Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
BMC Med ; 14: 2, 2016 Jan 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26732586

ABSTRACT

Prior to the 2014-2015 Ebola outbreak, infection prevention and control (IPC) activities in Liberian healthcare facilities were basic. There was no national IPC guidance, nor dedicated staff at any level of government or healthcare facility (HCF) to ensure the implementation of best practices. Efforts to improve IPC early in the outbreak were ad hoc and messaging was inconsistent. In September 2014, at the height of the outbreak, the national IPC Task Force was established with a Ministry of Health (MoH) mandate to coordinate IPC response activities. A steering group of the Task Force, including representatives of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), supported MoH leadership in implementing standardized messaging and IPC training for the health workforce. This structure, and the activities implemented under this structure, played a crucial role in the implementation of IPC practices and successful containment of the outbreak. Moving forward, a nationwide culture of IPC needs to be maintained through this governance structure in Liberia's health system to prevent and respond to future outbreaks.


Subject(s)
Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control , Hemorrhagic Fever, Ebola/epidemiology , Hemorrhagic Fever, Ebola/prevention & control , Infection Control/organization & administration , Advisory Committees/organization & administration , Health Personnel/education , Hemorrhagic Fever, Ebola/transmission , Humans , Infection Control/standards , Internationality , Liberia/epidemiology , Patient Isolation/organization & administration , Patient Isolation/standards , United States , World Health Organization
2.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 64(18): 505-8, 2015 May 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25974636

ABSTRACT

From mid-January to mid-February 2015, all confirmed Ebola virus disease (Ebola) cases that occurred in Liberia were epidemiologically linked to a single index patient from the St. Paul Bridge area of Montserrado County. Of the 22 confirmed patients in this cluster, eight (36%) sought and received care from at least one of 10 non-Ebola health care facilities (HCFs), including clinics and hospitals in Montserrado and Margibi counties, before admission to an Ebola treatment unit. After recognition that three patients in this emerging cluster had received care from a non-Ebola treatment unit, and in response to the risk for Ebola transmission in non-Ebola treatment unit health care settings, a focused infection prevention and control (IPC) rapid response effort for the immediate area was developed to target facilities at increased risk for exposure to a person with Ebola (Ring IPC). The Ring IPC approach, which provided rapid, intensive, and short-term IPC support to HCFs in areas of active Ebola transmission, was an addition to Liberia's proposed longer term national IPC strategy, which focused on providing a comprehensive package of IPC training and support to all HCFs in the country. This report describes possible health care worker exposures to the cluster's eight patients who sought care from an HCF and implementation of the Ring IPC approach. On May 9, 2015, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the end of the Ebola outbreak in Liberia.


Subject(s)
Health Facilities , Hemorrhagic Fever, Ebola/prevention & control , Infection Control/methods , Infection Control/organization & administration , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Cluster Analysis , Female , Health Personnel , Hemorrhagic Fever, Ebola/epidemiology , Humans , Liberia/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Occupational Exposure , Young Adult
3.
Sex Transm Infect ; 89 Suppl 4: iv57-9, 2013 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24202206

ABSTRACT

Although the key focus of this supplement is related to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in a sexually transmitted infection, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, the purpose of this article is to highlight the wider public health impact of AMR and the need for different disciplines of health to coordinate and collaborate in their selection and use of antimicrobial agents. AMR is being detected in health areas ranging from simple drugs used to treat common bacterial infections to the complex formulations used to treat tuberculosis, malaria and HIV infection, and on all continents. Tackling and containing AMR present an ordeal to international and national health authorities on many fronts. In June 2012, WHO launched the WHO Global Action Plan to Control the Spread and Impact of Antimicrobial Resistance in Neisseria gonorrhoeae with a vision to enhance the global response to the prevention, diagnosis and control of N gonorrhoeae infection and mitigate the health impact of AMR through enhanced, sustained, evidence-based and collaborative multisectoral action. This global action plan is positioned within a long-standing commitment of WHO to the issue of AMR with the launch of the Global Strategy on AMR in 2001 and World Health Day on AMR in 2011.


Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Drug Prescriptions/standards , Drug Resistance, Bacterial , Gonorrhea/drug therapy , Neisseria gonorrhoeae/drug effects , World Health Organization , Anti-Bacterial Agents/pharmacology , Gonorrhea/diagnosis , Gonorrhea/microbiology , Guidelines as Topic , Health Policy , Humans
4.
PLoS One ; 7(4): e35797, 2012.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22563403

ABSTRACT

Aerosol generating procedures (AGPs) may expose health care workers (HCWs) to pathogens causing acute respiratory infections (ARIs), but the risk of transmission of ARIs from AGPs is not fully known. We sought to determine the clinical evidence for the risk of transmission of ARIs to HCWs caring for patients undergoing AGPs compared with the risk of transmission to HCWs caring for patients not undergoing AGPs. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, University of York CRD databases, EuroScan, LILACS, Indian Medlars, Index Medicus for SE Asia, international health technology agencies and the Internet in all languages for articles from 01/01/1990 to 22/10/2010. Independent reviewers screened abstracts using pre-defined criteria, obtained full-text articles, selected relevant studies, and abstracted data. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. The outcome of interest was risk of ARI transmission. The quality of evidence was rated using the GRADE system. We identified 5 case-control and 5 retrospective cohort studies which evaluated transmission of SARS to HCWs. Procedures reported to present an increased risk of transmission included [n; pooled OR(95%CI)] tracheal intubation [n = 4 cohort; 6.6 (2.3, 18.9), and n = 4 case-control; 6.6 (4.1, 10.6)], non-invasive ventilation [n = 2 cohort; OR 3.1(1.4, 6.8)], tracheotomy [n = 1 case-control; 4.2 (1.5, 11.5)] and manual ventilation before intubation [n = 1 cohort; OR 2.8 (1.3, 6.4)]. Other intubation associated procedures, endotracheal aspiration, suction of body fluids, bronchoscopy, nebulizer treatment, administration of O2, high flow O2, manipulation of O2 mask or BiPAP mask, defibrillation, chest compressions, insertion of nasogastric tube, and collection of sputum were not significant. Our findings suggest that some procedures potentially capable of generating aerosols have been associated with increased risk of SARS transmission to HCWs or were a risk factor for transmission, with the most consistent association across multiple studies identified with tracheal intubation.


Subject(s)
Aerosols , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/transmission , Acute Disease , Databases, Factual , Health Personnel , Humans , Infectious Disease Transmission, Patient-to-Professional/statistics & numerical data , Intubation , Risk Factors , Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus/isolation & purification , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/virology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...