Corrigendum: Regional disparities in the prevalence and correlated factors of myopia in children and adolescents in Gansu, China.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1375080.].

Infection prevention and control in conflict-affected areas in northeast Syria: A cross-sectional study.

Objectives: In northeastern Syria (NES), the adherence of health care facilities to infection prevention and control (IPC) standards remains underexplored. This study evaluates the IPC performance of various health facilities against World Health Organization (WHO) benchmarks using the IPC Assessment Framework (IPCAF) and the Hand Hygiene Self-Assessment Framework (HHSAF). Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 33 health care facilities, including primary (PHC), secondary (SHC), and tertiary health care centres (THC). Data were collected via on-site evaluations using the IPCAF and HHSAF tools. Results: A significant 91% of facilities did not meet half of the WHO IPC minimum requirements. Specifically, 57% of PHCs met 26-50% of the standards, while none exceeded 75%. Among SHCs, 71% met 26-50% of the standards, while 44% of THCs fell within this range. Notably, 81.8% of facilities were classified as 'inadequate' per the IPCAF, with none achieving 'intermediate' or 'advanced' levels. The HHSAF results were similarly concerning, with 34.4% deemed 'inadequate' and 65.6% at the 'basic' level. A weak positive correlation (0.137) was found between IPCAF and HHSAF scores. Conclusions: NES health care facilities demonstrate substantial deficiencies in IPC compliance, with critical gaps in IPC programmes, health care-associated infection surveillance, and training. Urgent interventions are required to enhance IPC practices, leveraging local strengths and fostering international collaborations to improve patient safety and health care quality in the region.

Meta-analysis of hybrid immunity to mitigate the risk of Omicron variant reinfection.

Background: Hybrid immunity (a combination of natural and vaccine-induced immunity) provides additional immune protection against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) reinfection. Today, people are commonly infected and vaccinated; hence, hybrid immunity is the norm. However, the mitigation of the risk of Omicron variant reinfection by hybrid immunity and the durability of its protection remain uncertain. This meta-analysis aims to explore hybrid immunity to mitigate the risk of Omicron variant reinfection and its protective durability to provide a new evidence-based basis for the development and optimization of immunization strategies and improve the public's awareness and participation in COVID-19 vaccination, especially in vulnerable and at-risk populations. Methods: Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang databases were searched for publicly available literature up to 10 June 2024. Two researchers independently completed the data extraction and risk of bias assessment and cross-checked each other. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale assessed the risk of bias in included cohort and case-control studies, while criteria recommended by the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality (AHRQ) evaluated cross-sectional studies. The extracted data were synthesized in an Excel spreadsheet according to the predefined items to be collected. The outcome was Omicron variant reinfection, reported as an Odds Ratio (OR) with its 95% confidence interval (CI) and Protective Effectiveness (PE) with 95% CI. The data were pooled using a random- or fixed-effects model based on the I2 test. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. Results: Thirty-three articles were included. Compared with the natural immunity group, the hybrid immunity (booster vaccination) group had the highest level of mitigation in the risk of reinfection (OR = 0.43, 95% CI:0.34-0.56), followed by the complete vaccination group (OR = 0.58, 95% CI:0.45-0.74), and lastly the incomplete vaccination group (OR = 0.64, 95% CI:0.44-0.93). Compared with the complete vaccination-only group, the hybrid immunity (complete vaccination) group mitigated the risk of reinfection by 65% (OR = 0.35, 95% CI:0.27-0.46), and the hybrid immunity (booster vaccination) group mitigated the risk of reinfection by an additional 29% (OR = 0.71, 95% CI:0.61-0.84) compared with the hybrid immunity (complete vaccination) group. The effectiveness of hybrid immunity (incomplete vaccination) in mitigating the risk of reinfection was 37.88% (95% CI, 28.88-46.89%) within 270-364 days, and decreased to 33.23%% (95% CI, 23.80-42.66%) within 365-639 days; whereas, the effectiveness after complete vaccination was 54.36% (95% CI, 50.82-57.90%) within 270-364 days, and the effectiveness of booster vaccination was 73.49% (95% CI, 68.95-78.04%) within 90-119 days. Conclusion: Hybrid immunity was significantly more protective than natural or vaccination-induced immunity, and booster doses were associated with enhanced protection against Omicron. Although its protective effects waned over time, vaccination remains a crucial measure for controlling COVID-19. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier, CRD42024539682.

Healthcare workers' compliance with COVID-19 prevention and control measures at De Martino Hospital, Mogadishu, Somalia: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers are a high-risk group for COVID-19 and protecting them is crucial for healthcare delivery. Limited studies have explored compliance with infection prevention and control (IPC) practices among Somali healthcare workers. This study aimed to determine compliance with IPC practices among healthcare workers in De Martino Public Hospital, Somalia. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted at the De Martino Public Hospital, Mogadishu, Somalia from August to October 2022, with the participation of 204 healthcare workers (response rate = 97%). Compliance was assessed using responses to 25 questions on a five-point Likert-type scale, and a median score of 20 was used to dichotomize compliance scores. A chi-square test and logistic regression analysis were performed to check the associations between healthcare workers' socio-demographic information, IPC-related factors, work conditions and practices on COVID-19, and IPC compliance during healthcare interventions using SPSS 23 version. RESULTS: In total, 58.3% of the participants had good compliance with IPC. There were significant associations between IPC compliance and the type of healthcare worker (doctors and doctor assistants: 72.3%, nurses and paramedical staff: 67.3%, non-clinical staff: 5.7%, p < 0.01). After adjusting for potential confounding factors, compared to non-clinical staff, doctors and doctor assistants (OR: 12.11, 95% CI: 2.23-65.84) and nurses and paramedical staff (OR: 21.38, 95% CI: 4.23-108.01) had higher compliance with IPC measures. There were no significant associations between compliance and sex, marital status, vaccination status, or smoking (p > 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Low levels of compliance with COVID-19 IPC measures were observed among hospital workers. Prioritizing awareness campaigns and behavior change interventions, especially among non-clinical staff, is crucial for effective COVID-19 infection prevention and control within hospitals.

Predictors of performing preventive behaviors against affliction with COVID-19 based on vaccination: An application of the health belief model.

BACKGROUND: Nowadays, the COVID-19 pandemic has become one of the greatest global threats to human communities. Presently, the most important solution to deal with this pandemic is to fully comply with health protocols along with general vaccination. Given the increased vaccination rate in the community and the change in the thought of some people in the field of durable immunity and changing health behaviors, the present study determined the predictors of preventive behaviors against affliction with COVID-19 in two vaccinated and non-vaccinated groups based on the health belief model in the Iranian population aged 15-65 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This descriptive-analytical study was conducted cross-sectionally in 2022. A sample size of 500 Yazdi citizens was selected using the convenience non-random sampling method using the contact numbers received from the SIB system of the Iranian health deputy. They were examined online in two vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. The instrument used was Delshad Noghabi et al.'s questionnaire which was based on the health belief model. Due to the adjustment of the questionnaire according to the target group, its validity and reliability were re-checked and confirmed. Data were analyzed with SPSS22 using descriptive and analytical statistics, t-test, and linear regression. RESULTS: Based on the findings of the study, a significant difference was observed between the three variables of income level (P = 0.019), smoking (P <0.001), and employment status (P = 0.025) in two vaccinated and unvaccinated groups at the level of preventive behaviors. Besides, the constructs of perceived sensitivity (P <0.001), perceived benefits (P <0.001), action guide (P <0.001), and self-efficacy (P = 0.018) significantly predict preventive behaviors, so that the predictive value of perceived benefits (ß =3.67) was more than other variables. CONCLUSION: To prevent diseases, it is very important to increase people's awareness and information (self-efficacy) about the use of vaccination and pay attention to individual demographic characteristics in vaccination programs. Also, perceived sensitivity, perceived benefits, action guidelines, and perceived self-efficacy can be considered as important factors in determining people's willingness to be vaccinated. Therefore, education and information programs should be focused on these factors to increase people's willingness to be vaccinated.

A seesaw of equilibrium, midwives' experiences of infection prevention and control guideline adherence: A qualitative descriptive study.

Background: Infection prevention and control guidelines play a key role in preventing infections which can impact mothers and their newborn's quality of life. Despite the presence of evidenced-based infection prevention and control guidelines, midwives' adherence can be suboptimal internationally. The identification of facilitators and barriers to infection prevention and control guidelines can support practice and facilitate midwifery care. Aim: To understand midwives' experiences of the barriers and facilitators when adhering to infection prevention and control guidelines. Methods: A qualitative descriptive study using semi-structured interviews with 10 midwives from February to March 2022. The interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed utilising Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis framework involving the six steps of becoming familiar with the data, generating initial codes, generating themes, reviewing themes, defining and naming the themes, and presenting themes. Findings: Two themes developed; seesaw for equilibrium and back to basics: learning on your feet. Midwives experienced conflicting emotional motivators in the need for professional integrity towards infection prevention and control guideline adherence. The work environment impacts on midwives' ability to adhere to guidelines and communication and education have a vital role to play in infection prevention and control guideline adherence. Conclusions: While midwives have a strong sense of protection of professional integrity, work conditions such as environment, organisational structures, and management systems affect midwives' adherence to infection prevention and control guidelines. Effective education, training, and communication are required to promote infection prevention and control guideline adherence.

Addressing infection prevention and control in Alabama through the long-term care strike team.

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the lack of infection prevention and control (IPC) infrastructure among long-term care facilities (LTCFs) in the United States; the situation in Alabama is particularly dire with LTCFs receiving some of the lowest quality ratings in the country. Alabama's LTCFs continue to be challenged by frequent staff turnover, vaccine hesitancy, and reluctance to embrace new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations such as enhanced barrier precautions. However, the American Rescue Plan of 2021 made funds available to states through a CDC Epidemiology and Laboratory (ELC) Cooperative Agreement to promote IPC system improvement, including the creation of the Alabama Nursing Home and Long-Term Care Strike Team (LTC Strike Team). In this article, we reviewed preliminary data from Alabama for the first year of the 2-year cooperative agreement cycle (2022--2023). Data included activity tracking by Infection Preventionists (IPs) and evaluations submitted voluntarily by LTCFs upon completion of trainings and/or direct services provided by the LTC Strike Team. Results indicated a significant need for IPC training among LTCFs and a high level of satisfaction with the services provided by IPs. Despite successes, it is unclear if future funding will be available to support long-term sustainability efforts.

Uses of a real-time automatic nosocomial infection surveillance system to support prevention and control of hospital-acquired infections in the ICU.

Introduction: The intensive care unit (ICU) caters to patients with severe illnesses or injuries who require constant medical attention. These patients are susceptible to infections due to their weak immune systems and prolonged hospital stays. This makes the ICU the specialty with the highest hospital-acquired infection (HAI) cases. The core dimension of infection prevention and control for ICUs is infection surveillance, which analyses the risk factors of HAI and implements comprehensive interventions for HAI prevention and control. Hence, this study aimed to investigate the potential risk factors for developing HAI in the ICU using real-time automatic nosocomial infection surveillance systems (RT-NISS) to surveil, and analyze the effectiveness of RT-NISS coupled with comprehensive interventions on HAI prevention and control in the ICU. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted using data from an RT-NISS for all inpatients in the ICU from January 2021 to December 2022. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to analyse potential risk factors for HAI in the ICU. Surveillance of the prevalence proportion of HAI, the prevalence proportion of site-specific HAI, the proportion of ICU patients receiving antibiotics, the proportion of ICU patients receiving key antimicrobial combination, the proportion of HAI patients with pathogen detection, the proportion of patients with pathogen detection before antimicrobial treatment and the proportion of patients before receiving key antimicrobial combination, the utilization rate of devices and the rate of device-associated HAIs were monitored monthly by the RT-NISS. Comprehensive interventions were implemented in 2022, and we compared the results of HAIs between 2021 and 2022 to evaluate the effect of the RT-NISS application combined with comprehensive interventions on HAI prevention and control. Results: The relative risk factors, observed as being a significantly higher risk of developing HAI, were hospitalization over 2 weeks, chronic lung diseases, chronic heart diseases, chronic renal diseases, current malignancy, hypohepatia, stroke, cerebrovascular accident, severe trauma, tracheal intubation and tracheostomy and urinary catheter. By implementing comprehensive interventions depending on infection surveillance by the RT-NISS in 2022, the prevalence proportion of HAI was reduced from 12.67% in 2021 to 9.05% in 2022 (χ2 = 15.465, p < 0.001). The prevalence proportion of hospital-acquired multidrug-resistant organisms was reduced from 5.78% in 2021 to 3.21% in 2022 (χ2 = 19.085, p < 0.001). The prevalence proportion of HAI in four sites, including respiratory tract infection, gastrointestinal tract infection, surgical site infection, and bloodstream infection, was also significantly reduced from 2021 to 2022 (both p < 0.05). The incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia in 2022 was lower than that in 2021 (15.02% vs. 9.19%, χ2 = 17.627, p < 0.001). Conclusion: The adoption of an RT-NISS can adequately and accurately collect HAI case information to analyse the relative high-risk factors for developing HAIs in the ICU. Furthermore, implementing comprehensive interventions derived from real-time automation surveillance of the RT-NISS will reduce the risk and prevalence proportions of HAIs in the ICU.

Practitioner perspectives on equitable implementation of evidence-based interventions for cancer prevention and control.

Longstanding inequities in cancer prevention and control require novel approaches to improve evidence-based intervention implementation. Exploring and elevating the perspectives of cancer prevention and control practitioners working to advance health equity and equitably implement evidence-based interventions is an important yet underutilized step among researchers working in this space. The purpose of this study was to explore practitioners' perspectives of how health equity is defined and integrated into their work, challenges of advancing health equity for implementation in local settings, and associated strategies. We conducted virtual key informant interviews and focus groups with 16 US practitioners (e.g. clinicians, health administrators, public health professionals) in 2021-2022. Interviews and focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed. Data were coded using inductive content analysis and summarized into themes. Four major themes emerged: (i) how health equity is conceptualized as a process and outcome; (ii) need to shift equity mindsets; (iii) importance of community partnerships; (iv) organizational policies and strategies for fostering equity in implementation. Respondents noted the need for research and medical communities to learn about the importance and benefits of allowing communities to shape implementation to advance equity in the delivery of evidence-based interventions and outcomes. Additionally, respondents emphasized that institutional leaders should initiate changes regarding equitable implementation at the organizational- and system-levels. Respondents endorsed the need to address equity issues related to the implementation of cancer prevention and control programs, practices, and policies. Many findings can be applied beyond cancer prevention and control to support equitable implementation and outcomes more generally.

We need practitioners' input to improve how interventions can help those who need them most. In cancer prevention and control, we asked practitioners what they think about health equity in their work and problems they face. Our findings show how practitioners build strong community partnerships and make changes in health care and public health to improve health equity. These findings can be used in other health areas.

Knowledge and safe handling practices affecting the occupational exposure of nurses and midwives to hazardous drugs: A mixed methods systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Hazardous drugs are inherently toxic and present a potential occupational exposure risk to nurses and midwives. Hazardous drugs require special handling to minimise the risk of exposure and adverse health effects. Although the use of hazardous drugs in oncology services is well recognised, they are also used in other healthcare areas where nurses and midwives may be unaware there is a risk. OBJECTIVE: To investigate what nurses and midwives know and do about their occupational exposure to hazardous drugs, and what factors affect their knowledge and practice. DESIGN: Mixed methods systematic review. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted, and studies were included if the authors described what nurses or midwives knew about hazardous drugs, or what they did in their clinical practice to reduce their risk of occupational exposure (PROSPERO registration CRD42024437493). The databases were searched for any year until the 26th of January 2024.Two independent reviewers extracted data using Covidence and assessed the risk of bias. The data were extracted into the categories of knowledge of risk and safe handling practices, attitude and factors affecting these, and activities that posed the greatest risk of exposure (preparation, administration, and disposal of hazardous drugs, cleaning hazardous drug spills, and handling excreta from patients who had recently been treated with hazardous drugs). RESULTS: Of the 2702 articles that were identified, 59 quantitative and 3 qualitative studies were included in this review. No studies reported on midwives handling hazardous drugs. Most studies investigated nurses working in oncology services. Nurses reported a lack of education about the risk and safe handling. They were often responsible for preparing hazardous drugs and there was inconsistency in their compliance when using personal protective equipment. Nurses did not always perceive that there was a real risk of exposure, were concerned about the effect of wearing personal protective equipment on their relationship with patients and perceived they lacked the time to don equipment. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of occupational exposure to hazardous drugs outside of oncology services was rarely investigated. There were no studies reporting what midwives knew and did about their risk of occupational exposure to hazardous drugs. When nurses were aware of the risks, this did not necessarily translate into the implementation of safe handling practices or the consistent use of personal protective equipment because of a perceived low risk, lack of personal protective equipment availability, and prioritising personal or patient comfort over safety measures. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Nurses and midwives are often unknowingly exposed to the toxic effects of hazardous drugs when they prepare and administer these drugs for patients, although knowledge does not always equal safe handling practices.