Risk Perception and Willingness to Work Among Doctors and Medical Students of Karachi, Pakistan During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Web-Based Cross-Sectional Survey.

PURPOSE: During the timeline of twenty years, several epidemics and pandemics have occurred. Yet, a consistent feature of these public health crises is the surge in the demand for healthcare services exceeds the availability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted in the month of June and July 2020 in Karachi, Pakistan. The study participants included doctors and medical students residing in Karachi. RESULTS: Out of 187 doctors, 74.3% were working during the COVID-19 pandemic, of which 58.3% were willing to work. Out of 200 medical students, 93.5% were not volunteering during the COVID-19 pandemic, of which 46% were willing to volunteer. Doctors strongly agreed that they would be willing to work during the COVID-19 pandemic if they were healthy and able to do so (57.2%), if they were provided personal protective equipment (PPE) (51.3%), and if they were guaranteed coverage of treatment cost if they get infected while working (57.8%). Medical students strongly agreed that they would be willing to volunteer during the COVID-19 pandemic if they were provided PPE (49.0%), and if their parents were supportive of their decision to volunteer (44.5%). Most doctors (54.5%) felt that they were extremely likely to get infected while working during the COVID-19 pandemic and 59.4% felt that in turn, they were extremely likely to infect their families as well. Most medical students (40.5%) felt that they were somewhat likely to get infected while volunteering during the COVID-19 pandemic and 55.5% felt that in turn, they were extremely likely to infect their family as well. In the event of infection with COVID-19, 51.3% doctors and 42.0% medical students felt that they would recover without hospitalization. CONCLUSION: Since future pandemics are likely, we encourage health-care policymakers to utilize the findings of this study to create a sustainable pandemic response.

Past and current advances in Marburg virus disease: a review.

Marburg Virus (MARV), along with the Ebola virus, belongs to the family of Filovirus and is cause of a lethal and severely affecting hemorrhagic fever. The Marburgvirus genus includes two viruses: MARV and Ravn. MARV has been recognized as one of utmost importance by the World Health Organization (WHO). The case fatality rate of the virus ranges from 24.0 to 88.0% which demonstrates its lethal nature and the need for its widespread information. The first case of the Marburgvirus disease (MARD) was reported in 1967 when lab personnel working with African green monkeys got infected in Germany and Serbia simultaneously. Following the initial case, many more outbreaks occurred around the world such as Uganda, Angola, Congo, Kenya and even in the United States in 2008. It was soon found out that the MARV was a zoonotic virus and mainly contracted from animal-to-human contact and further transmitted via human-to-human contact. The Egyptian fruit bat (Rousettus aegyptiacus) is known to be one of the significant sources of the infection and tourists visiting caves inhabited by these bats or workers accessing mines, populated by the bats, are at an increased risk of contracting the illness. The incubation period ranges from 2-21 days and the clinical outcome can be broken down into three phases: initial generalized phase (day 1-4), early organ phase (day 5 to 13) and either a late organ/convalescence phase (day 13 onwards). Furthermore, the treatment of MARD is solely based on supportive care. Much has been investigated in over the past half-century of the initial infection but only a few treatment options show promising results. In addition, special precaution is advised whilst handling the patient or the biospecimens. Disease-modifying agents and inhibitors of viral replications show constructive outcomes. It is crucial to identify the host of the virus and educate the populations that are greatly at risk of the disease. While much is being investigated to devise a vaccine, it is important to educate Health Care Workers (HCWs) and close contacts facing the illness. Stopping the transmission remains the best measure that can be taken.

Knowledge, attitude and practice of medical students towards HIV patients in their pre-clinical and post-clinical years in Karachi, Pakistan: a dual-center cross-sectional study.

The human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is currently a global threat with an estimated 38.6 million people affected with HIV worldwide. According to the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), since 2004 the total number of cases of HIV in Pakistan has risen from 2700 to 130,000. In light of the rising burden of HIV/AIDS across the country, it is essential that medical students possess appropriate knowledge regarding the subject. Therefore, we aimed to assess the knowledge, attitude and practice of medical students towards HIV patients in their pre-clinical and post-clinical years in Karachi, Pakistan. A cross-sectional study was conducted among 518 pre-clinical (year 1 and 2) and post-clinical (year 3, 4, and 5) medical students from two medical schools in Karachi during the months of October - December 2019. Similar numbers of participants were taken from each year. Data were analyzed using SPSS. Descriptive statistics were used to report frequencies and proportions for categorical responses. Chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used as the primary statistical tests. About 55% of participants were female, and most belonged to the Islamic faith. More than half of the participants learned about HIV from books (315/518), followed by medical personnel (287/518). A quarter (134/518) of the participants believed HIV could be transmitted by sharing saliva, more than half of whom consisted of pre-clinical year students. Over half the participants (60.4%) knew that there was a difference between HIV and AIDs, most of whom belonged to the 5th year group. When detecting HIV, only about 30% of participants knew about indirect fluorescent antibody. Regarding attitudes, one-third would not be friends with a person diagnosed with HIV/AIDS. As a medical officer, a large majority (76.6%; n=397/518) of the participants would be anxious or somewhat anxious. Two-thirds believed that treating an HIV patient can make them contract HIV, and a majority of participants (333/518) did not feel adequately prepared to deal with the psycho-social problems of an HIV/AIDS patient. Finally, regarding practice, only one-third of the participants were willing to treat an HIV/AIDS patient, most of whom belonged to the pre-clinical 2nd year group and fewer to the post-clinical 3rd year group. Knowledge amongst medical students regarding HIV/AIDS was generally high, although there are some knowledge inadequacies which require more emphasis in the medical school curriculum. However, contrasting with the level of knowledge, in terms of attitude the majority were anxious or somewhat anxious when treating an HIV patient, and only one-third were willing to treat a patient with HIV.