Measuring the global response to antimicrobial resistance, 2020-21: a systematic governance analysis of 114 countries.

BACKGROUND: Understanding strategic commitments and policy responses to overcome antimicrobial resistance at the national, regional, and global levels is required to evaluate current progress and direct future planning. National action plans (NAPs) are the primary mechanism for guiding national strategy and action for antimicrobial resistance governance. Although several NAPs have been developed, no comprehensive content analysis of these plans exists. Using a governance framework, we aimed to assess all publicly available NAPs on antimicrobial resistance. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the contents of NAPs on antimicrobial resistance from 114 countries, applying a governance framework containing 18 domains and 54 indicators in three integral areas: policy design, implementation tools, and monitoring and evaluation. As well as manually searching NAPs and doing online and literature searches that were relevant to specific indicators from repository inception to June 1, 2022, several data sources were used to generate scores, including the Tripartite Antimicrobial Resistance Country Self-Assessment Survey, the Global Antimicrobial Resistance and Use Surveillance System, the Global Antimicrobial Resistance Research and Development Hub, and various WHO datasets. NAPs were included if the country had also submitted the NAP to the Tripartite Antimicrobial Resistance Country Self-Assessment Survey 2020-21, if the NAP was retrievable through a publicly accessible database or website, and if the NAP was either published in English or eligible for machine translation. Three researchers independently reviewed each NAP and were initially blinded to the evaluations of other researchers. They generated a score using a quantification system for each of 54 indicators. The Cochrane protocol for ensuring reliability was followed. The three researchers were then unblinded and met to resolve any disagreements in scoring to reach a consensus agreement. In each case of discrepancy, consensus was reached between the researchers. We developed criteria to standardise the process of quantifying each indicator. We also weighted and collated relevant national data from various sources to generate composite scores concordant with the key governance areas. We transformed these data to a scale of 0 (worst) to 100 (best), ranked countries on the basis of their mean scores, and used descriptive statistics to analyse global and regional trends. FINDINGS: 306 NAPs were identified and 114 were eligible for analysis. Between 2020 and 2021, the mean antimicrobial resistance governance score was 51 (SD 14). Norway had the highest governance score (mean 85 [SD 32]), and the Federated States of Micronesia had the lowest governance score (28 [37]). The highest scoring domain was participation (83 [16]), and the lowest scoring domains were accountability (30 [18]) and feedback mechanism (30 [25]). Domains relating to policy design (55 [13]) and implementation tools (54 [17]) scored similarly, whereas monitoring and evaluation (38 [20]) efforts were lower. INTERPRETATION: International efforts to control antimicrobial resistance varied considerably between countries. Monitoring and evaluation efforts need improving for continuous understanding of national and international progress. International response might not be commensurate with the scale and severity of antimicrobial resistance. FUNDING: None.

How the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands stalled COVID-19 for 22 months and managed its first significant community transmission.

Objective: The Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) is a remote Pacific island territory with a population of 47 329 that successfully prevented the significant introduction of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) until late 2021. This study documents how the response to the introduction of COVID-19 in CNMI in 2021 was conducted with limited resources without overwhelming local clinical capacity or compromising health service delivery for the population. Methods: Data from COVID-19 case investigations, contact tracing, the Commonwealth's immunization registry and whole genome sequencing were collated and analysed as part of this study. Results: Between 26 March 2020 and 31 December 2021, 3281 cases and 14 deaths due to COVID-19 were reported in CNMI (case fatality rate, 0.4%). While notification rates were highest among younger age groups, hospitalization and mortality rates were disproportionately greater among those aged > 50 years and among the unvaccinated. The first widespread community transmission in CNMI was detected in October 2021, with genomic epidemiology and contact tracing data indicating a single introduction event involving the AY.25 lineage and subsequent rapid community spread. Vaccination coverage was high before widespread transmission occurred in October 2021 and increased further over the study period. Discussion: Robust preparedness and strong leadership generated resilience within the public health sector such that COVID-19 did not overwhelm CNMI's health system as it did in other jurisdictions and countries around the world. At no point was hospital capacity exceeded, and all patients received adequate care without the need for health-care rationing.

Unique pattern of COVID-19 infection in the State of Hawai'i.

This is a brief report on an unusual observation regarding COVID-19 cases. The State of Hawaii is one of the most remote of the Pacific islands and the population is approximately 1.4 million. The racial and ethnic diversity is very high. For example, white Caucasians comprise ∼25%, Asians including Japanese, Chinese, and other Asians account for ∼30%, Hawaiians for 20%, and Pacific Islanders mostly from Micronesia and Samoa comprise ∼4%. We discovered that the COVID-19 rate in the latter group was up to 10 times that in all of the other groups combined and they accounted for almost 30% of cases. Moreover, we are unaware of COVID-19 transmission from Pacific Islanders to islanders with other ethnicities. Thus, there is an epidemic within the epidemic in Hawai'i.

Association between the spread of COVID-19 and weather-climatic parameters.

OBJECTIVE: To explore whether the climate has played a role in the COVID-19 outbreak, we compared virus lethality in countries closer to the Equator with others. Lethality in European territories and in territories of some nations with a non-temperate climate was also compared. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Lethality was calculated as the rate of deaths in a determinate moment from the outbreak of the pandemic out of the total of identified positives for COVID-19 in a given area/nation, based on the COVID-John Hopkins University website. Lethality of countries located within the 5th parallels North/South on 6 April and 6 May 2020, was compared with that of all the other countries. Lethality in the European areas of The Netherlands, France and the United Kingdom was also compared to the territories of the same nations in areas with a non-temperate climate. RESULTS: A lower lethality rate of COVID-19 was found in Equatorial countries both on April 6 (OR=0.72 CI 95% 0.66-0.80) and on May 6 (OR=0.48, CI 95% 0.47-0.51), with a strengthening over time of the protective effect. A trend of higher risk in European vs. non-temperate areas was found on April 6, but a clear difference was evident one month later: France (OR=0.13, CI 95% 0.10-0.18), The Netherlands (OR=0.5, CI 95% 0.3-0.9) and the UK (OR=0.2, CI 95% 0.01-0.51). This result does not seem to be totally related to the differences in age distribution of different sites. CONCLUSIONS: The study does not seem to exclude that the lethality of COVID-19 may be climate sensitive. Future studies will have to confirm these clues, due to potential confounding factors, such as pollution, population age, and exposure to malaria.