Search

Objective: Migrants and refugees are at a disadvantage in accessing basic necessities. The objective of this study is to assess the inequity in access, needs and determinants of COVID-19 vaccination among refugees and migrant populations in Pakistan., Design: We conducted a mixed-method study comprising a cross-sectional survey and a qualitative study. In this paper, we will only report the findings from the cross-sectional survey., Setting: This survey was conducted in different cities of Pakistan including Quetta, Karachi and Hyderabad., Participants: A total of 570 participants were surveyed including refugees and migrants, both in regular and irregular situations., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: The primary outcome of the study was to estimate the proportion of refugees and migrants, both in regular and irregular situations vaccinated against COVID-19 and assess the inequity. The χ 2 test and Fisher's exact test were used to determine the significant differences in proportions between refugees and migrants and between regions., Results: The survey showed that only 26.9% of the refugee and migrant population were tested for COVID-19, 4.56% contracted coronavirus, and 3.85% were hospitalised due to COVID-19. About 66% of the refugees and migrants were fully vaccinated including those who received the single-dose vaccine or received all two doses, and 17.6% were partially vaccinated. Despite vaccination campaigns by the government, 14.4% of the refugee and migrant population remained unvaccinated mostly because of vaccines not being offered, distant vaccination sites, limited access, unavailability of COVID-19 vaccine or due to a difficult registration process. Vaccination rates varied across provinces, genders and migrant populations due to misconceptions, and several social, cultural and geographical barriers., Conclusion: This study highlights the COVID-19 vaccine coverage, access and inequity faced by refugees and migrants during the pandemic. It suggests early prioritisation of policies inclusive of all refugees and migrants and the provision of identification documents to ease access to basic necessities., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Antiretroviral therapy (ART) has led to dramatic improvements in survival for people living with HIV, but is unable to cure infection, or induce viral control off therapy. Designing intervention trials with novel agents with the potential to confer a period of HIV remission without ART remains a key scientific and community goal. We detail the rationale, design, and outcomes of a randomised, placebo-controlled trial of two HIV-specific long-acting broadly neutralising antibodies (bNAbs): 3BNC117-LS and 10-1074-LS, which target CD4 binding site and V3 loop respectively, on post-treatment viral control., Methods: RIO is a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blinded prospective phase II study. Eligible individuals will have started ART within 3 months of primary HIV infection and have viral sequences that appear to be sensitive to both bNAbs. It will randomise 72 eligible participants 1:1 to the following arms via a two-stage design. In Stage 1, arm A participants are given dual long-acting (LS-variants) bNAbs infusions, followed by intensively monitored Analytical Treatment Interruption (ATI) (n = 36); in arm B, participants receive placebo infusions followed by ATI. The primary endpoint will be time to viral rebound within 36 weeks after ATI. Upon viral rebound, the participant and researcher are unblinded. Participants in arm A recommence ART and complete the study. Participants in arm B are invited to restart ART and enroll into Stage 2 where they will receive open-label LS bNAbs, followed by a second ATI 24 weeks after. Secondary and exploratory endpoints include adverse events, time to undetectable viraemia after restarting ART, immunological markers, HIV proviral DNA, serum bNAb concentrations in blood, bNAb resistance at viral rebound, and quality of life measures., Discussion: The two-stage design was determined in collaboration with community involvement. This design allows all participants the option to receive bNAbs. It also tests the hypothesis that bNAbs may drive sustained HIV control beyond the duration of detectable bNAb concentrations. Community representatives were involved at all stages. This included the two-stage design, discussion on the criteria to restart ART, frequency of monitoring visits off ART, and reducing the risk of onward transmission to HIV-negative partners. It also included responding to the challenges of COVID-19., Trial Registration: The protocol is registered on Clinical., Trials: gov and EudraCT and has approval from UK Ethics and MHRA., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Accurate and sensitive detection of antibody to SARS-CoV-2 remains an essential component of the pandemic response. Measuring antibody that predicts neutralising activity and the vaccine response is an absolute requirement for laboratory-based confirmatory and reference activity. The viral receptor binding domain (RBD) constitutes the prime target antigen for neutralising antibody. A double antigen binding assay (DABA), providing the most sensitive format has been exploited in a novel hybrid manner employing a solid-phase S1 preferentially presenting RBD, coupled with a labelled RBD conjugate, used in a two-step sequential assay for detection and measurement of antibody to RBD (anti-RBD). This class and species neutral assay showed a specificity of 100 % on 825 pre COVID-19 samples and a potential sensitivity of 99.6 % on 276 recovery samples, predicting quantitatively the presence of neutralising antibody determined by pseudo-type neutralization and by plaque reduction. Anti-RBD is also measurable in ferrets immunised with ChadOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine and in humans immunised with both AstraZeneca and Pfizer vaccines. This assay detects anti-RBD at presentation with illness, demonstrates its elevation with disease severity, its sequel to asymptomatic infection and its persistence after the loss of antibody to the nucleoprotein (anti-NP). It also provides serological confirmation of prior infection and offers a secure measure for seroprevalence and studies of vaccine immunisation in human and animal populations. The hybrid DABA also displays the attributes necessary for the detection and quantification of anti-RBD to be used in clinical practice. An absence of detectable anti-RBD by this assay predicates the need for passive immune prophylaxis in at-risk patients., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

At-home sampling is key to large scale seroprevalence studies. Dried blood spot (DBS) self-sampling removes the need for medical personnel for specimen collection but facilitates specimen referral to an appropriately accredited laboratory for accurate sample analysis. To establish a highly sensitive and specific antibody assay that would facilitate self-sampling for prevalence and vaccine-response studies. Paired sera and DBS eluates collected from 439 sero-positive, 382 sero-negative individuals and DBS from 34 vaccine recipients were assayed by capture ELISAs for IgG and IgM antibody to SARS-CoV-2. IgG and IgM combined on DBS eluates achieved a diagnostic sensitivity of 97.9% (95%CI 96.6 to 99.3) and a specificity of 99.2% (95% CI 98.4 to 100) compared to serum, displaying limits of detection equivalent to 23 and 10 WHO IU/ml, respectively. A strong correlation (r = 0.81) was observed between serum and DBS reactivities. Reactivity remained stable with samples deliberately rendered inadequate, (p = 0.234) and when samples were accidentally damaged or 'invalid'. All vaccine recipients were sero-positive. This assay provides a secure method for self-sampling by DBS with a sensitivity comparable to serum. The feasibility of DBS testing in sero-prevalence studies and in monitoring post-vaccine responses was confirmed, offering a robust and reliable tool for serological monitoring at a population level., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

IntroductionImmunoassays targeting different SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies are employed for seroprevalence studies. The degree of variability between immunoassays targeting anti-nucleocapsid (anti-NP; the majority) vs the potentially neutralising anti-spike antibodies (including anti-receptor-binding domain; anti-RBD), particularly in mild or asymptomatic disease, remains unclear.AimsWe aimed to explore variability in anti-NP and anti-RBD antibody detectability following mild symptomatic or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and analyse antibody response for correlation with symptomatology.MethodsA multicentre prospective cross-sectional study was undertaken (April-July 2020). Paired serum samples were tested for anti-NP and anti-RBD IgG antibodies and reactivity expressed as binding ratios (BR). Multivariate linear regression was performed analysing age, sex, time since onset, symptomatology, anti-NP and anti-RBD antibody BR.ResultsWe included 906 adults. Antibody results (793/906; 87.5%; 95% confidence interval: 85.2-89.6) and BR strongly correlated (ρ = 0.75). PCR-confirmed cases were more frequently identified by anti-RBD (129/130) than anti-NP (123/130). Anti-RBD testing identified 83 of 325 (25.5%) cases otherwise reported as negative for anti-NP. Anti-NP presence (+1.75/unit increase; p < 0.001), fever (≥ 38°C; +1.81; p < 0.001) or anosmia (+1.91; p < 0.001) were significantly associated with increased anti-RBD BR. Age (p = 0.85), sex (p = 0.28) and cough (p = 0.35) were not. When time since symptom onset was considered, we did not observe a significant change in anti-RBD BR (p = 0.95) but did note decreasing anti-NP BR (p < 0.001).ConclusionSARS-CoV-2 anti-RBD IgG showed significant correlation with anti-NP IgG for absolute seroconversion and BR. Higher BR were seen in symptomatic individuals, particularly those with fever. Inter-assay variability (12.5%) was evident and raises considerations for optimising seroprevalence testing strategies/studies.

Introduction: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is the largest public health challenge of the twenty-first century. While COVID-19 primarily affects the respiratory system, manifesting as interstitial pneumonitis and severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), it also has implications for the cardiovascular system. Moreover, those admitted to hospital with severe COVID-19 are more likely to have cardiovascular comorbidities such as hypertension and diabetes mellitus. The underlying pathophysiology of why COVID-19 onset can further decline cardiac pathologies as well as trigger acute onset of new cardiac complications is not yet well understood., Areas Covered: In this review, the authors extensively review literature focused on the current understanding and approaches of managing patients who have underlying cardiovascular diseases and concomitant COVID-19 infection. Furthermore, the authors explore the possible cardiovascular implications of the suggested COVID-19 therapeutic agents that are used to treat this lethal disease., Expert Opinion: Current evidence is evolving around the many trialed pharmacotherapeutic considerations for the management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with cardiovascular disease. While we await such data, clinicians should advocate for careful consideration of all concomitant medications for those presenting with COVID-19 on a patient-by-patient basis.

It is currently unknown how post-COVID-19 syndrome (PCS) may affect those infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This longitudinal study includes healthcare staff who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between March and April 2020, with follow-up of their antibody titers and symptoms. More than half (21 of 38) had PCS after 7-8 months. There was no statistically significant difference between initial reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction titers or serial antibody levels between those who did and those who did not develop PCS. This study highlights the relative commonality of PCS in healthcare workers and this should be considered in vaccination scheduling and workforce planning to allow adequate frontline staffing numbers., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

Objectives: Critical care workers were considered to be at high risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection from patients during the first wave of the pandemic. Staff symptoms, previous swab testing, and antibody prevalence were correlated with patient admissions to investigate this assumption., Design: Cross-sectional study., Setting: A large critical care department in a tertiary-care teaching hospital in London, United Kingdom., Subjects: Staff working in critical care., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: Participants completed a questionnaire and provided a serum sample for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 antibody testing over a 3-day period in April 2020. We compared the timing of symptoms in staff to the coronavirus disease 2019 patient admissions to critical care. We also identified factors associated with antibody detection. Of 625 staff 384 (61.4%) reported previous symptoms and 124 (19.8%) had sent a swab for testing. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection had been confirmed in 37 of those swabbed (29.8%). Overall, 21% (131/625) had detectable severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 antibody, of whom 9.9% (13/131) had been asymptomatic. The peak onset of symptoms among staff occurred 2 weeks before the peak in coronavirus disease 2019 patient admissions. Staff who worked in multiple departments across the hospital were more likely to be seropositive. Staff with a symptomatic household contact were also more likely to be seropositive at 31.3%, compared with 16.2% in those without (p < 0.0001)., Conclusions: Staff who developed coronavirus disease 2019 were less likely to have caught it from their patients in critical care. Other staff, other areas of the hospital, and the wider community are more likely sources of infection. These findings indicate that personal protective equipment was effective at preventing transmission from patients. However, staff also need to maintain protective measures away from the bedside., Competing Interests: Drs. Rosadas, McClure, and Tedder declare an interest in the Imperial Hybrid double antigen binding assay (DABA) (patent file IRN.FID4816059). Dr. Rosadas received funding from Imperial College London and disclosed that she is included as an inventor in a patent filed for the Imperial Hybrid DABA (FID4816059). Dr. Cherepanov received support for article research from Wellcome Trust/Charity Open Access Fund. Dr. McClure received support for article research from the Medical Research Council. Dr. Tedder received funding from the Medical Research Council and U.K. Research and Innovation research funding to develop serology. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)

Background: As the disease caused by the novel coronavirus has spread globally, there has been significant economic instability in the healthcare systems. This reality was especially accentuated in Ecuador where, the shortage of healthcare workers combined with cultural and macroeconomic factors has led Ecuador to face the most aggressive outbreak in Latin America. In this context, the participation of final-year medical students on the front line is indispensable. Appropriate training on COVID-19 is an urgent requirement that universities and health systems must guarantee. We aimed to describe the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of Ecuadorian final-year medical students that could potentially guide the design of better medical education curricula regarding COVID-19., Methods: This was a cross-sectional 33-item online survey conducted between April 6 to April 2020 assessing the knowledge, attitudes, and practices toward the diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and prognosis toward COVID-19 in Ecuadorian final-year medical students. It was sent by email, Facebook, and WhatsApp., Results: A total of 309 students responded to the survey. Out of which 88% of students scored high (≥ 70% correct) for knowledge of the disease. The majority of students were pessimistic about possible government actions, which is reflected in the negative attitude towards the control of COVID-19 and volunteering during the outbreak in Ecuador (77%, and 58% of the students, respectively). Moreover, 91% of students said they did not have adequate protective equipment. The latter finding was significantly associated with negative attitudes., Conclusions: Although a large number of students displayed negative attitudes, the non-depreciable percentage of students who were willing to volunteer and the coexisting high level of knowledge displayed by students, suggests that Ecuador has a capable upcoming workforce that could benefit from an opportunity to strengthen, improve and advance their training in preparation for COVID-19. Not having personal protective equipment was significantly associated to negative attitudes. Providing the necessary tools and creating a national curriculum may be one of the most effective ways to ensure all students are trained, whilst simultaneously focusing on the students' most pressing concerns. With this additional training, negative attitudes will improve and students will be better qualified.

At the start of the UK coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic, this rare point prevalence study revealed that one-third of patients (15 of 45) in a London inpatient rehabilitation unit were found to be infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) but asymptomatic. We report on 8 patients in detail, including their clinical stability, the evolution of their nasopharyngeal viral reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) burden, and their antibody levels over time, revealing the infection dynamics by RT-PCR and serology during the acute phase. Notably, a novel serological test for antibodies against the receptor binding domain of SARS-CoV-2 showed that 100% of our asymptomatic cohort remained seropositive 3-6 weeks after diagnosis., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

The majority of educators and students agreed that online learning was a preferable option during the pandemic. This study's primary goal was to examine the psychosocial difficulties college students had during COVID-19. The primary goals of the study were to identify the psychological problems that college students face. to assess how these relate to their comprehension, perspective, and application of COVID-19.should look into the different methods that students have employed to treat these illnesses. The whole student body at Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan served as the study's population. Using a deliberate selection technique, the departments of IBL and social science education were chosen to represent the study's sample. A questionnaire was used to gather data from the targeted department sample, and SPSS was used for data analysis. The gathered information was tallied, examined, and evaluated in relation to the study's goals. Conclusions were drawn from the data and then based on the research findings. Additionally, this study has highlighted the psychosocial problems and challenges that students face when learning online—problems that still need to be resolved. The conclusion emphasizes the assistance that the state, parents, educational institutions, and educators must offer in order to boost students' access to and participation in online learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With nearly 11 billion doses of the COVID-19 vaccine being administered, stark differences in the vaccination rates persist. Vaccine distribution initiatives such as COVAX and African Vaccine Acquisition Trust (AVAT) were formed to ensure equitable vaccine delivery. This review evaluates the initial COVID-19 vaccination efforts and the impact of different vaccine distribution initiatives on equitable vaccination coverage in the early phase. We conducted a descriptive and trend analysis with sub-groups by various context parameters of data on COVID-19 vaccination from December 2020 till February 2022, from four public databases including UNICEF, WHO, COVID-19 Task Force and Our World in Data to examine COVID-19 vaccine distribution progress and the contributions of vaccine procurement initiatives. We found that High Income Countries (HICs) had much higher vaccination rate (78.4%) than Lower-Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) (55.5%) and Low-Income Countries (LICs) (10.9%). Large differentials (>80% to <10%) in the vaccination rates of eligible population of adults in LMICs and LICs existed. Differentials in the total vaccine doses delivered to each country ranged from 355.6% to 4.8% of the total population. In LICs, 53.3% of the total doses were obtained via COVAX, 30.9% by bilateral/multilateral agreements, 6.5% by donations and 3.8% by AVAT. In LMICs, 56.4% of total vaccines procured were via bilateral/multilateral agreements, 21.4% by COVAX, 4.2% by donations and 0.5% by AVAT. COVAX delivered 1 billion doses by January 2022 which constituted 53.2% and 21.4% of procured doses in LICs and LMICs. In LICs and LMICs, 6.5% and 4.2% of total doses were acquired through donations while 30.9% and 56.4% of doses were purchased. Despite global efforts, significant disparities were present in COVID-19 vaccination efforts amongst countries of different income groups. Future efforts should focus on addressing vaccine inequities explicitly and in improving global vaccine distribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) has led the world toward severe socioeconomic crisis and psychological distress. It has severely hit the economy; but the service sector, particularly the hospitality industry, is hard hit by it. It increases the sense of insecurity among the employees and their perception of being unemployed, adversely affecting their mental health. This research aims to contribute to the emerging debate by investigating the effect of economic crisis and non-employability on employees' mental health through perceived job insecurity under the pandemic situation. It empirically examines the underlying framework by surveying 372 employees of the hospitality industry during COVID-19. Results indicate that perceived job insecurity mediates the relationship of fear of economic crisis, non-employability, and mental health. Furthermore, the contingency of fear of COVID-19 strengthens the indirect relationship of fear of economic crisis on mental health through perceived job insecurity. The findings will provide a new dimension to the managers to deal with the psychological factors associated with the employees' mental health and add to the emerging literature of behavioral sciences. The study also highlights the increasing need for investment in the digital infrastructure and smart technologies for the hospitality industry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Accurate antibody tests are essential to monitor the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Lateral flow immunoassays (LFIAs) can deliver testing at scale. However, reported performance varies, and sensitivity analyses have generally been conducted on serum from hospitalised patients. For use in community testing, evaluation of finger-prick self-tests, in non-hospitalised individuals, is required.Methods: Sensitivity analysis was conducted on 276 non-hospitalised participants. All had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by reverse transcription PCR and were ≥21 days from symptom onset. In phase I, we evaluated five LFIAs in clinic (with finger prick) and laboratory (with blood and sera) in comparison to (1) PCR-confirmed infection and (2) presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies on two 'in-house' ELISAs. Specificity analysis was performed on 500 prepandemic sera. In phase II, six additional LFIAs were assessed with serum.Findings: 95% (95% CI 92.2% to 97.3%) of the infected cohort had detectable antibodies on at least one ELISA. LFIA sensitivity was variable, but significantly inferior to ELISA in 8 out of 11 assessed. Of LFIAs assessed in both clinic and laboratory, finger-prick self-test sensitivity varied from 21% to 92% versus PCR-confirmed cases and from 22% to 96% versus composite ELISA positives. Concordance between finger-prick and serum testing was at best moderate (kappa 0.56) and, at worst, slight (kappa 0.13). All LFIAs had high specificity (97.2%-99.8%).Interpretation: LFIA sensitivity and sample concordance is variable, highlighting the importance of evaluations in setting of intended use. This rigorous approach to LFIA evaluation identified a test with high specificity (98.6% (95%CI 97.1% to 99.4%)), moderate sensitivity (84.4% with finger prick (95% CI 70.5% to 93.5%)) and moderate concordance, suitable for seroprevalence surveys. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Coronavirus disease 2019, also known as COVID-19, is caused by a novel coronavirus named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, or SARS-CoV-2. The infection has now catapulted into a full-blown pandemic across the world, which has affected more than 2 million people and has led to approximately 150,000 fatalities all over the world (WHO). In this review, we elaborate all currently available data that shed light on possible methods for treatment of COVID-19, such as antiviral drugs, corticosteroids, convalescent plasma, and potentially effective vaccines. Additionally, ongoing and discontinued clinical trials that have been carried out for validating probable treatments for COVID-19 are discussed. The review also elaborates the prospective approach and the possible advantages of using convalescent plasma and stem cells for the improvement of clinical symptoms and meeting the demand for an instantaneous cure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]