Community purchases of antimicrobials during the COVID-19 pandemic in Uganda: An increased risk for antimicrobial resistance.

Self-Medication (SM) involves the utilization of medicines to treat self-recognized symptoms or diseases without consultation and the irrational use of over-the-counter drugs. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the lack of definitive treatment led to increased SM. We aimed to estimate the extent of SM for drugs used to treat COVID-19 symptoms by collecting data from pharmacy sale records. The study was conducted in Kampala, Uganda, where we extracted data from community pharmacies with functional Electronic Health Records between January 2018 and October 2021 to enable a comparison of pre-and post-COVID-19. The data included the number of clients purchasing the following drugs used to treat COVID-19 and its symptoms: Antibiotics included Azithromycin, Erythromycin, and Ciprofloxacin; Supplements included Zinc and vitamin C, while Corticosteroids included dexamethasone. A negative binomial model was used to estimate the incident rate ratios for each drug to compare the effect of COVID-19 on SM. In the pre- COVID-19 period (1st January 2018 to 11th March 2020), 19,285 customers purchased antibiotics which included; Azithromycin (n = 6077), Ciprofloxacin (n = 6066) and Erythromycin (n = 997); health supplements including Vitamin C (430) and Zinc (n = 138); and Corticosteroid including Dexamethasone (n = 5577). During the COVID-19 pandemic (from 15th March 2020 to the data extraction date in October 2021), we observed a 99% increase in clients purchasing the same drugs. The number of clients purchasing Azithromycin increased by 19.7% to 279, Ciprofloxacin reduced by 58.8% to 96 clients, and those buying Erythromycin similarly reduced by 35.8% to 492 clients. In comparison, there were increases of 170%, 181%, and 377% for Vitamin C, Zinc, and Dexamethasone, respectively. The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the extent of SM in Uganda. We recommend future studies with a representation of data from pharmacies located in rural and urban areas to further study pandemics' effect on antimicrobials prescriptions, including obtaining pharmacists' perspectives using mixed methods approaches.

Risk Factors for COVID-19 Infection Among Healthcare Workers. A First Report From a Living Systematic Review and meta-Analysis.

Health care workers (HCWs) are more than ten times more likely to be infected with coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19) than the general population, thus demonstrating the burden of COVID-19 among HCWs. Factors that expose HCWs to a differentially high-risk of COVID-19 acquisition are important to elucidate, enable appropriate public health interventions to mitigate against high risk and reduce adverse outcomes from the infection. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize and critically analyze the existing evidence on SARS-CoV-2 risk factors among HCWs. With no geographical limitation, we included studies, in any country, that reported (i) the PCR laboratory diagnosis of COVID-19 as an independent variable (ii) one or more COVID-19 risk factors among HCWs with risk estimates (relative risk, odds ratio, or hazard ratio) (iii) original, quantitative study design, and published in English or Mandarian. Our initial search resulted in 470 articles overall, however, only 10 studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. Out of the 10 studies included in the review, inadequate/lack of protective personal equipment, performing tracheal intubation, and gender were the most common risk factors of COVID-19. Based on the random effects adjusted pooled relative risk, HCWs who reported the use of protective personal equipment were 29% (95% CI: 16% to 41%) less likely to test positive for COVID-19. The study also revealed that HCWs who performed tracheal intubations were 34% (95% CI: 14% to 57%) more likely to test positive for COVID-19. Interestingly, this study showed that female HCWs are at 11% higher risk (RR 1.11 95% CI 1.01-1.21) of COVID-19 than their male counterparts. This article presents initial findings from a living systematic review and meta-analysis, therefore, did not yield many studies; however, it revealed a significant insight into better understanding COVID-19 risk factors among HCWs; insights important for devising preventive strategies that protect them from this infection. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020193508 available for public comments via the link below https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020193508).

Risk factors for COVID-19 among healthcare workers. A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the spectrum of risk factors for infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among front-line healthcare workers (HCWs) has not been well-described. While several studies evaluating the risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection among patient-facing and non-patient-facing front-line HCWs have been reported since the outbreak of the coronavirus disease in 2019 (COVID-19), and several more are still underway. There is, therefore, an immediate need for an ongoing, rigorous systematic review that continuously assesses the risk factors of SARS-CoV-2 infection among front-line HCWs. OBJECTIVE: Here, we outline a protocol to serve as a guideline for conducting a living systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the burden of COVID-19 on front-line HCWs and identify risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection in patient-facing and non-patient-facing front-line HCWs. METHODS: The protocol was developed and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). The conduct of the proposed living systematic review and meta-analysis will primarily follow the principles recommended in the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) guidance for undertaking systematic reviews in healthcare, and the Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. The systematic literature searches will be performed using the EBSCOhost platform by searching the following databases within the platform: Academic search complete, health source: nursing/academic edition, CINAHL with full text, Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE, Science Direct databases, Google Scholar, and; also a search in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure and the World Health Organization library databases for relevant studies will be performed. The searches will include peer-reviewed articles, published in English and Mandarin language irrespective of publication year, evaluating the risk for testing positive for C0VID-19, the risk of developing symptoms associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, or both, among front-line HCWs. The initial review period will consider articles published since the onset of COVID-19 disease to the present and then updated monthly. Review Manager (RevMan 5.3) will be used to pool the odds ratios or mean differences for individual risk factors where possible. Results will be presented as relative risks and 95% confidence intervals for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences, or standardised mean differences along with 95% confidence intervals, for continuous outcomes. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale will be used to rate study quality, and the certainty of the evidence will be assessed by using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE). The results of the living systematic review and meta-analysis will be reported per the PRISMA guidelines. DISCUSSION: Though addressing the needs of front-line HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic is a high priority, data to inform such initiatives are inadequate, particularly data on the risk factor disparities between patient-facing and non-patient-facing front-line HCWs. The proposed living systematic review and meta-analysis anticipate finding relevant studies reporting risk factors driving the SARS-CoV-2 infection rates among patient-facing and non-patient-facing front-line HCWs, thus providing subsidies for public health interventions and occupational health policies. The study results will be disseminated electronically, in print and through conference presentation, and key stakeholder meetings in the form of policy briefs. TRAIL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020193508 available for public comments via the link below https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020193508).

COVID-19 Prevalence among Healthcare Workers. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Understanding the burden of SARS-CoV-2 infections among healthcare workers is a critical component to inform occupational health policy and strategy. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to map and analayse the available global evidence on the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infections among healthcare workers. The random-effects adjusted pooled prevalence of COVID-19 among those studies that conducted the test using the antibody (Ab) method was 7% [95% CI: 3 to 17%]. The random-effects adjusted pooled prevalence of COVID-19 among those studies that conducted the test using the PCR method was 11% [95% CI: 7 to 16%]. We found the burden of COVID-19 among healthcare workers to be quite significant and therefore a cause for global health concern. Furthermore, COVID-19 infections among healthcare workers affect service delivery through workers' sick leave, the isolation of confirmed cases and quarantine of contacts, all of which place significant strain on an already shrunken health workforce.