Search

Background: Currently, antivenoms are the only specific treatment available for snakebite envenoming. In Brazil, over 30% of patients cannot access antivenom within its critical care window. Researchers have therefore proposed decentralizing to community health centers to decrease time-to-care and improve morbidity and mortality. Currently, there is no evidence-based method to evaluate the capacity of health units for antivenom treatment, nor what the absolute minimum supplies and staff are necessary for safe and effective antivenom administration and clinical management., Methods: This study utilized a modified-Delphi approach to develop and validate a checklist to evaluate the minimum requirements for health units to adequately treat snakebite envenoming in the Amazon region of Brazil. The modified-Delphi approach consisted of four rounds: 1) iterative development of preliminary checklist by expert steering committee; 2) controlled feedback on preliminary checklist via expert judge survey; 3) two-phase nominal group technique with new expert judges to resolve pending items; and 4) checklist finalization and closing criteria by expert steering committee. The measure of agreement selected for this study was percent agreement defined a priori as ≥75%., Results: A valid, reliable, and feasible checklist was developed. The development process highlighted three key findings: (1) the definition of community health centers and its list of essential items by expert judges is consistent with the Brazilian Ministry of Health, WHO snakebite strategic plan, and a general snakebite capacity guideline in India (internal validity), (2) the list of essential items for antivenom administration and clinical management is feasible and aligns with the literature regarding clinical care (reliability), and (3) engagement of local experts is critical to developing and implementing an antivenom decentralization strategy (feasibility)., Conclusion: This study joins an international set of evidence advocating for decentralization, adding value in its definition of essential care items; identification of training needs across the care continuum; and demonstration of the validity, reliability, and feasibility provided by engaging local experts. Specific to Brazil, further added value comes in the potential use of the checklist for health unit accreditation as well as its applications to logistics and resource distribution. Future research priorities should apply this checklist to health units in the Amazon region of Brazil to determine which community health centers are or could be capable of receiving antivenom and translate this expert-driven checklist and approach to snakebite care in other settings or other diseases in low-resource settings., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Serrão-Pinto et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: As quantitative glucose 6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency (G6PDd) screening tools are evaluated in operational studies, questions remain as to whether they are cost-effective. Here, a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was performed to estimate the Incremental Cost-effectiveness Ratio (ICER) of the introduction of quantitative screening test to detect G6PDd among P. vivax carriers in two municipalities in the Brazilian Amazon., Methodology/principal Findings: This cost-effectiveness analysis evaluated the use of the Standard G6PD quantitative screening test in vivax malaria treatment units in two municipalities of the Brazilian Amazon. Using the perspective of the Brazilian public health system, the analysis was performed for the outcome 'PQ-associated hospitalization avoided', based on a decision tree model. The results indicated that the G6PDd screening strategy compared with the routine strategy was highly cost-effective, with an ICER of US$495 per additional hospitalization avoided, which represented less than 8% of one Brazilian gross domestic product per capita (US$6,822). The uncertainties evaluated in the sensitivity analysis did not significantly affect the ICER identified in the base-case., Conclusions/significance: This cost-effectiveness analysis showed the quantitative G6PD testing was effective in avoiding PQ-associated hospitalizations. The incorporation of G6PD screening is of paramount importance towards P. vivax malaria elimination in the Amazon to promote the safe use of primaquine and tafenoquine., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

SARS-CoV-2 affects mainly the lungs, however, other manifestations, including neurological manifestations, have also been described during the disease. Some of the neurological findings have involved intracerebral or subarachnoid hemorrhage, strokes, and other thrombotic/hemorrhagic conditions. Nevertheless, the gross pathology of hemorrhagic lesions in the central nervous system has not been previously described in Brazilian autopsy cases. This study aimed to describe gross and microscopic central nervous system (CNS) pathology findings from the autopsies and correlate them with the clinical and laboratory characteristics of forty-five patients with COVID-19 from Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil. Forty-four patients were autopsied of which thirty-eight of these (86.36%) were positive by RT-PCR for COVID-19, and six (13.3%) were positive by the serological rapid test. Clinical and radiological findings were compatible with the infection. The patients were classified in two groups: presence (those who had hemorrhagic and/or thrombotic manifestations in the CNS) and absence (those who did not present hemorrhagic and/or thrombotic manifestations in the CNS). For risk assessment, relative risk and respective confidence intervals were estimated. Macroscopic or microscopic hemorrhages were found in twenty-three cases (52,27%). The postmortem gross examination of the brain revealed a broad spectrum of hemorrhages, from spots to large and confluent areas and, under microscopy, we observed mainly perivascular discharge. The association analyses showed that the use of corticosteroid, anticoagulant and antibiotic had no statistical significance with a risk of nervous system hemorrhagic manifestations. However, it is possible to infer a statistical tendency that indicates that individuals with diabetes had a higher risk for the same outcome (RR = 1.320, 95% CI = 0.7375 to 2.416, p = 0.3743), which was not observed in relation to other comorbidities. It is unknown whether the new variants of the virus can cause different clinical manifestations, such as those observed or indeed others. As a result, more studies are necessary to define clinical and radiologic monitoring protocols and strategic interventions for patients at risk of adverse and fatal events, such as the extensive hemorrhaging described here. It is imperative that clinicians must be aware of comorbidities and the drugs used to treat patients with COVID-19 to prevent CNS hemorrhagic and thrombotic events., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency greatly hinders Plasmodium vivax malaria radical cure and further elimination due to 8-aminoquinolines-associated hemolysis. Although the deleterious health effects of primaquine in G6PD deficient individuals have been known for over 50 years, G6PD testing is not routinely performed before primaquine treatment in most P. vivax endemic areas., Method/principal Findings: The qualitative CareStart G6PD screening test was implemented in 12 malaria treatment units (MTUs) in the municipality of Rio Preto da Eva, Western Brazilian Amazon, a malaria endemic area, between February 2019 and early January 2020. Training materials were developed and validated; evaluations were conducted on the effectiveness of training health care professionals (HCPs) to perform the test, the interpretation and reliability of routine testing performed by HCPs, and perceptions of HCPs and patients. Most HCPs were unaware of G6PD deficiency and primaquine-related adverse effects. Most of 110 HCPs trained (86/110, 78%) were able to correctly perform the G6PD test after a single 4-hour training session. The test performed by HCPs during implementation showed 100.0% (4/4) sensitivity and 68.1% (62/91) specificity in identifying G6PD deficient patients as compared to a point-of-care quantitative test (Standard G6PD)., Conclusions/significance: G6PD screening using the qualitative CareStart G6PD test performed by HCPs in MTUs of an endemic area showed high sensitivity and concerning low specificity. The amount of false G6PD deficiency detected led to substantial loss of opportunities for radical cure., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.