MAIN BODY: Recent successes in malaria control and elimination have reduced the global malaria burden, but these gains are fragile and progress has stalled in the past 5 years. Withdrawing successful interventions often results in rapid malaria resurgence, primarily threatening vulnerable young children and pregnant women. Malaria programmes are being affected in many ways by COVID-19. For prevention of malaria, insecticide-treated nets need regular renewal, but distribution campaigns have been delayed or cancelled. For detection and treatment of malaria, individuals may stop attending health facilities, out of fear of exposure to COVID-19, or because they cannot afford transport, and health care workers require additional resources to protect themselves from COVID-19. Supplies of diagnostics and drugs are being interrupted, which is compounded by production of substandard and falsified medicines and diagnostics. These disruptions are predicted to double the number of young African children dying of malaria in the coming year and may impact efforts to control the spread of drug resistance. Using examples from successful malaria control and elimination campaigns, we propose strategies to re-establish malaria control activities and maintain elimination efforts in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, which is likely to be a long-term challenge. All sectors of society, including governments, donors, private sector and civil society organisations, have crucial roles to play to prevent malaria resurgence. Sparse resources must be allocated efficiently to ensure integrated health care systems that can sustain control activities against COVID-19 as well as malaria and other priority infectious diseases.
CONCLUSION: As we deal with the COVID-19 pandemic, it is crucial that other major killers such as malaria are not ignored. History tells us that if we do, the consequences will be dire, particularly in vulnerable populations.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted from 3 to 12 April 2020. The health belief model (HBM) was used to assess predictors of the intent to receive the vaccine and the WTP.
RESULTS: A total of 1,159 complete responses was received. The majority reported a definite intent to receive the vaccine (48.2%), followed by a probable intent (29.8%) and a possible intent (16.3%). Both items under the perceived benefits construct in the HBM, namely believe the vaccination decreases the chance of infection (OR = 2.51, 95% CI 1.19-5.26) and the vaccination makes them feel less worry (OR = 2.19, 95% CI 1.03-4.65), were found to have the highest significant odds of a definite intention to take the vaccine. The mean ± standard deviation (SD) for the amount that participants were willing to pay for a dose of COVID-19 vaccine was MYR$134.0 (SD±79.2) [US$30.66 ± 18.12]. Most of the participants were willing to pay an amount of MYR$100 [US$23] (28.9%) and MYR$50 [US$11.5] (27.2%) for the vaccine. The higher marginal WTP for the vaccine was influenced by no affordability barriers as well as by socio-economic factors, such as higher education levels, professional and managerial occupations and higher incomes.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrate the utility of HBM constructs in understanding COVID-19 vaccination intention and WTP.
METHODOLOGY: A rapid evidence review was conducted to identify how community engagement is used for infectious disease prevention and control during epidemics. Three databases were searched in addition to extensive snowballing for grey literature. Previous epidemics were limited to Ebola, Zika, SARS, Middle East respiratory syndromeand H1N1 since 2000. No restrictions were applied to study design or language.
RESULTS: From 1112 references identified, 32 articles met our inclusion criteria, which detail 37 initiatives. Six main community engagement actors were identified: local leaders, community and faith-based organisations, community groups, health facility committees, individuals and key stakeholders. These worked on different functions: designing and planning, community entry and trust building, social and behaviour change communication, risk communication, surveillance and tracing, and logistics and administration.
CONCLUSION: COVID-19's global presence and social transmission pathways require social and community responses. This may be particularly important to reach marginalised populations and to support equity-informed responses. Aligning previous community engagement experience with current COVID-19 community-based strategy recommendations highlights how communities can play important and active roles in prevention and control. Countries worldwide are encouraged to assess existing community engagement structures and use community engagement approaches to support contextually specific, acceptable and appropriate COVID-19 prevention and control measures.
METHODS: Medical records of patients who underwent thoracic surgery from March 18, 2020 to May 17, 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. All patients undergoing thoracic surgery were tested for Covid-19 using the reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction method. Patients with malignancy were observed for 10 to 14 days in the ward after testing negative. The healthcare workers donned personal protective equipment for all the cases, and the number of healthcare workers in the operating room was limited to the minimum required.
RESULTS: A total of 44 procedures were performed in 26 thoracic surgeries. All of these procedures were classified as aerosol generating, and the mean duration of the surgery was 130 ± 43 minutes. None of the healthcare workers involved in the surgery were exposed or infected by Covid-19.
CONCLUSION: Covid-19 will be a threat for a long time and thoracic surgeons must continue to provide their services, despite having to deal with aerosol generating procedures, in the new normal. Covid-19 testing of all surgical candidates, using the reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, donning full personal protective equipment for healthcare workers, and carefully planned procedures are among the measures suggested to prevent unnecessary Covid-19 exposure in thoracic surgery.
METHODS: A rapid online survey comprising 22 items was administered during the rapid outbreak of COVID-19 in Pakistan. Questions were focused on the prevention, transmission, clinical features, and control of COVID-19. In addition, the attitudes and practices of the participants were explored. Descriptive statistics, Mann-Whitney tests, Kruskal-Wallis tests, and regression analysis were carried out during data analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 1257 respondents participated in this study. Most of the respondents had good knowledge (good = 64.8%, average = 30.5%, poor = 4.7%) of COVID-19. Gender, marital status, education, and residence were observed to have a significant association with the knowledge score. A vast majority of the survey respondents (77.0%) believed that COVID-19 would be controlled successfully in Pakistan. The practices of wearing a mask (85.8%) and handwashing (88.1%) were common among the participants.
CONCLUSION: The participants demonstrated good knowledge and reasonable attitudes and practices toward most aspects of the COVID-19 outbreak. Improvements in certain areas could be made by mass-level education.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to analyze and evaluate the contents as well as features of COVID-19 mobile apps. The findings are instrumental in helping health care professionals to identify suitable mobile apps for COVID-19 self-monitoring and education. The results of the mobile apps' assessment could potentially help mobile app developers improve or modify their existing mobile app designs to achieve optimal outcomes.
METHODS: The search for the mHealth apps available in the android-based Play Store and the iOS-based App Store was conducted between April 18 and May 5, 2020. The region of the App Store where we performed the search was the United States, and a virtual private network app was used to locate and access COVID-19 mobile apps from all countries on the Google Play Store. The inclusion criteria were apps that are related to COVID-19 with no restriction in language type. The basic features assessment criteria used for comparison were the requirement for free subscription, internet connection, education or advisory content, size of the app, ability to export data, and automated data entry. The functionality of the apps was assessed according to knowledge (information on COVID-19), tracing or mapping of COVID-19 cases, home monitoring surveillance, online consultation with a health authority, and official apps run by health authorities.
RESULTS: Of the 223 COVID-19-related mobile apps, only 30 (19.9%) found in the App Store and 28 (44.4%) in the Play Store matched the inclusion criteria. In the basic features assessment, most App Store (10/30, 33.3%) and Play Store (10/28, 35.7%) apps scored 4 out of 7 points. Meanwhile, the outcome of the functionality assessment for most App Store apps (13/30, 43.3%) was a score of 3 compared to android-based apps (10/28, 35.7%), which scored 2 (out of the maximum 5 points). Evaluation of the basic functions showed that 75.0% (n=36) of the 48 included mobile apps do not require a subscription, 56.3% (n=27) provide symptom advice, and 41.7% (n=20) have educational content. In terms of the specific functions, more than half of the included mobile apps are official mobile apps maintained by a health authority for COVID-19 information provision. Around 37.5% (n=18) and 31.3% (n=15) of the mobile apps have tracing or mapping and home monitoring surveillance functions, respectively, with only 17% (n=8) of the mobile apps equipped with an online consultation function.
CONCLUSIONS: Most iOS-based apps incorporate infographic mapping of COVID-19 cases, while most android-based apps incorporate home monitoring surveillance features instead of providing focused educational content on COVID-19. It is important to evaluate the contents and features of COVID-19 mobile apps to guide users in choosing a suitable mobile app based on their requirements.
METHODS: Utilizing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, USA) website, and a comprehensive review of PubMed literature, we obtained information regarding clinical signs and symptoms, treatment and diagnosis, transmission methods, protection methods and risk factors for Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and COVID-19. Comparisons between the viruses were made.
RESULTS: Inadequate risk assessment regarding the urgency of the situation, and limited reporting on the virus within China has, in part, led to the rapid spread of COVID-19 throughout mainland China and into proximal and distant countries. Compared with SARS and MERS, COVID-19 has spread more rapidly, due in part to increased globalization and the focus of the epidemic. Wuhan, China is a large hub connecting the North, South, East and West of China via railways and a major international airport. The availability of connecting flights, the timing of the outbreak during the Chinese (Lunar) New Year, and the massive rail transit hub located in Wuhan has enabled the virus to perforate throughout China, and eventually, globally.
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that we did not learn from the two prior epidemics of coronavirus and were ill-prepared to deal with the challenges the COVID-19 epidemic has posed. Future research should attempt to address the uses and implications of internet of things (IoT) technologies for mapping the spread of infection.