300 million years apart: the extreme case of macromorphological skeletal convergence between deltocyathids and a turbinoliid coral (Anthozoa, Scleractinia).

The integration of morphological and molecular lines of evidence has enabled the family Deltocyathidae to be erected to accommodate Deltocyathus species that were previously ascribed to the family Caryophylliidae. However, although displaying the same morphological characteristics as other species of Deltocyathus , molecular data suggested that D. magnificus was phylogenetically distant from Deltocyathidae, falling within the family Turbinoliidae instead. To elucidate the enigmatic evolutionary history of this species and skeletal microstructural features, the phylogenetic relationships of Deltocyathidae and Turbinoliidae were investigated using nuclear ultraconserved and exon loci and complete mitochondrial genomes. Both nuclear and mitochondrial phylogenomic reconstructions confirmed the position of D. magnificus within turbinolids. Furthermore, a novel mitochondrial gene order was uncovered for Deltocyathidae species. This gene order was not present in Turbinoliidae or in D. magnificus that both have the scleractinian canonical gene order, further indicating the taxonomic utility of mitochondrial gene order. D. magnificus is therefore formally moved to the family Turbinoliidae and accommodated in a new genus (Dennantotrochus Kitahara, Vaga & Stolarski, gen. nov.). Surprisingly, turbinolids and deltocyathids do not differ in microstructural organisation of the skeleton that consists of densely packed, individualised rapid accretion deposits and thickening deposits composed of fibres perpendicular to the skeleton surface. Therefore, although both families are clearly evolutionarily divergent, macromorphological features indicate a case of skeletal convergence while these may still share conservative biomineralisation mechanisms. ZooBank: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:5F1C0E25-3CC6-4D1F-B1F0-CD9D0014678E.

Advancing outbreak simulation training: a collaborative pilot study for dual-specialty medical trainees and infection prevention and control professionals.

BACKGROUND: In response to identified gaps in infection prevention and control (IPC) training within Scotland, a Short Life Working Group initiated an innovative outbreak simulation training programme. AIM: To enhance the knowledge and confidence of medical microbiology and infectious diseases trainees and IPC professionals in managing healthcare-associated infection (HAI) outbreaks, employing the National Infection Prevention and Control Manual guidelines. METHODS: Participants completed prerequisite online training in epidemiology and surveillance before engaging in a meticulously crafted vancomycin-resistant enterococci outbreak simulation, which mirrored a real-life incident and adhered to the standards set by the Association for Simulated Practice in Healthcare. The programme incorporated Kolb's experiential learning cycle, fostering an authentic and engaging learning environment. A total of 41 individuals participated in the synchronous online training phase, with eight individuals involved in the pilot outbreak simulation. Evaluation of the training's efficacy followed Kirkpatrick's model, combining quantitative (five-point Likert scales) and qualitative (open-ended questions and participant reflections) data collection methods. FINDINGS: Results demonstrated significant improvements in participants' knowledge, skills, and confidence in outbreak management. Feedback highlighted the realism and educational value of the simulation, with 100% agreement on its efficacy in enhancing outbreak management capabilities. CONCLUSION: The success of this pilot study underscores the potential of simulation training in IPC and paves the way for broader implementation. It emphasizes the effectiveness of structured, experiential learning in equipping healthcare professionals with practical skills and confidence for managing complex HAI outbreaks, contributing to a more competent and prepared workforce.

Caryophylliids (Anthozoa, Scleractinia) and mitochondrial gene order: Insights from mitochondrial and nuclear phylogenomics.

Molecularly, the family Caryophylliidae is polyphyletic and different sets of genetic data converge towards a consensus that a taxonomic review of this family is necessary. Overall, the order of genes in the mitochondrial genome (mitogenome) together with DNA sequences have been used to successfully untangle evolutionary relationships in several groups of organisms. Published mitogenomes of two caryophylliid genera (Desmophyllum and Solenosmilia) present a transposition of the gene block containing cob, nad2, and nad6, which is located between nad5 5' exon and trnW, while that of Polycyathus chaishanensis presents the same gene order as the majority of scleractinian corals. In molecular-based evolutionary reconstructions, caryophylliids that have the mitochondrial gene rearrangement were recovered as a monophyletic lineage ("true" caryophylliids), while members of the genus Polycyathus were placed in a different position. In this study, additional mitogenomes of this family were assembled and included in evolutionary reconstructions of Scleractinia in order to improve our understanding on whether the mitogenome gene rearrangement is limited to and, therefore, could be a synapomorphy of the actual members of Caryophylliidae. Specimens of Caryophyllia scobinosa, Premocyathus sp., Heterocyathus sulcatus, and Trochocyathus caryophylloides, as well as Desmophyllum pertusum and Solenosmilia variabilis from the Southwest Atlantic were sequenced using Illumina platforms. Then, mitochondrial genomes were assembled and annotated, and nuclear datasets were recovered in-silico from assembled contigs using a previously published set of baits. Evolutionary reconstructions were performed using mitochondrial and nuclear datasets and based on Maximum Likelihood and Bayesian Inference. Obtained mitogenomes are circular and range between 15,816 and 18,225 bp in size and from 30.76% to 36.63% in GC content. The gene rearrangement is only seen in C. scobinosa, D. pertusum, Premocyathus sp., and S. variabilis, which were recovered as a monophyletic clade in both mitochondrial and nuclear phylogenies. On the other hand, the "caryophylliids" with the canonical mitogenome gene order were not recovered within this clade. Differences in features of the skeleton of "true" caryophylliids in comparison to traditional members of the family were observed and offer further support that the gene rearrangement might be seen as a synapomorphy of family Caryophylliidae.

Stylasterids (Hydrozoa: Stylasteridae) from Mar del Plata submarine canyon and adjacent area (southwestern Atlantic), with a key to the species off Argentina.

The Argentine continental margin is a poorly explored area as regards its benthic biodiversity. Few works have been made near the Brazil-Malvinas confluence (around 38° S) regarding corals, especially in deep waters (over 1000 m). Hitherto 17 species of stylasterids are known from southwestern Atlantic (SWA) off Argentina. Fourteen species of stylasterids collected from the Mar del Plata submarine canyon and adjacent area in years 2012 and 2013 at depths between 800 and 2200 m are discussed, including the descriptions of 13 of them. The geographic distribution of six species and bathymetric range of occurrence of two species are broadened in this work. Stations where most specimens were collected are located in areas where sedimentation is known to be scarce. Species in common between the study area and the Antarctic region, south of Chile, South Africa, New Zealand and New Caledonia suggest the Circumpolar Antarctic Current and the Malvinas Current are the means for dispersion. A key of identification of all stylasterid species off Argentina is included.

The long-term impact of the Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) program on leprosy incidence: A modelling study.

BACKGROUND: The Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) program explored the feasibility and impact of contact tracing and the provision of single dose rifampicin (SDR) to eligible contacts of newly diagnosed leprosy patients in Brazil, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Tanzania. As the impact of the programme is difficult to establish in the short term, we apply mathematical modelling to predict its long-term impact on the leprosy incidence. METHODOLOGY: The individual-based model SIMCOLEP was calibrated and validated to the historic leprosy incidence data in the study areas. For each area, we assessed two scenarios: 1) continuation of existing routine activities as in 2014; and 2) routine activities combined with LPEP starting in 2015. The number of contacts per index patient screened varied from 1 to 36 between areas. Projections were made until 2040. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In all areas, the LPEP program increased the number of detected cases in the first year(s) of the programme as compared to the routine programme, followed by a faster reduction afterwards with increasing benefit over time. LPEP could accelerate the reduction of the leprosy incidence by up to six years as compared to the routine programme. The impact of LPEP varied by area due to differences in the number of contacts per index patient included and differences in leprosy epidemiology and routine control programme. CONCLUSIONS: The LPEP program contributes significantly to the reduction of the leprosy incidence and could potentially accelerate the interruption of transmission. It would be advisable to include contact tracing/screening and SDR in routine leprosy programmes.

Leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis with single-dose rifampicin (LPEP): an international feasibility programme.

BACKGROUND: Innovative approaches are required for leprosy control to reduce cases and curb transmission of Mycobacterium leprae. Early case detection, contact screening, and chemoprophylaxis are the most promising tools. We aimed to generate evidence on the feasibility of integrating contact tracing and administration of single-dose rifampicin (SDR) into routine leprosy control activities. METHODS: The leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis (LPEP) programme was an international, multicentre feasibility study implemented within the leprosy control programmes of Brazil, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Tanzania. LPEP explored the feasibility of combining three key interventions: systematically tracing contacts of individuals newly diagnosed with leprosy; screening the traced contacts for leprosy; and administering SDR to eligible contacts. Outcomes were assessed in terms of number of contacts traced, screened, and SDR administration rates. FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 2015, and Aug 1, 2019, LPEP enrolled 9170 index patients and listed 179 769 contacts, of whom 174 782 (97·2%) were successfully traced and screened. Of those screened, 22 854 (13·1%) were excluded from SDR mainly because of health reasons and age. Among those excluded, 810 were confirmed as new patients (46 per 10 000 contacts screened). Among the eligible screened contacts, 1182 (0·7%) refused prophylactic treatment with SDR. Overall, SDR was administered to 151 928 (86·9%) screened contacts. No serious adverse events were reported. INTERPRETATION: Post-exposure prophylaxis with SDR is safe; can be integrated into different leprosy control programmes with minimal additional efforts once contact tracing has been established; and is generally well accepted by index patients, their contacts, and health-care workers. The programme has also invigorated local leprosy control through the availability of a prophylactic intervention; therefore, we recommend rolling out SDR in all settings where contact tracing and screening have been established. FUNDING: Novartis Foundation.

Leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis with single-dose rifampicin (LPEP): an international feasibility programme

Background: Innovative approaches are required for leprosy control to reduce cases and curb transmission of Mycobacterium leprae. Early case detection, contact screening, and chemoprophylaxis are the most promising tools. We aimed to generate evidence on the feasibility of integrating contact tracing and administration of single-dose rifampicin (SDR) into routine leprosy control activities. Methods The leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis (LPEP) programme was an international, multicentre feasibility study implemented within the leprosy control programmes of Brazil, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Tanzania. LPEP explored the feasibility of combining three key interventions: systematically tracing contacts of individuals newly diagnosed with leprosy; screening the traced contacts for leprosy; and administering SDR to eligible contacts. Outcomes were assessed in terms of number of contacts traced, screened, and SDR administration rates. Findings Between Jan 1, 2015, and Aug 1, 2019, LPEP enrolled 9170 index patients and listed 179 769 contacts, of whom 174782 (97·2%) were successfully traced and screened. Of those screened, 22 854 (13·1%) were excluded from SDR mainly because of health reasons and age. Among those excluded, 810 were confirmed as new patients (46 per 10 000 contacts screened). Among the eligible screened contacts, 1182 (0·7%) refused prophylactic treatment with SDR. Overall, SDR was administered to 151 928 (86·9%) screened contacts. No serious adverse events were reported. Interpretation Post-exposure prophylaxis with SDR is safe; can be integrated into different leprosy control programmes with minimal additional efforts once contact tracing has been established; and is generally well accepted by index patients, their contacts, and health-care workers. The programme has also invigorated local leprosy control through the availability of a prophylactic intervention; therefore, we recommend rolling out SDR in all settings where contact tracing and screening have been established(AU).

The long-term impact of the leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis (LPEP) program on leprosy incidence: a modelling study

The Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) program explored the feasibility and impact of contact tracing and the provision of SDR to eligible contacts of newly diagnosed leprosy patients in states or districts of Brazil, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Tanzania. This study investigated the long-term impact of the LPEP program on the leprosy new case detection rate (NCDR). Our results show that LPEP could reduce the NCDR beyond the impact of the routine leprosy control programme and that many new cases could be prevented. The benefit of LPEP increases gradually over time. LPEP could accelerate the time of reaching predicted NCDR levels of 2040 under routine program by up to six years. Furthermore, we highlighted how the impact varies between countries due to differences in the number of contacts per index patient screened and differences in leprosy epidemiology and national control programme. Generally, including both household contacts and neighbours (> 20 contacts per index patient) would yield the highest impact.

A comprehensive research agenda for zero leprosy.

BACKGROUND: Leprosy control achieved dramatic success in the 1980s-1990s with the implementation of short course multidrug therapy, which reduced the global prevalence of leprosy to less than 1 in 10 000 population. However, a period of relative stagnation in leprosy control followed this achievement, and only limited further declines in the global number of new cases reported have been achieved over the past decade. MAIN TEXT: In 2016, major stakeholders called for the development of an innovative and comprehensive leprosy strategy aimed at reducing the incidence of leprosy, lowering the burden of disability and discrimination, and interrupting transmission. This led to the establishment of the Global Partnership for Zero Leprosy (GPZL) in 2018, with partners aligned around a shared Action Framework committed to achieving the WHO targets by 2030 through national leprosy program capacity-building, resource mobilisation and an enabling research agenda. GPZL convened over 140 experts from more than 20 countries to develop a research agenda to achieve zero leprosy. The result is a detailed research agenda focusing on diagnostics, mapping, digital technology and innovation, disability, epidemiological modelling and investment case, implementation research, stigma, post exposure prophylaxis and transmission, and vaccines. This research agenda is aligned with the research priorities identified by other stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS: Developing and achieving consensus on the research agenda for zero leprosy is a significant step forward for the leprosy community. In a next step, research programmes must be developed, with individual components of the research agenda requiring distinct expertise, varying in resource needs, and operating over different timescales. Moving toward zero leprosy now requires partner alignment and new investments at all stages of the research process, from discovery to implementation.

Prolaxis post-exposición para lepra con dosis única de rifampicina: manual para su implementación / No disponible

OBJETIVO: La profilaxis post-exposición de la lepra con dosis única de rifampicina (SDR-PEP) ha demostrado ser efectiva y aplicable y está recomendada por la OMS desde 2018. Esta caja de herramientas SDR-PEP se desarrolló a través de la experiencia de la profilaxis lepra post-eliminación (LPEP). Se ha diseñado para facilitar y estandarizar la implementación del seguimiento de contactos y la administración SDR-PEP en regiones y países que iniciaron la intervención. RESULTADOS: Se desarrollaron cuatro instrumentos, incorporando la evidencia existente actual para SDR-PEP y los métodos y enseñanzas del proyecto LPEP en ocho países. (1) El conjunto de diapositivas Powerpoint política/apoyo que ayudarán a los programadores sobre la evidencia, practicabilidad y recursos necesarios para SDR-PEP, (2) La colección de diapositivas PowerPoint sobre formación e implementación en el campo para formar al personal implicado en el seguimiento de contactos y PEP con SDR, (3) manual genérico de campo SDR-PEP que puede ser usado para formar un protocolo específico de campo para el seguimiento de contactos y SDR-PEP como referencia para el personal directamente implicado. Finalmente, (4) el manual director SDR-PEP, que resume los distintos componentes de la caja de herramientas y contiene las instrucciones para su uso. CONCLUSIÓN: En respuesta al interés manifestado por varios países de implementar el seguimiento de contactos de lepra con PEP con SDR, con las recomendaciones OMS sobre SDR-PEP, esta caja de herramientas basada en la evidencia concreta pero flexible, ha sido diseñada para servir a los directores de programas nacionales de lepra con un medio práctico para trasladar los planteamientos a la práctica. Está disponible gratuitamente en la página de Infolep y actualizada constantemente: https://www.leprosy-information.org/keytopic/leprosy-post-exposure-prophylaxis-lpep-programme

OBJECTIVE: Leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis with single-dose rifampicin (SDRPEP) has proven effective and feasible, and is recommended by WHO since 2018. This SDR-PEP toolkit was developed through the experience of the leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis (LPEP) programme. It has been designed to facilitate and standardise the implementation of contact tracing and SDR-PEP administration in regions and countries that start the intervention. RESULTS: Four tools were developed, incorporating the current evidence for SDRPEP and the methods and learnings from the LPEP project in eight countries. (1) the SDR-PEP policy/advocacy PowerPoint slide deck which will help to inform policy makers about the evidence, practicalities and resources needed for SDR-PEP, (2) the SDR-PEP field implementation training PowerPoint slide deck to be used to train front line staff to implement contact tracing and PEP with SDR, (3) the SDR-PEP generic field guide which can be used as a basis to create a location specific field protocol for contact tracing and SDR-PEP serving as a reference for frontline field staff. Finally, (4) the SDR-PEP toolkit guide, summarising the different components of the toolkit and providing instructions on its optimal use. CONCLUSION: In response to interest expressed by countries to implement contact tracing and leprosy PEP with SDR in the light of the WHO recommendation of SDRPEP, this evidence-based, concrete yet flexible toolkit has been designed to serve national leprosy programme managers and support them with the practical means to translate policy into practice. The toolkit is freely accessible on the Infolep homepages and updated as required: https://www.leprosy-information.org/keytopic/leprosy-postexposure-prophylaxis-lpep-programme

Prolaxis post-exposición para lepra con dosis única de rifampicina: manual para su implementación / Post-exposure prolaxis for leprosy with a single dose of rifampicin: a manual for its implementation

Objetivo: La profilaxis post-exposición de la lepra con dosis única de rifampicina (SDR-PEP) ha demostrado ser efectiva y aplicable y está recomendada por la OMS desde 2018. Esta caja de herramientas SDR-PEP se desarrolló a través de la experiencia de la profilaxis lepra post-eliminación (LPEP). Se ha diseñado para facilitar y estandarizar la implementación del seguimiento de contactos y la administración SDR-PEP en regiones y países que iniciaron la intervención. Resultados: Se desarrollaron cuatro instrumentos, incorporando la evidencia existente actual para SDR-PEP y los métodos y enseñanzas del proyecto LPEP en ocho países. (1) El conjunto de diapositivas Powerpoint política/apoyo que ayudarán a los programadores sobre la evidencia, practicabilidad y recursos necesarios para SDR-PEP, (2) La colección de diapositivas PowerPoint sobre formación e implementación en el campo para formar al personal implicado en el seguimiento de contactos y PEP con SDR, (3) manual genérico de campo SDR-PEP que puede ser usado para formar un protocolo específico de campo para el seguimiento de contactos y SDR-PEP como referencia para el personal directamente implicado. Finalmente, (4) el manual director SDR-PEP, que resume los distintos componentes de la caja de herramientas y contiene las instrucciones para su uso. Conclusión: En respuesta al interés manifestado por varios países de implementar el seguimiento de contactos de lepra con PEP con SDR, con las recomendaciones OMS sobre SDR-PEP, esta caja de herramientas basada en la evidencia concreta pero flexible, ha sido diseñada para servir a los directores de programas nacionales de lepra con un medio práctico para trasladar los planteamientos a la práctica. Está disponible gratuitamente en la página de Infolep y actualizada constantemente: https://www.leprosy-information.org/keytopic/leprosy-post-exposure-prophylaxis-lpep-programme(AU).

Objective: Leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis with single-dose rifampicin (SDRPEP) has proven effective and feasible, and is recommended by WHO since 2018. This SDR-PEP toolkit was developed through the experience of the leprosy post-exposure prophylaxis (LPEP) programme. It has been designed to facilitate and standardise the implementation of contact tracing and SDR-PEP administration in regions and countries that start the intervention. Results: Four tools were developed, incorporating the current evidence for SDRPEP and the methods and learnings from the LPEP project in eight countries. (1) the SDR-PEP policy/advocacy PowerPoint slide deck which will help to inform policy makers about the evidence, practicalities and resources needed for SDR-PEP, (2) the SDR-PEP field implementation training PowerPoint slide deck to be used to train front line staff to implement contact tracing and PEP with SDR, (3) the SDR-PEP generic field guide which can be used as a basis to create a location specific field protocol for contact tracing and SDR-PEP serving as a reference for frontline field staff. Finally, (4) the SDR-PEP toolkit guide, summarising the different components of the toolkit and providing instructions on its optimal use. Conclusion: In response to interest expressed by countries to implement contact tracing and leprosy PEP with SDR in the light of the WHO recommendation of SDRPEP, this evidence-based, concrete yet flexible toolkit has been designed to serve national leprosy programme managers and support them with the practical means to translate policy into practice. The toolkit is freely accessible on the Infolep homepages and updated as required: https://www.leprosy-information.org/keytopic/leprosy-postexposure-prophylaxis-lpep-programme(AU).

Establishing a baseline for a national paediatric antimicrobial stewardship programme.

BACKGROUND: The majority of antimicrobial stewardship programmes focus on prescribing in adult populations; however, there is a recognized need for targeted paediatric antimicrobial stewardship to improve the quality and safety of prescribing amongst this patient group. OBJECTIVES: To describe the current epidemiology of antimicrobial prescribing in paediatric inpatient populations in Scotland to establish a baseline of evidence and identify priority areas for quality improvement to support a national paediatric antimicrobial stewardship programme. METHODS: A total of 559 paediatric inpatients were surveyed during the Scottish national point prevalence survey of healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial prescribing, 2016. The prevalence of antimicrobial prescribing was calculated and characteristics of antimicrobial prescribing were described as proportions and compared between specialist hospitals and paediatric wards in acute hospitals. RESULTS: Prevalence of antimicrobial use in paediatric inpatients was 35.4% (95% CI = 31.6%-39.4%). Treatment of community- and hospital-acquired infections accounted for 47.1% and 20.7% of antimicrobial use, respectively, with clinical sepsis being the most common diagnosis and gentamicin the most frequently prescribed antimicrobial for the treatment of infection. The reason for prescribing was documented in the notes for 86.5% of all prescriptions and, of those assessed for compliance against local policy, 92.9% were considered compliant. CONCLUSIONS: Data from national prevalence surveys are advantageous when developing antimicrobial stewardship programmes. Results have highlighted differences in the prescribing landscape between paediatric inpatient populations in specialist hospitals and acute hospitals, and have informed priorities for the national antimicrobial stewardship programme, which reinforces the need for a targeted paediatric antimicrobial stewardship programme.

Barriers and enablers to meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus admission screening in hospitals: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: To reduce the risk of transmission of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), international guidelines recommend admission screening to identify hospital patients at risk of colonization. However, routine monitoring indicates that optimum screening compliance levels are not always achieved. In order to enhance compliance, we must better understand those factors which influence staff screening behaviours. AIM: To identify factors which influence staff compliance with hospital MRSA screening policies. METHODS: A sequential two-stage mixed-methods design applied constructs from normalization process theory and the theoretical domains framework to guide data collection and analysis. Initial qualitative findings informed subsequent development of a national cross-sectional survey of nursing staff (N = 450). Multiple regression modelling identified which barriers and enablers best predict staff compliance. FINDINGS: Three factors were significant in predicting optimum (>90%) compliance with MRSA screening: having MRSA screening routinized within the admission process; category of clinical area; feedback of MRSA screening compliance within the clinical area. Integration of data-sets indicated that organizational systems which 'make doing the right thing easy' influence compliance, as does local ward culture. Embedded values and beliefs regarding the relative (de)prioritization of MRSA screening are important. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study to provide original evidence of barriers and enablers to MRSA screening, applying both sociological and psychological theory. As antimicrobial resistance is a global health concern, these findings have international relevance for screening programmes. Future policy recommendations or behaviour change interventions, based on the insights presented here, could have significant impact upon improving screening compliance.

An enhanced regimen as post-exposure chemoprophylaxis for leprosy: PEP+.

The ongoing transmission of Mycobacterium (M.) leprae reflected in a very slow decline in leprosy incidence, forces us to be innovative and conduct cutting-edge research. Single dose rifampicin (SDR) as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) for contacts of leprosy patients, reduces their risk to develop leprosy by 60%. This is a promising new preventive measure that can be integrated into routine leprosy control programmes, as is being demonstrated in the Leprosy Post-Exposure Programme that is currently ongoing in eight countries.The limited (60%) effectiveness of SDR is likely due to the fact that some contacts have a preclinical infection beyond the early stages for which SDR is not sufficient to prevent the development of clinical signs and symptoms of leprosy. An enhanced regimen, more potent against a higher load of leprosy bacteria, would increase the effectiveness of this preventive measure significantly.The Netherlands Leprosy Relief (NLR) is developing a multi-country study aiming to show that breaking the chain of transmission of M. leprae is possible, evidenced by a dramatic reduction in incidence. In this study the assessment of the effectiveness of an enhanced prophylactic regimen for leprosy is an important component. To define the so called PEP++ regimen for this intervention study, NLR convened an Expert Meeting that was attended by clinical leprologists, public health experts, pharmacologists, dermatologists and microbiologists.The Expert Meeting advised on combinations of available drugs, with known efficacy against leprosy, as well as on the duration of the intake, aiming at a risk reduction of 80-90%. To come to a conclusion the Expert Meeting considered the bactericidal, sterilising and bacteriostatic activity of the potential drugs. The criteria used to determine an optimal enhanced regimen were: effectiveness, safety, acceptability, availability, affordability, feasibility and not inducing drug resistance.The Expert Meeting concluded that the enhanced regimen for the PEP++ study should comprise three standard doses of rifampicin 600 mg (weight adjusted when given to children) plus moxifloxacin 400 mg given at four-weekly intervals. For children and for adults with contraindications for moxifloxacin, moxifloxacin should be replaced by clarithromycin 300 mg (weight adjusted).

Programa post-exposición a la profilaxis de la Lepra (LPEP): Actualización y análisis interno / No disponible

Se requieren nuevos planteamientos para incrementar el control de la lepra, disminuir el número de personas afectadas y cortar la transmisión. Para conseguir este objetivo las mejores soluciones son la detección precoz. El cribaje de contactos y la quimioprofilaxis. El Programa Profilaxis Post-exposición a la Lepra (LPEP) ayuda a demostrar la viabilidad de integrar el rastreo de contactos y dosis única de rifampicina (SDR) en las actividades rutinarias de control de la enfermedad. El programa LPEP está implementado entre los programas de control de la lepra de Brasil, Camboya, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka y Tanzania. Se centra en tres objetivos: rastro de contactos de nuevos pacientes diagnosticados de lepra, cribaje de contactos y administración de SDR a los contactos seleccionados. Las adaptaciones de protocolos países-específicos se refieren a la definición de contacto, edad mínima para SDR y personal implicado. La calidad de la evidencia se mantiene mediante coordinación central, documentación detallada y supervisión. Ya se han completado alrededor de 2 años de trabajo de campo en siete países en julio de 2017. Los 5,941 pacientes índice registrados (89·4% de los registrados) han identificado un total de 123,311 contactos, de los cuales el 99·1% ha sido rastreado y cribado. De entre ellos, se identificaron 406 nuevos pacientes de lepra (329/100,000) y a 10,883 (8·9%) no se les administró SDR por diversos motivos. También 785 contactos (6·7%) rehusó tomar la profilaxis con SDR. En total, se administró SDR al 89·0% de los contactos registrados. La profilaxis post-exposición con SDR es segura; se puede integrar en los programas rutinarios de control de la lepra y es generalmente bien aceptada por el paciente índice, sus contactos y el personal sanitario. El programa también consigue estimular los programas locales de control de la lepra

Innovative approaches are required to further enhance leprosy control, reduce the number of people developing leprosy, and curb transmission. Early case detection, contact screening, and chemoprophylaxis currently is the most promising approach to achieve this goal. The Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) programme generates evidence on the feasibility of integrating contact tracing and single-dose rifampicin (SDR) administration into routine leprosy control activities in different settings. The LPEP programme is implemented within the leprosy control programmes of Brazil, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Tanzania. Focus is on three key interventions: tracing the contacts of newly diagnosed leprosy patients; screening the contacts for leprosy; and administering SDR to eligible contacts. Country-specific protocol adaptations refer to contact definition, minimal age for SDR, and staff involved. Central coordination, detailed documentation and rigorous supervision ensure quality evidence. Around 2 years of field work had been completed in seven countries by July 2017. The 5,941 enrolled index patients (89·4% of the registered) identified a total of 123,311 contacts, of which 99·1% were traced and screened. Among them, 406 new leprosy patients were identified (329/100,000), and 10,883 (8·9%) were excluded from SDR for various reasons. Also, 785 contacts (0·7%) refused the prophylactic treatment with SDR. Overall, SDR was administered to 89·0% of the listed contacts. Post-exposure prophylaxis with SDR is safe; can be integrated into the routines of different leprosy control programmes; and is generally well accepted by index patients, their contacts and the health workforce. The programme has also invigorated local leprosy control

Results from the third Scottish National Prevalence Survey: is a population health approach now needed to prevent healthcare-associated infections?

BACKGROUND: Healthcare-associated infections (HCAIs) are a major public health concern and a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. A robust and current evidence base that is specific to local, national and Europe-wide settings is necessary to inform the development of strategies to reduce HCAI and contain antimicrobial resistance. AIM: To measure the prevalence of HCAI and antimicrobial prescribing and identify key priority areas for interventions to reduce the burden of infection. METHODS: A national rolling point-prevalence survey (PPS) in National Health Service (NHS) acute, NHS non-acute, NHS paediatric, and independent hospitals was carried out between September and November 2016 using the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control protocol designed for the European PPS. FINDINGS: The prevalence of HCAI was 4.6%, 2.7%, and 3.2% in acute adults, paediatric and non-acute patient groups, respectively. The most frequent HCAI types reported in adult patients were urinary tract infection and pneumonia. The prevalence of antimicrobial prescribing was 35.7%, 29.3%, and 13.8% in acute adults, paediatric, and non-acute patient groups, respectively. Respiratory, skin and soft tissue, gastrointestinal, and urinary tract infections were the most common infections being treated at the time of survey. CONCLUSION: HCAI continues to be a public health concern in Scotland. Urinary tract infection and pneumonia continue to place a significant burden on patients and on healthcare delivery, including those that develop in the community and require hospital admission. A broader population health approach which focuses on reducing the risk of infection upstream would reduce these infections in both community and hospital settings.

The Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) programme: update and interim analysis.

Innovative approaches are required to further enhance leprosy control, reduce the number of people developing leprosy, and curb transmission. Early case detection, contact screening, and chemoprophylaxis currently is the most promising approach to achieve this goal. The Leprosy Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (LPEP) programme generates evidence on the feasibility of integrating contact tracing and single-dose rifampicin (SDR) administration into routine leprosy control activities in different settings. The LPEP programme is implemented within the leprosy control programmes of Brazil, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka and Tanzania. Focus is on three key interventions: tracing the contacts of newly diagnosed leprosy patients; screening the contacts for leprosy; and administering SDR to eligible contacts. Country-specific protocol adaptations refer to contact definition, minimal age for SDR, and staff involved. Central coordination, detailed documentation and rigorous supervision ensure quality evidence. Around 2 years of field work had been completed in seven countries by July 2017. The 5,941 enrolled index patients (89·4% of the registered) identified a total of 123,311 contacts, of which 99·1% were traced and screened. Among them, 406 new leprosy patients were identified (329/100,000), and 10,883 (8·9%) were excluded from SDR for various reasons. Also, 785 contacts (0·7%) refused the prophylactic treatment with SDR. Overall, SDR was administered to 89·0% of the listed contacts. Post-exposure prophylaxis with SDR is safe; can be integrated into the routines of different leprosy control programmes; and is generally well accepted by index patients, their contacts and the health workforce. The programme has also invigorated local leprosy control.

An enhanced regimen as post-exposure chemoprophylaxis for leprosy: PEP++

The ongoing transmission of Mycobacterium (M.) leprae reflected in a very slow decline in leprosy incidence, forces us to be innovative and conduct cutting-edge research. Single dose rifampicin (SDR) as post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) for contacts of leprosy patients, reduces their risk to develop leprosy by 60%. This is a promising new preventive measure that can be integrated into routine leprosy control programmes, as is being demonstrated in the Leprosy Post-Exposure Programme that is currently ongoing in eight countries.The limited (60%) effectiveness of SDR is likely due to the fact that some contacts have a preclinical infection beyond the early stages for which SDR is not sufficient to prevent the development of clinical signs and symptoms of leprosy. An enhanced regimen, more potent against a higher load of leprosy bacteria, would increase the effectiveness of this preventive measure significantly.The Netherlands Leprosy Relief (NLR) is developing a multi-country study aiming to show that breaking the chain of transmission of M. leprae is possible, evidenced by a dramatic reduction in incidence. In this study the assessment of the effectiveness of an enhanced prophylactic regimen for leprosy is an important component. To define the so called PEP++ regimen for this intervention study, NLR convened an Expert Meeting that was attended by clinical leprologists, public health experts, pharmacologists, dermatologists and microbiologists.The Expert Meeting advised on combinations of available drugs, with known efficacy against leprosy, as well as on the duration of the intake, aiming at a risk reduction of 80-90%. To come to a conclusion the Expert Meeting considered the bactericidal, sterilising and bacteriostatic activity of the potential drugs. The criteria used to determine an optimal enhanced regimen were: effectiveness, safety, acceptability, availability, affordability, feasibility and not inducing drug resistance.The Expert Meeting concluded that the enhanced regimen for the PEP++ study should comprise three standard doses of rifampicin 600 mg (weight adjusted when given to children) plus moxifloxacin 400 mg given at four-weekly intervals. For children and for adults with contraindications for moxifloxacin, moxifloxacin should be replaced by clarithromycin 300 mg (weight adjusted).

Multidrug therapy for leprosy: a game changer on the path to elimination.

Leprosy is present in more than 100 countries, where it remains a major cause of peripheral neuropathy and disability. Attempts to eliminate the disease have faced various obstacles, including characteristics of the causative bacillus Mycobacterium leprae: the long incubation period, limited knowledge about its mode of transmission, and its poor growth on culture media. Fortunately, the leprosy bacillus is sensitive to several antibiotics. The first antibiotic to be widely used for leprosy treatment was dapsone in the 1950s, which had to be taken over several years and was associated with increasing bacterial resistance. Therefore, in 1981, WHO recommended that all registered patients with leprosy should receive combination therapy with three antibiotics: rifampicin, clofazimine, and dapsone. Global implementation of this highly effective multidrug therapy took about 15 years. In 1985, 5·3 million patients were receiving multidrug therapy; by 1991, this figure had decreased to 3·1 million (a decrease of 42%) and, by 2000, to 597 232 (a decrease of almost 90%). This reduction in the number of patients registered for treatment was due to shortening of the treatment regimen and achievement of 100% coverage with multidrug therapy. This achievement, which owed much to WHO and the donors of the multidrug therapy components, prompted WHO in 1991 to set a global target of less than one case per 10 000 population by 2000 to eliminate the disease as a public health problem. All but 15 countries achieved this target. Since 2000, about 250 000 new cases of leprosy have been detected every year. We believe an all-out campaign by a global leprosy coalition is needed to bring that figure down to zero.