METHODS: The International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections Consortium (ISARIC) COVID-19 database was queried to include children under 19 years of age admitted to hospital from January 2020 to April 2021 with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis. Univariate and multivariable analysis of contributing factors for mortality were assessed by country group (HICs vs LMICs) as defined by the World Bank criteria.
RESULTS: A total of 12 860 children (3819 from 21 HICs and 9041 from 15 LMICs) participated in this study. Of these, 8961 were laboratory-confirmed and 3899 suspected COVID-19 cases. About 52% of LMICs children were black, and more than 40% were infants and adolescent. Overall in-hospital mortality rate (95% CI) was 3.3% [=(3.0% to 3.6%), higher in LMICs than HICs (4.0% (3.6% to 4.4%) and 1.7% (1.3% to 2.1%), respectively). There were significant differences between country income groups in intervention profile, with higher use of antibiotics, antivirals, corticosteroids, prone positioning, high flow nasal cannula, non-invasive and invasive mechanical ventilation in HICs. Out of the 439 mechanically ventilated children, mortality occurred in 106 (24.1%) subjects, which was higher in LMICs than HICs (89 (43.6%) vs 17 (7.2%) respectively). Pre-existing infectious comorbidities (tuberculosis and HIV) and some complications (bacterial pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome and myocarditis) were significantly higher in LMICs compared with HICs. On multivariable analysis, LMIC as country income group was associated with increased risk of mortality (adjusted HR 4.73 (3.16 to 7.10)).
CONCLUSION: Mortality and morbidities were higher in LMICs than HICs, and it may be attributable to differences in patient demographics, complications and access to supportive and treatment modalities.
METHODS: We systematically followed a five-step scoping review framework to identify and review relevant literature about CRC screening in LMICs, written in the English language before February 2020. We searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science and Google Scholar for studies targeting the general, asymptomatic, at-risk adult population. The TIDieR tool and an implementation checklist were used to extract data from empirical studies; and we extracted data-informed insights from policy reviews and commentaries.
RESULTS: CRC screening interventions (n = 24 studies) were implemented in nine middle-income countries. Population-based screening programmes (n = 11) as well as small-scale screening interventions (n = 13) utilised various recruitment strategies. Interventions that recruited participants face-to-face (alone or in combination with other recruitment strategies) (10/15), opportunistic clinic-based screening interventions (5/6) and educational interventions combined with screening (3/4), seemed to be the strategies that consistently achieved an uptake of > 65% in LMICs. FOBT/FIT and colonoscopy uptake ranged between 14 and 100%. The most commonly reported implementation indicator was 'uptake/reach'. There was an absence of detail regarding implementation indicators and there is a need to improve reporting practice in order to disseminate learning about how to implement programmes.
CONCLUSION: Opportunities and challenges for the implementation of CRC screening programmes were related to the reporting of CRC cases and screening, cost-effective screening methods, knowledge about CRC and screening, staff resources and training, infrastructure of the health care system, financial resources, public health campaigns, policy commitment from governments, patient navigation, planning of screening programmes and quality assurance.
STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional, web-based survey administered between May and June, 2020.
RESULTS: Of 189 invited participants in 69 LMICs, we received 145 (77%) responses from 58 (84%) countries. The pandemic provides significant challenges to neonatal care, particularly in low-income countries. Respondents noted exacerbations of preexisting shortages in staffing, equipment, and isolation capabilities. In Sub-Saharan Africa, 9/35 (26%) respondents noted increased mortality in non-COVID-19-infected infants. Clinical practices on cord clamping, isolation, and breastfeeding varied widely, often not in line with World Health Organization guidelines. Most respondents noted family access restrictions, and limited shared decision-making.
CONCLUSIONS: Many LMICs face an exacerbation of preexisting resource challenges for neonatal care during the pandemic. Variable approaches to care delivery and deviations from guidelines provide opportunities for international collaborative improvement.
Methods: This study employed a qualitative design. Semi-structured interviews (n = 20) were conducted with key opinion leaders from 14 countries. The participants were predominantly members of the International COVID-19 and Cancer Taskforce, who convened in March 2020 to address delivery of cancer care in the context of the pandemic. The Framework Method was employed to analyse the positive changes of the pandemic with corresponding challenges to their maintenance post-pandemic.
Results: Ten themes of positive changes were identified which included: value in cancer care, digital communication, convenience, inclusivity and cooperation, decentralisation of cancer care, acceleration of policy change, human interactions, hygiene practices, health awareness and promotion and systems improvement. Impediments to the scale-up of these positive changes included resource disparities and variation in legal frameworks across regions. Barriers were largely attributed to behaviours and attitudes of stakeholders.
Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to important value-based innovations and changes for better cancer care across different health systems. The challenges to maintaining/implementing these changes vary by setting. Efforts are needed to implement improved elements of care that evolved during the pandemic.
OBJECTIVES: This review focuses on identifying the indicators used to evaluate ACS care pathways and their effect on the care process and clinical outcomes.
METHODS: This review follows the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The systematic research was conducted using five research databases. Two groups were created by dividing the studies according to their year of publication. The first group included those studies published from 1997 to 2007 ("Group 1"), while the second included those published from 2008 to 2018 ("Group 2"). Selected studies were screened using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) quality assessment tool.
RESULTS: Seventeen studies were included in this review. One study was a randomized controlled trial, 14 were predesigns and postdesigns, and two were longitudinal observational designs. The Group 1 studies demonstrated that ACS care pathways had a positive effect on reducing the length of the hospital stay and the door-to-balloon times. Similar effects were observed for the Group 2 studies.
CONCLUSION: Implementing ACS care pathway helps to organize care processes and decrease treatment delays as well as improve the patient outcomes without adverse consequences for patients or additional resources and costs. While the current level of evidence is inadequate to warrant a formal recommendation, there is a need for more studies with an emphasis on well-designed randomization to measure patient outcomes.
STUDY DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional study.
METHODS: This study was completed alongside similar studies undertaken by the rest of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries and led by Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). The study will allow further understanding of possible obstacles that may be encountered while implementing a nationwide prevention program. The 10-dimensional model of readiness had been developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) in collaboration with five countries (Brazil, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, and South Africa) through a five-stage process. Stakeholders and decision makers were invited to participate. Scores for each dimension were compared with those for the rest of the GCC countries.
RESULTS: The overall score of Kuwait was 39.17 out of 100. This was below the mean average score for the GCC countries (47.83). Out of the 10 dimensions, key informants scored the highest on legislation, mandates and policies (6.61). The lowest score was reported on attitudes towards CM prevention (1.94). Informal social resources (5.72) ranked the highest as compared to the rest of the GCC countries.
CONCLUSIONS: The readiness of Kuwait is weak on several dimensions and needs to be strengthened. Despite that, the country is moderately ready to implement large-scale evidence-based CM prevention programs because it is strong in the infrastructure of knowledge, legislation, mandates, and policies and informal social resources.
DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Preinterventional study was conducted in one-month period of January 2019, followed by intervention period from February to March 2019. Postintervention study was conducted from April to July 2019. The CLABSI rates were compared between pre and postintervention periods. A multifaceted intervention bundle was implemented, which comprised (1) educational program for healthcare workers, (2) weekly audit and feedback and (3) implementation of central line bundle of care.
FINDINGS: There was a significant overall reduction of CLABSI rate between preintervention and postintervention period [incidence rate ratio (IRR) of 0.06 (95 percent CI, 0.01-0.33; P = 0.001)].
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: CLABSI rates were reduced by a multifaceted intervention bundle, even in non-ICU and resource-limited setting. This includes a preinterventional study to identify the risk factors followed by a local adaption of the recommended care bundles. This study recommends resources-limited hospitals to design a strategy that is suitable for their own local setting to reduce CLABSI.
ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This study demonstrated the feasibility of a multifaceted intervention bundle that was locally adapted with an evidence-based approach to reduce CLABSI rate in non-ICU and resource-limited setting.
METHODS: The study was conducted using a self-administered questionnaire. Knowledge of PIMs was assessed using 10 clinical vignettes based on the 2015 Beers Criteria. Practice behaviour towards older customers was assessed using 10 items with a 5-point Likert scale. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyse the data.
RESULTS: A total of 277 community pharmacists participated in the study. Only 27.1% of the pharmacists were aware of Beers Criteria, and of these, only 37.3% were aware of the latest 2015 update. The respondents demonstrated moderate knowledge of PIMs with a mean total score of 5.46 ± 1.89 out of a maximum of 10. Pharmacists who were aware of Beers Criteria had significantly higher scores (6.31 vs 5.14, P