Antimicrobial stewardship in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review protocol on the opportunities and challenges for Sub-Saharan Africa.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) remains one of the leading threats to global public health and this may increase following COVID-19 pandemic. This is particularly the case in Africa where regulations on antimicrobial usage are weak. This protocol outlines the steps to undertake a systematic review to synthesize evidence on drivers of AMR and evaluate existing approaches to strengthening antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). On the basis of the evidence generated from the evidence synthesis, the overarching goal of this work is to provide recommendations to support best practices in AMS implementation in SSA. METHODS: A systematic search will be conducted using the following databases: Global Health Library, PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, Google Scholar, Global Health, Embase, African Journals Online Library, Web of Science, antimicrobial databases (WHO COVID-19, TrACSS, NDARO, and JPIAMR), and the Cochrane databases for systematic reviews. Studies will be included if they assess AMR and AMS in SSA from January 2000 to January 31, 2023. RESULTS: The primary outcomes will include the drivers of AMR and approaches to AMS implementation in SSA. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses will guide the reporting of this systematic review. CONCLUSIONS: The findings are expected to provide evidence on best practices and resource sharing for policy consideration to healthcare providers and other stakeholders both at the local and international levels. Additionally, the study seeks to establish drivers specific to AMR during the COVID-19 era in the SSA, for example, with the observed increasing trend of antimicrobial misuse during the first or second year of the pandemic may provide valuable insights for policy recommendation in preparedness and response measures to future pandemics. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022368853.

Comparison of clinician diagnosis of COVID-19 with real time polymerase chain reaction in an adult-representative population in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Due to the high transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2, accurate diagnosis is essential for effective infection control, but the gold standard, real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), is costly, slow, and test capacity has at times been insufficient. We compared the accuracy of clinician diagnosis of COVID-19 against RT-PCR in a general adult population. METHODS: COVID-19 diagnosis data by 30th September 2021 for participants in an ongoing population-based cohort study of adults in Western Sweden were retrieved from registers, based on positive RT-PCR and clinician diagnosis using recommended ICD-10 codes. We calculated accuracy measures of clinician diagnosis using RT-PCR as reference for all subjects and stratified by age, gender, BMI, and comorbidity collected pre-COVID-19. RESULTS: Of 42,621 subjects, 3,936 (9.2%) and 5705 (13.4%) had had COVID-19 identified by RT-PCR and clinician diagnosis, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of clinician diagnosis against RT-PCR were 78% (95%CI 77-80%) and 93% (95%CI 93-93%), respectively. Positive predictive value (PPV) was 54% (95%CI 53-55%), while negative predictive value (NPV) was 98% (95%CI 98-98%) and Youden's index 71% (95%CI 70-72%). These estimates were similar between men and women, across age groups, BMI categories, and between patients with and without asthma. However, while specificity, NPV, and Youden's index were similar between patients with and without chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), sensitivity was slightly higher in patients with (84% [95%CI 74-90%]) than those without (78% [95%CI 77-79%]) COPD. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of clinician diagnosis for COVID-19 is adequate, regardless of gender, age, BMI, and asthma, and thus can be used for screening purposes to supplement RT-PCR.

Nutrient supplementation for prevention of viral respiratory tract infections in healthy subjects: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

It remains uncertain as to whether nutrient supplementation for the general population considered healthy could be useful in the prevention of RTIs, such as COVID-19. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the evidence was evaluated for primary prevention of any viral respiratory tract infection (RTI) such as SARS-CoV-2, through supplementation of nutrients with a recognized role in immune function: multiple micronutrients, vitamin A, folic acid, vitamin B12, C, D, E, beta-carotene, zinc, iron and long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids. The search produced 15,163 records of which 93 papers (based on 115 studies) met the inclusion criteria, resulting in 199,055 subjects (191,636 children and 7,419 adults) from 37 countries. Sixty-three studies were included in the meta-analyses, which was performed for children and adults separately. By stratifying the meta-analysis by world regions, only studies performed in Asia showed a significant but heterogeneous protective effect of zinc supplementation on RTIs (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.7-0.96, I2  = 79.1%, p = .000). Vitamin D supplementation in adults significantly decreased the incidence of RTI (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.79-0.99, p = .272), particularly in North America (RR 0.82 95% CI 0.68-0.97), but not in Europe or Oceania. Supplementation of nutrients in the general population has either no or at most a very limited effect on prevention of RTIs. Zinc supplementation appears protective for children in Asia, whilst vitamin D may protect adults in the USA and Canada. In 10/115 (8.7%) studies post-hoc analyses based on stratification for nutritional status was performed. In only one study zinc supplementation was found to be more effective in children with low zinc serum as compared to children with normal zinc serum levels.

Impact of COVID-19 national lockdown on asthma exacerbations: interrupted time-series analysis of English primary care data.

BACKGROUND: The impact of COVID-19 and ensuing national lockdown on asthma exacerbations is unclear. METHODS: We conducted an interrupted time-series (lockdown on 23 March 2020 as point of interruption) analysis in asthma cohort identified using a validated algorithm from a national-level primary care database, the Optimum Patient Care Database. We derived asthma exacerbation rates for every week and compared exacerbation rates in the period: January to August 2020 with a pre-COVID-19 period and January to August 2016-2019. Exacerbations were defined as asthma-related hospital attendance/admission (including accident and emergency visit), or an acute course of oral corticosteroids with evidence of respiratory review, as recorded in primary care. We used a generalised least squares modelling approach and stratified the analyses by age, sex, English region and healthcare setting. RESULTS: From a database of 9 949 387 patients, there were 100 165 patients with asthma who experienced at least one exacerbation during 2016-2020. Of 278 996 exacerbation episodes, 49 938 (17.9%) required hospital visit. Comparing pre-lockdown to post-lockdown period, we observed a statistically significant reduction in the level (-0.196 episodes per person-year; p<0.001; almost 20 episodes for every 100 patients with asthma per year) of exacerbation rates across all patients. The reductions in level in stratified analyses were: 0.005-0.244 (healthcare setting, only those without hospital attendance/admission were significant), 0.210-0.277 (sex), 0.159-0.367 (age), 0.068-0.590 (region). CONCLUSIONS: There has been a significant reduction in attendance to primary care for asthma exacerbations during the pandemic. This reduction was observed in all age groups, both sexes and across most regions in England.