Search

Two decades ago, the genocide against the Tutsis in Rwanda led to the deaths of 1 million people, and the displacement of millions more. Injury and trauma were followed by the effects of a devastated health system and economy. In the years that followed, a new course set by a new government set into motion equity-oriented national policies focusing on social cohesion and people-centred development. Premature mortality rates have fallen precipitously in recent years, and life expectancy has doubled since the mid-1990s. Here we reflect on the lessons learned in rebuilding Rwanda's health sector during the past two decades, as the country now prepares itself to take on new challenges in health-care delivery.

Background Novel drug regimens are needed for tuberculosis (TB) treatment. New regimens aim to improve on characteristics such as duration, efficacy, and safety profile, but no single regimen is likely to be ideal in all respects. By linking these regimen characteristics to a novel regimen's ability to reduce TB incidence and mortality, we sought to prioritize regimen characteristics from a population-level perspective. Methods and Findings We developed a dynamic transmission model of multi-strain TB epidemics in hypothetical populations reflective of the epidemiological situations in India (primary analysis), South Africa, the Philippines, and Brazil. We modeled the introduction of various novel rifampicin-susceptible (RS) or rifampicin-resistant (RR) TB regimens that differed on six characteristics, identified in consultation with a team of global experts: (1) efficacy, (2) duration, (3) ease of adherence, (4) medical contraindications, (5) barrier to resistance, and (6) baseline prevalence of resistance to the novel regimen. We compared scale-up of these regimens to a baseline reflective of continued standard of care. For our primary analysis situated in India, our model generated baseline TB incidence and mortality of 157 (95% uncertainty range [UR]: 113-187) and 16 (95% UR: 9-23) per 100,000 per year at the time of novel regimen introduction and RR TB incidence and mortality of 6 (95% UR: 4-10) and 0.6 (95% UR: 0.3-1.1) per 100,000 per year. An optimal RS TB regimen was projected to reduce 10-y TB incidence and mortality in the India-like scenario by 12% (95% UR: 6%-20%) and 11% (95% UR: 6%-20%), respectively, compared to current-care projections. An optimal RR TB regimen reduced RR TB incidence by an estimated 32% (95% UR: 18%-46%) and RR TB mortality by 30% (95% UR: 18%-44%). Efficacy was the greatest determinant of impact; compared to a novel regimen meeting all minimal targets only, increasing RS TB treatment efficacy from 94% to 99% reduced TB mortality by 6% (95% UR: 1%-13%, half the impact of a fully optimized regimen), and increasing the efficacy against RR TB from 76% to 94% lowered RR TB mortality by 13% (95% UR: 6%-23%). Reducing treatment duration or improving ease of adherence had smaller but still substantial impact: shortening RS TB treatment duration from 6 to 2 mo lowered TB mortality by 3% (95% UR: 1%-6%), and shortening RR TB treatment from 20 to 6 mo reduced RR TB mortality by 8% (95% UR: 4%-13%), while reducing nonadherence to the corresponding regimens by 50% reduced TB and RR TB mortality by 2% (95% UR: 1%-4%) and 6% (95% UR: 3%-10%), respectively. Limitations include sparse data on key model parameters and necessary simplifications to model structure and outcomes. Conclusions In designing clinical trials of novel TB regimens, investigators should consider that even small changes in treatment efficacy may have considerable impact on TB-related incidence and mortality. Other regimen improvements may still have important benefits for resource allocation and outcomes such as patient quality of life., Author(s): Emily A. Kendall 1,*, Sourya Shrestha 2, Ted Cohen 3, Eric Nuermberger 1, Kelly E. Dooley 1,4, Lice Gonzalez-Angulo 5, Gavin J. Churchyard 6, Payam Nahid 7, Michael L. [...]

Evidence of successful management of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDRTB) is mainly generated from referral hospitals in high-income countries. We evaluate the management of MDRTB in 5 resource-limited countries: Estonia, Latvia, Peru, [...]

Abstract Background Malaria control is currently receiving significant international commitment. As part of this commitment, Rwanda has undertaken a two-pronged approach to combating malaria via mass distribution of long-lasting insecticidal-treated nets and distribution of antimalarial medications by community health workers. This study attempted to measure the impact of these interventions on paediatric hospitalizations for malaria and on laboratory markers of disease severity. Methods A retrospective analysis of hospital records pre- and post-community-based malaria control interventions at a district hospital in rural Rwanda was performed. The interventions took place in August 2006 in the region served by the hospital and consisted of mass insecticide treated net distribution and community health workers antimalarial medication disbursement. The study periods consisted of the December–February high transmission seasons pre- and post-rollout. The record review examined a total of 551 paediatric admissions to identify 1) laboratory-confirmed malaria, defined by thick smear examination, 2) suspected malaria, defined as fever and symptoms consistent with malaria in the absence of an alternate cause, and 3) all-cause admissions. To define the impact of the intervention on clinical markers of malaria disease, trends in admission peripheral parasitaemia and haemoglobin were analyzed. To define accuracy of clinical diagnoses, trends in proportions of malaria admissions which were microscopy-confirmed before and after the intervention were examined. Finally, to assess overall management of febrile illnesses antibiotic use was described. Results Of the 551 total admissions, 268 (48.6%) and 437 (79.3%) were attributable to laboratory-confirmed and suspected malaria, respectively. The absolute number of admissions due to suspected malaria was smaller during the post-intervention period (N = 150) relative to the pre-intervention period (N = 287), in spite of an increase in the absolute number of hospitalizations due to other causes during the post-intervention period. The percentage of suspected malaria admissions that were laboratory-confirmed was greater during the pre-intervention period (80.4%) relative to the post-intervention period (48.1%, prevalence ratio [PR]: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.39 – 2.02; chi-squared p-value < 0.0001). Among children admitted with laboratory-confirmed malaria, the risk of high parasitaemia was higher during the pre-intervention period relative to the post-intervention period (age-adjusted PR: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.11 – 2.38; chi-squared p-value = 0.004), and the risk of severe anaemia was more than twofold greater during the pre-intervention period (age-adjusted PR: 2.47; 95% CI: 0.84 – 7.24; chi-squared p-value = 0.08). Antibiotic use was common, with 70.7% of all children with clinical malaria and 86.4% of children with slide-negative malaria receiving antibacterial therapy. Conclusion This study suggests that both admissions for malaria and laboratory markers of clinical disease among children may be rapidly reduced following community-based malaria control efforts. Additionally, this study highlights the problem of over-diagnosis and over-treatment of malaria in malaria-endemic regions, especially as malaria prevalence falls. More accurate diagnosis and management of febrile illnesses is critically needed both now and as fever aetiologies change with further reductions in malaria.

The article focuses on criminal informants and their importance in the criminal justice system. Topics include the concept of disloyalty and betrayal, civilian cooperation and compliance with the law, and police legitimacy. Information is provided on police-community relations, alternative policing strategies, and the reporting of noncriminal suspicious behavior.

Background: Recent World Health Organization guidance on drug-resistant tuberculosis treatment de-prioritised injectable agents, in use for decades, and endorsed all-oral longer regimens. However, questions remain about the role of the injectable agent, particularly in the context of regimens using new and repurposed drugs. We compared the effectiveness of an injectable-containing regimen to that of an all-oral regimen among patients with drug-resistant tuberculosis who received bedaquiline and/or delamanid as part of their multidrug regimen., Methods: Patients with a positive baseline culture were included. 6-month culture conversion was defined as two consecutive negative cultures collected >15 days apart. We derived predicted probabilities of culture conversion and relative risk using marginal standardisation methods., Results: Culture conversion was observed in 83.8% (526 out of 628) of patients receiving an all-oral regimen and 85.5% (425 out of 497) of those receiving an injectable-containing regimen. The adjusted relative risk comparing injectable-containing regimens to all-oral regimens was 0.96 (95% CI 0.88-1.04). We found very weak evidence of effect modification by HIV status: among patients living with HIV, there was a small increase in the frequency of conversion among those receiving an injectable-containing regimen, relative to an all-oral regimen, which was not apparent in HIV-negative patients., Conclusions: Among individuals receiving bedaquiline and/or delamanid as part of a multidrug regimen for drug-resistant tuberculosis, there was no significant difference between those who received an injectable and those who did not regarding culture conversion within 6 months. The potential contribution of injectable agents in the treatment of drug-resistant tuberculosis among those who were HIV positive requires further study., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: P.Y. Khan reports grants from Unitaid, during the conduct of the study; other (study drug donations coordinated by the endTB Consortium) from Otsuka Pharamceutical and Janssen, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: M.F. Franke reports grants from Unitaid, during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: C. Hewison reports grants from Unitaid, during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: K.J. Seung reports grants from Unitaid, during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: H. Huerga reports grants from Unitaid, during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: S. Atwood has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: S. Ahmed reports grants from Unitaid, during the conduct of the study; other (study drug donations coordinated by the endTB Consortium) from Otsuka Pharamceutical and Janssen Pharmaceutical, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: M. Khan has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: T. Sultana has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Manzur-ul-Alam has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: L.N.Q. Vo reports grants and non-financial support (drugs/equipment) from Unitaid via IRD Global during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: L. Lecca has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: K. Yae has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: S. Kozhabekov has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Tamirat has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Gelin has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: S.C. Vilbrun has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Kikvidze has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: J. Faqirzai has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Kadyrov has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Skrahina has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Mesic has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: N. Avagyan has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Bastard reports grants from Unitaid, during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: M.L. Rich reports grants from Unitaid, during the conduct of the study; personal fees for consultancy from World Health Organization, other (study drug donations coordinated by the endTB Consortium) from Otsuka Pharamceutical and Janssen, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: U. Khan reports grants from Unitaid, during the conduct of the study; other (study drug donations coordinated by the endTB Consortium) from Otsuka Pharamceutical and Janssen, outside the submitted work. Conflict of interest: C.D. Mitnick reports a grant from Unitaid to fund the study and that the endTB Consortium coordinated donations of delamanid (Otsuka Pharmaceutical) and bedaquiline (Janssen) to be used for treatment by some of the patients included in the endTB Observational Study., (Copyright ©The authors 2022. For reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions@ersnet.org.)

Background: Access to antiretroviral therapy (ART) has rapidly expanded; as of the end of 2010, an estimated 6.6 million people are receiving ART in low-income and middle-income countries. Few reports have focused on the experiences of rural health centers or the use of community health workers. We report clinical and programatic outcomes at 24 months for a cohort of patients enrolled in a community-based ART program in southeastern Rwanda under collaboration between Partners In Health and the Rwandan Ministry of Health., Methods and Findings: A retrospective medical record review was performed for a cohort of 1041 HIV+ adult patients initiating community-based ART between June 1, 2005, and April 30, 2006. Key programatic elements included free ART with direct observation by community health worker, tuberculosis screening and treatment, nutritional support, a transportation allowance, and social support. Among 1041 patients who initiated community-based ART, 961 (92.3%) were retained in care, 52 (5%) died and 28 (2.7%) were lost to follow-up. Median CD4 T-cell count increase was 336 cells per microliter [interquartile range: (IQR): 212-493] from median 190 cells per microliter (IQR: 116-270) at initiation., Conclusions: A program of intensive community-based treatment support for ART in rural Rwanda had excellent outcomes in 24-month retention in care. Having committed to improving access to HIV treatment in sub-Saharan Africa, the international community, including country HIV programs, should set high programmatic outcome benchmarks.