RESUMO
BackgroundIn South Africa 19% of the adult population aged 15-49 years are living with HIV (LWH). Few data on the influence of HIV on SARS-CoV-2 household transmission are available. MethodsWe performed a case-ascertained, prospective household transmission study of symptomatic index SARS-CoV-2 cases LWH and HIV-uninfected adults and their contacts in South Africa. Households were followed up thrice weekly for 6 weeks to collect nasal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing. We estimated household cumulative infection risk (HCIR), duration of SARS-CoV-2 positivity (at cycle threshold value<30 as proxy for high viral load), and assessed associated factors. ResultsWe recruited 131 index cases and 457 household contacts. HCIR was 59% (220/373); not differing by index HIV status (60% [50/83] in cases LWH vs 58% [173/293] in HIV-uninfected cases, OR 1.0, 95%CI 0.4-2.3). HCIR increased with index case age (35-59 years: aOR 3.4 95%CI 1.5-7.8 and [≥]60 years: aOR 3.1, 95%CI 1.0-10.1) compared to 18-34 years, and contacts age, 13-17 years (aOR 7.1, 95%CI 1.5-33.9) and 18-34 years (aOR 4.4, 95%CI 1.0-18.4) compared to <5 years. Mean positivity duration at high viral load was 7 days (range 2-28), with longer positivity in cases LWH (aHR 0.3, 95%CI 0.1-0.7). ConclusionsHIV-infection was not associated with higher HCIR, but cases LWH had longer positivity duration at high viral load. Adults aged >35 years were more likely to transmit, and individuals aged 13-34 to acquire SARS-CoV-2 in the household. Health services must maintain HIV testing with initiation of antiretroviral therapy for those HIV-infected. SummaryIn this case-ascertained, prospective household transmission study, household cumulative infection risk was 59% from symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 index cases, not differing based on index HIV status. Index cases living with HIV were positive for SARS-CoV-2 for longer at higher viral loads.
RESUMO
Objective: To describe findings from an external quality assessment programme involving laboratories in Africa that routinely investigate epidemic-prone diseases.Methode Beginning in 2002, the Regional Office for Africa of the World Health Organization (WHO) invited national public health laboratories and related facilities in Africa to participate in the programme. Three surveys comprising specimens and questionnaires associated with bacterial enteric diseases, bacterial meningitis, plague, tuberculosis and malaria were sent annually to test participants' diagnostic proficiency. Identical surveys were sent to referee laboratories for quality control. Materials were prepared, packaged and shipped in accordance with standard protocols. Findings and reports were due within 30 days. Key methodological decisions and test results were categorized as acceptable or unacceptable on the basis of consensus feedback from referees, using established grading schemes.Findings Between 2002 and 2009, participation increased from 30 to 48 Member States of the WHO and from 39 to 78 laboratories. Each survey was returned by 6493% of participants. Mean turnaround time was 25.9 days. For bacterial enteric diseases and meningitis components, bacterial identification was acceptable in 65% and 69% of challenges, respectively, but serotyping and antibiotic susceptibility testing and reporting were frequently unacceptable. Microscopy was acceptable for 73% of plague challenges. Tuberculosis microscopy was satisfactorily performed, with 87% of responses receiving acceptable scores. In the malaria component, 82% of responses received acceptable scores for species identification but only 51% of parasite quantitation scores were acceptable.Conclusion The external quality assessment programme consistently identified certain functional deficiencies requiring strengthening that were present in African public health microbiology laboratories
