Search

Aims To develop recommendations for strategies and interventions to reduce stigma and discrimination related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), through reviewing and synthesising evidence in relation to COVID-19 and other disease outbreaks and infectious/stigmatised conditions from systematic reviews and primary studies and recommendations from additional materials. Methods Rapid review, drawing on the World Health Organization's (WHO) methodology for developing interim guidelines during health emergencies. PubMed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central and Campbell Collaboration searched up to mid-April 2020. Searches were supplemented by reference-searching and expert recommendations. Searches were designed to identify: (1) systematic reviews ( Results The searches identified a total of 4150 potentially relevant records, from which 12 systematic reviews and 29 additional articles were included. Overarching considerations and specific recommendations focus on: (1) language/words used in relation to COVID-19 and affected people; (2) media/journalistic practices; (3) public health interventions; (4) targeted public health interventions for key groups and (5) involving communities and key stakeholders. Conclusions These recommendations represent the first consolidated evidence-based guidance on stigma and discrimination reduction in relation to COVID-19. Mitigating the impact of stigma is critical in reducing distress and negative experiences, and strengthening communities' resolve to work together during exceptional circumstances. Ultimately, reducing stigma helps addressing structural inequalities that drive marginalisation and exacerbate both health risks and the impact of stigma. Administrations and decision makers are urged to consider integrating these recommendations into the ongoing COVID-19 response.

BACKGROUND: In Sub-Saharan African countries which often lack high-quality vital registration data, estimates of under-five mortality (U5M) rely heavily on full birth histories (FBHs) collected in surveys and model age patterns of mortality calibrated against vital statistics from other populations. Health and Demographic Surveillance Systems (HDSS) are al-ternate sources of population-based data in much of sub-Saharan Africa, which are less formally utilized in estimation. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to compare the age pattern of U5M in African HDSS with FBHs from the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (MICS), the Human Mortality Database (HMD), and model age patterns. METHODS: We examined the relative levels of neonatal, post neonatal, infant, and child mortality across data sources. We directly compared estimates for DHS and MICS subnational regions with HDSS, and used OLS regression to identify data attributes that correlated with the disparity between estimates. RESULTSH: DSS and FBH data suggests that African populations have higher levels of child mortality and lower infant mortality than the historic record. This age pattern is most explicit for Western African populations, but also characterizes data for other sub regions. The comparison between HDSS and FBH suggests that FBH child mortality is biased downward. The comparison is less conclusive for neonatal and infant mortality. CONTRIBUTION: This study questions the practice of using model age patterns derived from largely high-income settings for inferring or correcting U5M estimates for African populations. It also highlights the considerable uncertainty around the consistency of HDSS and FBH estimates of U5M.

Background: In many countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, self-reported HIV testing history and awareness of HIV-positive status from household surveys are used to estimate the percentage of people living with HIV (PLHIV) who know their HIV status. Despite widespread use, there is limited empirical information on the sensitivity of those self-reports, which can be affected by non-disclosure. Methods: Bayesian latent class models were used to estimate the sensitivity of self-reported HIV testing history and awareness of HIV-positive status in four Population-based HIV Impact Assessment surveys in Eswatini, Malawi, Tanzania, and Zambia. Antiretroviral (ARV) metabolites biomarkers were used to identify persons on treatment who did not accurately report their status. For those without ARV biomarkers, the pooled estimate of non-disclosure among untreated persons was 1.48 higher than those on treatment. Results: Among PLHIV, the sensitivity of self-reported HIV testing history ranged 96% to 99% across surveys. Sensitivity of self-reported awareness of HIV status varied from 91% to 97%. Non-disclosure was generally higher among men and those aged 15-24 years. Adjustments for imperfect sensitivity did not substantially influence estimates of of PLHIV ever tested (difference

Background: COVID-19 has the potential to cause substantial disruptions to health services, including by cases overburdening the health system or response measures limiting usual programmatic activities. We aimed to quantify the extent to which disruptions in services for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), tuberculosis (TB) and malaria in low- and middle-income countries with high burdens of those disease could lead to additional loss of life. Methods: We constructed plausible scenarios for the disruptions that could be incurred during the COVID-19 pandemic and used established transmission models for each disease to estimate the additional impact on health that could be caused in selected settings. Findings: In high burden settings, HIV-, TB- and malaria-related deaths over five years may increase by up to 10%, 20% and 36%, respectively, compared to if there were no COVID-19 pandemic. We estimate the greatest impact on HIV to be from interruption to antiretroviral therapy, which may occur during a period of high health system demand. For TB, we estimate the greatest impact is from reductions in timely diagnosis and treatment of new cases, which may result from any prolonged period of COVID-19 suppression interventions. We estimate that the greatest impact on malaria burden could come from interruption of planned net campaigns. These disruptions could lead to loss of life-years over five years that is of the same order of magnitude as the direct impact from COVID-19 in places with a high burden of malaria and large HIV/TB epidemics. Interpretation: Maintaining the most critical prevention activities and healthcare services for HIV, TB and malaria could significantly reduce the overall impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, The Wellcome Trust, DFID, MRC

our estimates show that the percentage of individuals that have been infected is 4.1% [3.7%-4.5%], with wide variation between states. For all states, even for the worst affected states, we estimate that less than a quarter of the population has been infected; in New York, for example, we estimate that 16.6% [12.8%-21.6%] of individuals have been infected to date. Our attack rates for New York are in line with those from recent serological studies [1] broadly supporting our choice of infection fatality rate. There is variation in the initial reproduction number, which is likely due to a range of factors; we find a strong association between the initial reproduction number with both population density (measured at the state level) and the chronological date when 10 cumulative deaths occurred (a crude estimate of the date of locally sustained transmission). Our estimates suggest that the epidemic is not under control in much of the US: as of 17 May 2020 the reproduction number is above the critical threshold (1.0) in 24 [95% CI: 20-30] states. Higher reproduction numbers are geographically clustered in the South and Midwest, where epidemics are still developing, while we estimate lower reproduction numbers in states that have already suffered high COVID-19 mortality (such as the Northeast). These estimates suggest that caution must be taken in loosening current restrictions if effective additional measures are not put in place. We predict that increased mobility following relaxation of social distancing will lead to resurgence of transmission, keeping all else constant. We predict that deaths over the next two-month period could exceed current cumulative deaths by greater than two-fold, if the relationship between mobility and transmission remains unchanged. Our results suggest that factors modulating transmission such as rapid testing, contact tracing and behavioural precautions are crucial to offset the rise of transmission associated with loosening of social distancing. Overall, we show that while all US states have substantially reduced their reproduction numbers, there is little evidence that any states are approaching herd immunity and thus the epidemic is close to over in any state.

Brazil is an epicentre for COVID-19 in Latin America. In this report we describe the Brazilian epidemic using three epidemiological measures: the number of infections, the number of deaths and the reproduction number. Our modelling framework requires sufficient death data to estimate trends, and we therefore limit our analysis to 16 states that have experienced a total of more than fifty deaths. The distribution of deaths among states is highly heterogeneous, with 5 states—São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Ceará, Pernambuco and Amazonas—accounting for 81% of deaths reported to date. In these states, we estimate that the percentage of people that have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 ranges from 3.3% (95% CI: 2.8%-3.7%) in São Paulo to 10.6% (95% CI: 8.8%-12.1%) in Amazonas. The reproduction number (a measure of transmission intensity) at the start of the epidemic meant that an infected individual would infect three or four others on average. Following non-pharmaceutical interventions such as school closures and decreases in population mobility, we show that the reproduction number has dropped substantially in each state. However, for all 16 states we study, we estimate with high confidence that the reproduction number remains above 1. A reproduction number above 1 means that the epidemic is not yet controlled and will continue to grow. These trends are in stark contrast to other major COVID19 epidemics in Europe and Asia where enforced lockdowns have successfully driven the reproduction number below 1. While the Brazilian epidemic is still relatively nascent on a national scale, our results suggest that further action is needed to limit spread and prevent health system overload.

Italy was the first European country to experience sustained local transmission of COVID-19. As of 1st May 2020, the Italian health authorities reported 28; 238 deaths nationally. To control the epidemic, the Italian government implemented a suite of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), including school and university closures, social distancing and full lockdown involving banning of public gatherings and non essential movement. In this report, we model the effect of NPIs on transmission using data on average mobility. We estimate that the average reproduction number (a measure of transmission intensity) is currently below one for all Italian regions, and significantly so for the majority of the regions. Despite the large number of deaths, the proportion of population that has been infected by SARS-CoV-2 (the attack rate) is far from the herd immunity threshold in all Italian regions, with the highest attack rate observed in Lombardy (13.18% [10.66%-16.70%]). Italy is set to relax the currently implemented NPIs from 4th May 2020. Given the control achieved by NPIs, we consider three scenarios for the next 8 weeks: a scenario in which mobility remains the same as during the lockdown, a scenario in which mobility returns to pre-lockdown levels by 20%, and a scenario in which mobility returns to pre-lockdown levels by 40%. The scenarios explored assume that mobility is scaled evenly across all dimensions, that behaviour stays the same as before NPIs were implemented, that no pharmaceutical interventions are introduced, and it does not include transmission reduction from contact tracing, testing and the isolation of confirmed or suspected cases. We find that, in the absence of additional interventions, even a 20% return to pre-lockdown mobility could lead to a resurgence in the number of deaths far greater than experienced in the current wave in several regions. Future increases in the number of deaths will lag behind the increase in transmission intensity and so a second wave will not be immediately apparent from just monitoring of the daily number of deaths. Our results suggest that SARS-CoV-2 transmission as well as mobility should be closely monitored in the next weeks and months. To compensate for the increase in mobility that will occur due to the relaxation of the currently implemented NPIs, enhanced community surveillance including swab testing, contact tracing and the early isolation of infections are of paramount importance to reduce the risk of resurgence in transmission.

COVID-19 has the potential to cause disruptions to health services in different ways; through the health system becoming overwhelmed with COVID-19 patients, through the intervention used to slow transmission of COVID-19 inhibiting access to preventative interventions and services, and through supplies of medicine being interrupted. We aim to quantify the extent to which such disruptions in services for HIV, TB and malaria in high burden low- and middle-income countries could lead to additional loss of life. In high burden settings, HIV, TB and malaria related deaths over 5 years may be increased by up to 10%, 20% and 36%, respectively, compared to if there were no COVID-19 epidemic. We estimate the greatest impact on HIV to be from interruption to ART, which may occur during a period of high or extremely high health system demand; for TB, we estimate the greatest impact is from reductions in timely diagnosis and treatment of new cases, which may result from a long period of COVID-19 suppression interventions; for malaria, we estimate that the greatest impact could come from reduced prevention activities including interruption of planned net campaigns, through all phases of the COVID-19 epidemic. In high burden settings, the impact of each type of disruption could be significant and lead to a loss of life-years over five years that is of the same order of magnitude as the direct impact from COVID-19 in places with a high burden of malaria and large HIV/TB epidemics. Maintaining the most critical prevention activities and healthcare services for HIV, TB and malaria could significantly reduce the overall impact of the COVID-19 epidemic.

Following the emergence of a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and its spread outside of China, Europe is now experiencing large epidemics. In response, many European countries have implemented unprecedented non-pharmaceutical interventions including case isolation, the closure of schools and universities, banning of mass gatherings and/or public events, and most recently, widescale social distancing including local and national lockdowns. In this report, we use a semi-mechanistic Bayesian hierarchical model to attempt to infer the impact of these interventions across 11 European countries. Our methods assume that changes in the reproductive number – a measure of transmission - are an immediate response to these interventions being implemented rather than broader gradual changes in behaviour. Our model estimates these changes by calculating backwards from the deaths observed over time to estimate transmission that occurred several weeks prior, allowing for the time lag between infection and death. One of the key assumptions of the model is that each intervention has the same effect on the reproduction number across countries and over time. This allows us to leverage a greater amount of data across Europe to estimate these effects. It also means that our results are driven strongly by the data from countries with more advanced epidemics, and earlier interventions, such as Italy and Spain. We find that the slowing growth in daily reported deaths in Italy is consistent with a significant impact of interventions implemented several weeks earlier. In Italy, we estimate that the effective reproduction number, Rt, dropped to close to 1 around the time of lockdown (11th March), although with a high level of uncertainty. Overall, we estimate that countries have managed to reduce their reproduction number. Our estimates have wide credible intervals and contain 1 for countries that have implemented all interventions considered in our analysis. This means that the reproduction number may be above or below this value. With current interventions remaining in place to at least the end of March, we estimate that interventions across all 11 countries will have averted 59,000 deaths up to 31 March [95% credible interval 21,000-120,000]. Many more deaths will be averted through ensuring that interventions remain in place until transmission drops to low levels. We estimate that, across all 11 countries between 7 and 43 million individuals have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 up to 28th March, representing between 1.88% and 11.43% of the population. The proportion of the population infected to date – the attack rate - is estimated to be highest in Spain followed by Italy and lowest in Germany and Norway, reflecting the relative stages of the epidemics. Given the lag of 2-3 weeks between when transmission changes occur and when their impact can be observed in trends in mortality, for most of the countries considered here it remains too early to be certain that recent interventions have been effective. If interventions in countries at earlier stages of their epidemic, such as Germany or the UK, are more or less effective than they were in the countries with advanced epidemics, on which our estimates are largely based, or if interventions have improved or worsened over time, then our estimates of the reproduction number and deaths averted would change accordingly. It is therefore critical that the current interventions remain in place and trends in cases and deaths are closely monitored in the coming days and weeks to provide reassurance that transmission of SARS-Cov-2 is slowing.

On Monday 16th March 2020 the UK government announced new actions to control COVID-19. These recommendations directly affected the entire UK population, and included the following: stop non-essential contact with others; stop all unnecessary travel; start working from home where possible; avoid pubs, clubs, theatres and other such social venues; and to isolate at home for 14 days if anyone in the household has a high temperature or a new and continuous cough. To capture public sentiment towards these recommendations, a YouGov survey was commissioned by the Patient Experience Research Centre (PERC), Imperial College London. The survey was completed by 2,108 UK adults between the dates of 17th – 18th March 2020. The survey results show the following: • 77% reported being worried about the COVID-19 outbreak in the UK. • 48% of adults who have not tested positive for COVID-19 believe it is likely they will be infected at some point in the future. • 93% of adults reported personally taking at least one measure to protect themselves from COVID-19 infection, including: o 83% washed their hands more frequently; o 52% avoided crowded areas; o 50% avoided social events; o 36% avoided public transport; o 31% avoided going out; o 11% avoided going to work; o 28% avoided travel to areas outside the UK. • There is high reported ability and willingness to self-isolate for 7 days* if advised to do so by a health professional (88%). • However only 44% reported being able to work from home. This was higher among managerial and professional workers (60%) than manual, semi-skilled, and casual workers (19%)^, reflecting less flexible job roles for manual and lower grade workers. • 71% reported changing behaviour in response to government guidance. The figure (53%) was lower for young adults (18-24 year-olds). • Hand washing (63%), avoiding persons with symptoms (61%), and covering your sneeze (53%) were more likely to be perceived as ‘very effective’ measures to prevent COVID-19 spread than common social distancing measures (avoiding going out (31%), to work (23%), to shops (16%) or to schools (19%)).

Background: More than 90% of trauma mortality occurs in low- and middle-income countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa. Head injury is the primary driver of trauma mortality in the prehospital and in-hospital setting. Methods: An observational study was performed on patients presenting with traumatic brain injury (TBI) from October 2016 through May 2017 at Kamuzu Central Hospital, Malawi. Bivariate analysis and logistic regression were performed to determine the odds of favorable functional outcomes and mortality after controlling for significant covariates. Results: Of the 356 patients with TBI, 72 (20.2%) were children

Background: In patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis follow‐up magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) is performed by many centres, particularly for the early detection of biliary malignancies and strictures. Clinically meaningful MRI‐based definitions of primary sclerosing cholangitis related complications are, however, lacking.Aim: To investigate how primary sclerosing cholangitis experts interpret follow‐up MRI/MRCP with a focus on conclusions that may impact clinical decision‐making in primary sclerosing cholangitis.Methods: Within the International Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis Study Group, an online survey on 16 real‐life primary sclerosing cholangitis cases including clinical and biochemical information as well as a T2‐weighted liver MRI/3D‐MRCP was conducted. The interpretation of images and subsequent recommendations were assessed using a multiple‐choice questionnaire. An inter‐rater reliability calculation (Fleiss′ kappa) was performed and factors potentially affecting the interpretation of magnetic resonance images were analysed using generalised linear mixed‐effect models.Results: Forty‐four members/associates of the International Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis Study Group (median experience in the care of primary sclerosing cholangitis patients: 14 years) completed the survey. The MRI interpretation significantly varied among the participants. The lowest agreement was found with respect to the indication to perform subsequent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP; Κ = 0.12, 95%CI 0.11‐0.14). Elevated total bilirubin was the variable with the strongest effect on the rate of suspected dominant strictures, cholangiocarcinoma or ERCP recommendations. Liver cirrhosis did not prevent participants from recommending ERCP. Overall, the survey participants′ recommendations contrasted the real‐life management and outcome.Conclusions: In primary sclerosing cholangitis, the interpretation of follow‐up MRI/3D‐MRCP significantly varies even among experts and seems to be primarily affected by bilirubin levels. Generally accepted MRI‐based definitions of primary sclerosing cholangitis‐related complications are urgently needed.