epidemiologic and Economic Model to project HIV infections from 2020 to 2025 in 32 US metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs). We sampled a range of effects of the pandemic on sexual transmission (0-50% reduction), viral suppression among people with HIV (0-40% reduction), HIV testing (0-50% reduction), and pre-exposure prophylaxis use (0-30% reduction), and indexed reductions over time to Google Community Mobility Reports. RESULTS: Simulations projected reported diagnoses would drop in 2020 and rebound in 2021 or 2022, regardless of underlying incidence. If sexual transmission normalized by July 2021 and HIV care normalized by January 2022, we projected 1161 (1%) more infections from 2020 to 2025 across all 32 cities than if COVID-19 had not occurred. Among "optimistic" simulations in which sexual transmission was sharply reduced and viral suppression was maintained we projected 8% lower incidence (95% credible interval: 14% lower to no change). Among "pessimistic" simulations where sexual transmission was largely unchanged but viral suppression fell, we projected 11% higher incidence (1-21% higher). MSA-specific projections are available at www.jheem.org?covid. CONCLUSIONS: The effects of COVID-19 on HIV transmission remain uncertain and differ between cities. Reported diagnoses of HIV in 2020-2021 are likely to correlate poorly with underlying incidence. Minimizing disruptions to HIV care is critical to mitigating negative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on HIV transmission.

What Will It Take to End HIV in the United States? : A Comprehensive, Local-Level Modeling Study.

BACKGROUND: The Ending the HIV Epidemic (EHE) initiative aims to reduce incident HIV infections by 90% over a span of 10 years. The intensity of interventions needed to achieve this for local epidemics is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of HIV interventions at the city level. DESIGN: A compartmental model of city-level HIV transmission stratified by age, race, sex, and HIV risk factor was developed and calibrated. SETTING: 32 priority metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs). PATIENTS: Simulated populations in each MSA. INTERVENTION: Combinations of HIV testing and preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) coverage among those at risk for HIV, plus viral suppression in persons with diagnosed HIV infection. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the projected reduction in incident cases from 2020 to 2030. RESULTS: Absent intervention, HIV incidence was projected to decrease by 19% across all 32 MSAs. Modest increases in testing (1.25-fold per year), PrEP coverage (5 percentage points), and viral suppression (10 percentage points) across the population could achieve reductions of 34% to 67% by 2030. Twenty-five percent PrEP coverage, testing twice a year on average, and 90% viral suppression among young Black and Hispanic men who have sex with men (MSM) achieved similar reductions (13% to 68%). Including all MSM and persons who inject drugs could reduce incidence by 48% to 90%. Thirteen of 32 MSAs could achieve greater than 90% reductions in HIV incidence with large-scale interventions that include heterosexuals. A web application with location-specific results is publicly available (www.jheem.org). LIMITATION: The COVID-19 pandemic was not represented. CONCLUSION: Large reductions in HIV incidence are achievable with substantial investment, but the EHE goals will be difficult to achieve in most locations. An interactive model that can help policymakers maximize the effect in their local environments is presented. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health.

Antigen-based Rapid Diagnostic Testing or Alternatives for Diagnosis of Symptomatic COVID-19: A Simulation-based Net Benefit Analysis.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests can diagnose COVID-19 rapidly and at low cost, but lower sensitivity compared with reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (PCR) has limited clinical adoption. METHODS: We compared antigen testing, PCR testing, and clinical judgment alone for diagnosing symptomatic COVID-19 in an outpatient setting (10% COVID-19 prevalence among the patients tested, 3-day PCR turnaround) and a hospital setting (40% prevalence, 24-hour PCR turnaround). We simulated transmission from cases and contacts, and relationships between time, viral burden, transmission, and case detection. We compared diagnostic approaches using a measure of net benefit that incorporated both clinical and public health benefits and harms of the intervention. RESULTS: In the outpatient setting, we estimated that using antigen testing instead of PCR to test 200 individuals could be equivalent to preventing all symptomatic transmission from one person with COVID-19 (one "transmission-equivalent"). In a hospital, net benefit analysis favored PCR and testing 25 patients with PCR instead of antigen testing achieved one transmission-equivalent of benefit. In both settings, antigen testing was preferable to PCR if PCR turnaround time exceeded 2 days. Both tests provided greater net benefit than management based on clinical judgment alone unless intervention carried minimal harm and was provided equally regardless of diagnostic approach. CONCLUSIONS: For diagnosis of symptomatic COVID-19, we estimated that the speed of diagnosis with antigen testing is likely to outweigh its lower accuracy compared with PCR, wherever PCR turnaround time is 2 days or longer. This advantage may be even greater if antigen tests are also less expensive.

Quantifying the potential value of antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests for COVID-19: a modelling analysis.

BACKGROUND: Testing plays a critical role in treatment and prevention responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Compared to nucleic acid tests (NATs), antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) can be more accessible, but typically have lower sensitivity and specificity. By quantifying these trade-offs, we aimed to inform decisions about when an Ag-RDT would offer greater public health value than reliance on NAT. METHODS: Following an expert consultation, we selected two use cases for analysis: rapid identification of people with COVID-19 amongst patients admitted with respiratory symptoms in a 'hospital' setting and early identification and isolation of people with mildly symptomatic COVID-19 in a 'community' setting. Using decision analysis, we evaluated the health system cost and health impact (deaths averted and infectious days isolated) of an Ag-RDT-led strategy, compared to a strategy based on NAT and clinical judgement. We adopted a broad range of values for 'contextual' parameters relevant to a range of settings, including the availability of NAT and the performance of clinical judgement. We performed a multivariate sensitivity analysis to all of these parameters. RESULTS: In a hospital setting, an Ag-RDT-led strategy would avert more deaths than a NAT-based strategy, and at lower cost per death averted, when the sensitivity of clinical judgement is less than 90%, and when NAT results are available in time to inform clinical decision-making for less than 85% of patients. The use of an Ag-RDT is robustly supported in community settings, where it would avert more transmission at lower cost than relying on NAT alone, under a wide range of assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: Despite their imperfect sensitivity and specificity, Ag-RDTs have the potential to be simultaneously more impactful, and have a lower cost per death and infectious person-days averted, than current approaches to COVID-19 diagnostic testing.