Search

Studies on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in sub-Saharan Africa have yielded varying results, although authors universally agree the real burden surpasses reported cases. The primary objective of this study was to determine SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among patients attending Monkole Hospital in Kinshasa (D.R. Congo). The secondary objective was to evaluate the analytic performance of two chemiluminescence platforms: Elecsys® (Roche) and VirClia® (Vircell) on dried blood spot samples (DBS). The study population (N = 373) was recruited in two stages: a mid-2021 blood donor cohort (15.5% women) and a mid-2022 women cohort. Crude global seroprevalence was 61% (53.9%-67.8%) pre-Delta in 2021 and 90.2% (84.7%-94.2%) post-Omicron in 2022. Anti-spike (S) antibody levels significantly increased from 53.1 (31.8-131.3) U/mL in 2021 to 436.5 (219.3-950.5) U/mL in 2022 and were significantly higher above 45 years old in the 2022 population. Both platforms showed good analytic performance on DBS samples: sensitivity was 96.8% for IgG (antiN/S) (93.9%-98.5%) and 96.0% (93.0%-98.0%) for anti-S quantification. These results provide additional support for the notion that exposure to SARS-CoV-2 is more widespread than indicated by case-based surveillance and will be able to guide the pandemic response and strategy moving forward. Likewise, this study contributes evidence to the reliability of DBS as a tool for serological testing and diagnosis in resource-limited settings., (© 2024 The Authors. Journal of Medical Virology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact both in general and mental healthcare, challenged the health systems worldwide, and affected their capacity to deliver essential health services. We aimed to describe perceived changes in ease of access to general and mental healthcare among patients with a diagnosis of depression and/or unhealthy alcohol use in Colombia., Methods: This study is embedded in the DIADA project, a multicenter implementation research study aimed at evaluating the integration of mental healthcare in primary care in Colombia. Between November 2020 and August 2021, we conducted a COVID-19 pandemic impact assessment in a cohort of participants with newly diagnosed depression and/or unhealthy alcohol use part of DIADA project. We assessed the ease of access and factors related to perceived ease of access to general or mental healthcare, during the COVID-19 pandemic., Results: 836 participants completed the COVID-19 pandemic impact assessment. About 30% of participants considered their mental health to be worse during the pandemic and 84.3% perceived access to general healthcare to be worse during the pandemic. Most of participants (85.8%) were unable to assess access to mental health services, but a significant proportion considered it to be worse. Experiencing worse ease of access to general healthcare was more frequent among women, patients with diagnosis of depression, and patients with comorbidities. Experiencing worse ease of access to mental healthcare was more frequent among patients aged between 30 and 49.9 years, from socioeconomic status between 4 and 6, affiliated to the contributive social security regime, attending urban study sites, and those who perceived their mental health was worse during the pandemic., Discussion: Despite the overall perception of worse mental health during the pandemic, the use of mental healthcare was low compared to general healthcare. Ease of access was perceived to be worse compared to pre-pandemic. Ease of access and access were affected by geographical study site, socioeconomic status, age and gender. Our findings highlight the need for improved communication between patients and institutions, tailored strategies to adapt the healthcare provision to patients' characteristics, and continued efforts to strengthen the role of mental healthcare provision in primary care., Competing Interests: Author LM is affiliated with the business that developed the mobile intervention platform used in this research. This relationship is extensively managed by author LM and her academic institution. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Gómez-Restrepo, Cepeda, Torrey, Suarez-Obando, Uribe-Restrepo, Park, Acosta, Camblor, Castro, Aguilera-Cruz, González, Chaparro, Gómez-Gamez, Bell and Marsch.)