Search

In the light of thousands of infections and deaths, the World Health Organization (WHO) has declared the outbreak of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) a worldwide pandemic. It has spread to about 22 million people worldwide, with a total of 0.45 million expiries, limiting the movement of most people worldwide in the last 6 months. However, COVID-19 became the foremost health, economic, and humanitarian challenge of the twenty-first century. Measures intended to curb the pandemic of COVID-19 included travel bans, lockdowns, and social distances through shelter orders, which will further stop human activities suddenly and eventually impact the world and the national economy. The viral disease is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). After SARS-CoV-2 virus and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)-related CoV, COVID-19 is the third most significant lethal disease to humans. According to WHO, COVID-19 mortality exceeded that of SARS and MERS since COVID-19 was declared an international public health emergency. Genetic sequencing has recently established that COVID-19 is close to SARS-CoV and bat coronavirus which has not yet been recognized as the key cause of this pandemic outbreak, its transmission, and human pathogen mechanism. This review focuses on a brief introduction of novel coronavirus pathogens, including coronavirus in humans and animals, its taxonomic classification, symptoms, pathogenicity, social impact, economic impact, and potential treatment therapy for COVID-19.

Despite the acknowledged injustice and widespread existence of parachute research studies conducted in low- or middle-income countries by researchers from institutions in high-income countries, there is currently no pragmatic guidance for how academic journals should evaluate manuscript submissions and challenge this practice. We assembled a multidisciplinary group of editors and researchers with expertise in international health research to develop this consensus statement. We reviewed relevant existing literature and held three workshops to present research data and holistically discuss the concept of equitable authorship and the role of academic journals in the context of international health research partnerships. We subsequently developed statements to guide prospective authors and journal editors as to how they should address this issue. We recommend that for manuscripts that report research conducted in low- or middle-income countries by collaborations including partners from one or more high-income countries, authors should submit accompanying structured reflexivity statements. We provide specific questions that these statements should address and suggest that journals should transparently publish reflexivity statements with accepted manuscripts. We also provide guidance to journal editors about how they should assess the structured statements when making decisions on whether to accept or reject submitted manuscripts. We urge journals across disciplines to adopt these recommendations to accelerate the changes needed to halt the practice of parachute research.

The International Health Regulations—State Party Annual Reporting (IHR-SPAR) index and the Global Health Security Index (GHSI) have been developed to aid in strengthening national capacities for pandemic preparedness. We examined the relationship between country-level rankings on these two indices, along with two additional indices (the Universal Health Coverage Service Coverage Index and World Bank Worldwide Governance Indicator (n = 195)) and compared them to the country-level reported coronavirus disease (COVID-19) cases and deaths (Johns Hopkins University COVID-19 Dashboard) through 17 June 2020. Ordinary least squares regression models were used to compare weekly reported COVID-19 cases and death rates per million in the first 12 weeks of the pandemic between countries classified as low, middle and high ranking on each index while controlling for country socio-demographic information. Countries with higher GHSI and IHR-SPAR index scores experienced fewer reported COVID-19 cases and deaths but only for the first 8 weeks after the country’s first case. For the GHSI, this association was further limited to countries with populations below 69.4 million. For both the GHSI and IHR-SPAR, countries with a higher sub-index score in human resources for pandemic preparedness reported fewer COVID-19 cases and deaths in the first 8 weeks after the country’s first reported case. The Universal Health Coverage Service Coverage Index and Worldwide Governance Indicator country-level rankings were not associated with COVID-19 outcomes. The associations between GHSI and IHR-SPAR scores and COVID-19 outcomes observed in this study demonstrate that these two indices, although imperfect, may have value, especially in countries with a population under 69.4 million people for the GHSI. Preparedness indices may have value; however, they should continue to be evaluated as policy makers seek to better prepare for future global public health crises.

Coronavirus refers to a group of widespread viruses. The name refers to the specific morphology of these viruses because their spikes look like a crown under an electron microscope. The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that has been reported in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, was proclaimed an international public health emergency (PHEIC) on 30 January 2020, and on 11 March 2020, it was declared as a pandemic (World Health Organization 2020). The official name of the virus was declared by the WHO as “COVID-19 virus”, formerly known as “2019-nCoV”, or “Wuhan Coronavirus”. The International Committee on Virus Taxonomy’s Coronavirus Research Group has identified that this virus is a form of coronavirus that caused a severe outbreak of acute respiratory syndrome in 2002–2003 (SARS). As a result, the latest severe acute respiratory syndrome has been classified as a corona virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pathogen by this committee. This disease spread quickly across the country and the world within the first 3 months of the outbreak and became a global pandemic. To stop COVID-19 from spreading, the governing agencies used various chemicals to disinfect different commercial spaces, streets and highways. However, people used it aggressively because of panic conditions, anxiety and unconsciousness, which can have a detrimental impact on human health and the environment. Our water bodies, soil and air have been polluted by disinfectants, forming secondary products that can be poisonous and mutagenic. In the prevention and spread of COVID-19, disinfection is crucial, but disinfection should be carried out with sufficient precautions to minimize exposure to harmful by-products. In addition, to prevent inhalation, adequate personal protective equipment should be worn and chemical usage, concentrations, ventilation in the room and application techniques should be carefully considered. In the USA, 60% of respondents said they cleaned or disinfected their homes more often than they had in the previous months. In addition to the robust use of disinfection approaches to combat COVID-19, we will explore safe preventative solutions here.

Background Efficiency and transparency of pricing and reimbursement (P&R) rules and procedures as well as their implementation in South-eastern Europe (SEE) lag substantially behind Western European practice. Nevertheless, P&R systems in SEE are rarely critically assessed, warranting a detailed and wider-encompassing exploration. Objective Our study provides a comparative assessment of P&R processes for patent-protected medicines in ten SEE countries—EU member states: Croatia, Slovenia, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria ; and non-EU countries: Albania, Montenegro, Serbia, North Maceodina, Bosnia and Herzegovina. P&R systems are compared and evaluated through a research framework that focuses on: (1) public financing of patent-protected medicines, (2) definition of benefit packages, (3) requirements for the submission of reimbursement dossiers, (4) assessment and appraisal processes, (5) reimbursement decision making, (6) processes that occur post reimbursement, and (7) pricing. The study aims to contribute to the discussion on improving the efficiency and quality of P&R of patent-protected medicines in the region. Methods We conducted a non-systematic literature review of published literature, as well as policy briefs and reports on healthcare systems in the SEE region along with legal documents framing the P&R procedures in local languages. The information gathered from these various sources was then discussed and clarified through structured telephone interviews with relevant national experts from each SEE country, mainly current and former senior officials and/or executives of the funding and assessment/ appraisal bodies (total of 20 interviews conducted in late 2019). Results Capacity building through sharing knowledge and information on successful reforms across borders is an opportunity for SEE countries to further develop their P&R policies and increase (equitable) access to patent-protected medicines (especially expensive medicines), increasing affordability and containing costs. Simple yet robust and systematic decision-making frameworks that rely on international health technology assessment (HTA) procedures and are based on the pursuit of transparency seem to be the most cost- effective approach to strengthening P&R systems in SEE. Conclusions Further reforms aiming to develop transparent and robust national decision-making frameworks (including oversight) and build institutional HTA- related and decision-making capacity are awaited in most of SEE countries, especially the non-EU members. In non-EU SEE countries, these efforts could increase access to patent-protected medicines, which is—at the moment —very limited. The EU-member SEE countries operate more developed P&R systems but could further benefit from developing their procedures, oversight and value- for-money assessment toolbox and capacity, hence further improving the transparency and efficiency of procedures that regulate access to patent- protected medicines.

Chronic backpain among adolescents is important because the prevalence is high, above 10%, and more than 10% of all adolescents experience impacts on important day-to-day activities. Chronic backpain tracks into adulthood and is associated with several health problems. The objective was to study trends in the prevalence of chronic backpain among adolescents 1991-2018, to examine the association with socioeconomic status (SES), and whether this association changed over time. The study used data from eight comparable cross-sectional school surveys of nationally representative samples of 11-15-year-olds in 1991, 1994, 1998, 2002, 2006, 2010, 2014, and 2018, which constitute the Danish arm of the international Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) study. The participation rate was 74.6% of the eligible study population, n = 29,952. Chronic backpain was defined as self-reported backpain daily or several days a week during the last 6 months. The prevalence of chronic backpain was 11.1%, significantly increasing from 8.9% in 1991 to 11.7% in 2018. The OR for chronic backpain was 1.20 (95% CI: 1.10-1.31) in middle, and 1.56 (95% CI: 1.41-1.73) in low compared to high SES. Sensitivity analyses with two other cut-points for backpain frequency showed similar associations.Conclusion: Chronic backpain is common among adolescents and the prevalence increased from 1991 to 2018. The prevalence was highest in lower SES families. We recommend increased efforts to prevent chronic backpain. What is Known: • Chronic backpain among adolescents is common, has a high burden of disability, is associated with several health problems, and tracks into adulthood. What is New: • The prevalence of chronic backpain among adolescents in Denmark increased from 8.9% in 1991 to 11.7% in 2018. • The prevalence was highest among adolescents from lower SES families.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has affected around forty million people worldwide and causing over a million deaths. Since no treatment guideline is considered the most efficient, and with no vaccine approved for prophylaxis, currently the COVID-19 response demands efficient use of available technology and tools in medical field for controlling the disease. The knowledge and experience gained from the epidemics of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), Ebola, and Zika virus play a pivotal role in this pandemic response. The required technologies and tools are adapted from the existing technologies and are modified to serve the purpose of COVID-19 response which is applied in the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of Coronavirus infection. The technologies applied at the prevention stage aims at limiting the spread of infection by using personal protective equipment, contact-tracing, and modelling. At the stage of diagnosis, technologies are used efficiently and the correct diagnosis of infected cases is done by molecular, immunological testing and radiological imaging. Artificial-Intelligence is employed in building applications that use the available information and radio-images to aid in differential diagnosis of Coronavirus infection. The treatment in COVID-19 incorporates technology in both in-patient and remote care of the cases. Though the COVID-19 response strategy differs from country to country, it is devised based on the recommendations made by the international health authorities such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and the National Center for Disease Control and Prevention of the United States (NCDCP-US). The controlling of the pandemic depends on the collective effort of all nations which rest on efficient scientific communication and in the advancement of the medical field.

The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the COVID-19 outbreak to be an international public health emergency. Various situations affected global citizens physically and mentally. Focusing on high school students, we began collecting data via online questionnaires between May and July 2020, 145 valid answers in total. Perth Emotional Regulation Competency Inventory (PERCI) was used to assess emotional stability. We then statistically analyzed the data using Spearman’s correlation coefficient between each factor. The data showed that emotional stability was reduced during the coronavirus situation. In addition, Economic status is an important factor affecting the tendency of emotional stability (p

RESUMEN La salud internacional es un campo interdisciplinario de conocimiento, investigación y acción que se ocupa de la salud de las poblaciones más allá de sus fronteras nacionales. América Latina se constituyó como pionera desde el siglo XX, otorgándole al campo un dinamismo inusitado. En tal sentido requiere de un proceso de análisis, reflexión e interpretación desde una perspectiva propia de nuestra región, para dejar de considerarlo mera réplica del desarrollo sanitario europeo. Este artículo tiene el doble objetivo de analizar el devenir histórico del campo de la Salud Internacional y, en segundo lugar, reflexionar en torno a los conceptos de Salud Internacional y de Salud Global, en la nueva geopolítica regional y global. A través de un recorrido histórico que inicia en 1851, este análisis da cuenta de las disputas, tensiones y rivalidades de las que ha sido objeto el campo de la salud internacional y algunos de sus principales organismos, entre ellos la Organización Mundial de la Salud que -con la supremacía del neoliberalismo pasó a estar supeditada a los intereses mercantilistas de nuevos actores extra sanitarios, como el Banco Mundial, la industria farmacéutica y organismos filantrópicos. En este contexto, el pasaje del campo de la Salud Internacional a la denominación de Salud Global representa-mucho más que un simple giro lingüístico un giro político ideológico. En América Latina, en cambio, la influencia de trayectorias críticas de pensamiento latinoamericanas ha actuado en el campo de la Salud Internacional desde una perspectiva basada en los derechos humanos y la soberanía sanitaria regional, a través de una cooperación más horizontal y de políticas emancipadoras. El advenimiento de la pandemia ha demostrado que la salud es un asunto internacional incuestionable, demandando políticas coordinadas e integrales. Sin embargo, sobreviene en un mundo fragmentado por disputas e intereses y, en particular en América Latina -con la disolución de UNA SUR llega en un contexto de reformas salvajes de sus sistemas sanitarios y en un momento de marcada debilidad en algunos de sus procesos de integración. Se impone, en consecuencia, la urgencia de discutir la arquitectura de la salud global y regional, su agenda y de repensar la cooperación internacional como política epidemiológica que permita efectivamente abordar las inequidades globales y dar respuesta a las necesidades urgentes y persistentes de nuestros pueblos. SUMMARY International health is an interdisciplinary field of knowledge, research, and action that deals with the health of populations beyond their national borders. Latin America established itself as a pioneer in international health during the 20th century, inducing an unprecedented dynamic in the field. In this sense, a process of analysis, reflection, and interpretation from a Latin American perspective is required to overcome its image as a mere replica of European health development. This article has the double objective of analyzing the historical development of the field of International Health and, secondly, reflecting on the concepts of International Health and Global Health, in the new regional and global geopolitics. Through a historical journey that begins in 1851, this analysis accounts for the disputes, tensions, and rivalries that have shaped the field of international health and some of its main organizations. Particularly, the World Health Organization-with the supremacy of neoliberalismhas been impacted by mercantilist interests of new non-health actors, such as the World Bank, the pharmaceutical industry, and philanthropic organizations. In this context, the passage/transition from the field of International Health to the denomination of Global Health represents much more than a simple linguistic shift a political-ideological shift. In Latin America, on the other hand, the influence of critical Latin American thought has pushed toward an understanding of International Health based on human rights and regional health sovereignty, implemented through more horizontal cooperation and emancipatory policies. The advent of the pandemic has shown that health is an unquestionable international issue, demanding coordinated and comprehensive policies. Instead, it occurs in a world fragmented by disputes and interests and, particularly in Latin America -with the dissolution of UNASURit arrives in a context of savage/wild health system reforms and at a time of marked weakness in some of its processes of integration. Consequently, there is an urgent need to discuss the architecture of global and regional health, its agenda, and to rethink international cooperation as an epidemiological policy that effectively addresses global inequities and responds to the urgent and persistent needs of our people.

Background Pandemics threaten lives and economies. This article addresses the global threat of the anticipated overlap of COVID-19 with seasonal-influenza. Objectives Scientific evidence based on simulation methodology is presented to reveal the impact of a dual outbreak, with scenarios intended for propagation analysis. This article aims at researchers, clinicians of family medicine, general practice and policy-makers worldwide. The implications for the clinical practice of primary health care are discussed. Current research is an effort to explore new directions in epidemiology and health services delivery. Methods Projections consisted of machine learning, dynamic modelling algorithms and whole simulations. Input data consisted of global indicators of infectious diseases. Four simulations were run for ‘20% versus 60% flu-vaccinated populations’ and ‘10 versus 20 personal contacts’. Outputs consisted of numerical values and mathematical graphs. Outputs consisted of numbers for ‘never infected’, ‘vaccinated’, ‘infected/recovered’, ‘symptomatic/asymptomatic’ and ‘deceased’ individuals. Peaks, percentages, R0, durations are reported. Results The best-case scenario was one with a higher flu-vaccination rate and fewer contacts. The reverse generated the worst outcomes, likely to disrupt the provision of vital community services. Both measures were proven effective; however, results demonstrated that ‘increasing flu-vaccination rates’ is a more powerful strategy than ‘limiting social contacts’. Conclusions Results support two affordable preventive measures: (i) to globally increase influenza-vaccination rates, (ii) to limit the number of personal contacts during outbreaks. The authors endorse changing practices and research incentives towards multidisciplinary collaborations. The urgency of the situation is a call for international health policy to promote interdisciplinary modern technologies in public health engineering.

Background COVID-19 has focussed public attention on the management of communicable disease like never before. Surveillance, contact tracing, and case management are recognised as key components of outbreak prevention. Development of guidance for COVID-19 has drawn from existing management of other communicable diseases, including Invasive Meningococcal Disease (IMD). IMD is a rare but severe outcome of Neisseria meningitidis infection that can be prevented through vaccination. Cases still occur sporadically, requiring ongoing surveillance and consistent management. To this end, national and international public health agencies have developed and published guidance for identification and management of IMD cases. Aim To assess national and international guidelines for the public health management of IMD, with a focus on the recommendations for identification and management of “close contacts” to IMD cases. Methods Guidelines from six national and international public health agencies were assessed using a modified version of the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) Instrument in four key domains: stakeholder involvement, developmental rigour, clarity, and applicability. A direct comparison of terminology and recommendations for identification and management of close contacts to IMD cases was also conducted. Results Guidelines from Europe and the United Kingdom rated most highly using the AGREE II Instrument, both presenting a clear, critical assessment of the strength of the available evidence, and the risks, costs, and benefits behind recommendations for management of close contacts. Direct comparison of guidelines identified inconsistencies in the language defining close contacts to IMD cases. Conclusion Discrepancies between guidelines could be due to limited evidence concerning mechanisms behind disease transmission, along with the lack of a consistent process for development and review of guideline recommendations. COVID-19 management has demonstrated that international collaboration for development of public health guidance is possible, a practice that should be extended to management of other communicable diseases.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine the number of physiotherapists who interrupted their services because of the COVID-19 pandemic and to verify the procedures adopted by the physiotherapists who are still working. Methods: It was a Cross sectional study. Study Setting was University of South Asia, Lahore. Data was collected through self-administered questionnaire. Physiotherapists working in Government and Private Hospitals in Lahore were recruited. Data was collected from October 2020 to November 2020. Non-probability Convenient sampling technique was used to recruit participants in study. Sample size of 241 Participants was calculated by using an online calculator (Raosoft,Inc.2004) with 5% margin of error, 95% confidence level and population of 462 physiotherapists working in Lahore in various Government and Private Hospitals Results: Out of 210 participants, males were 154 (73%) while females were 56 (27%). 37 (18%) were working in government hospitals while 173 (82%) were working in private setups. 14 (7%) were holding only undergraduate degree while 196 (93%) were post graduate. 28 (13%) were having up to 4 years of clinical experience working as physiotherapist, 65 (31%) were having up to 8 years of experience while 117 (56%) were having up to 12 years of clinical experience. When asked about Source of information on COVID-19, 16 (8%) chose Official international health organization sites and media, 18 (9%) chose Official government sites and media e.g. Ministry of Health Pakistan, 121 (58%) chose News Media e.g. TVs, radios, Magazines, Newspapers, 52 (25%) chose Social Media e.g. WhatsApp, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram while 2 (1%) chose journals and only 1 participant (.5%) chose others source of information. Conclusion: The distribution of Attitude, Knowledge, and Practice is the same across categories of source of information on COVID-19. Keywords: COVID-19, Coronavirus disease, Knowledge, Attitude, Practice

Clinical care in cystic fibrosis (CF) has continued to advance over the last several years, particularly with the widespread eligibility and use of highly effective modulator therapy. Improved outcomes and longevity of persons with CF (PwCF) have increased recognition of the multisystem impact of the disease on the daily lives of PwCF. This review will cover a broad array of topics, from diagnosis to multisystem effects related to mental health, endocrine, palliative care, reproductive health, otolaryngology, and cardiac issues. Additionally, worldwide care delivery will be reviewed, demonstrating variation in outcomes based on resources and populations served. This review is part of the CF Year in Review 2020 series, focusing on the multi-system effects of CF. This review focuses on articles from Pediatric Pulmonology but also includes articles published in 2020 from other journals that are of particular interest to clinicians.

COVID-19 pandemic has become a significant international public health problem. In addition to dealing with the pandemic’s impact on mental health, parents need to cope with specific changes in their routines caused by social distance measures. This study aimed to investigate common mental disorders (CMD) symptoms in Brazilian parents during the COVID-19 pandemic and its associated factors. A total of 232 Brazilian parents ranging from 20 to 48 years old (M = 33.85; SD = 4.83) with children aged 1–36 months (M = 17.00; SD = 9,87) participated in an online survey. Parents answered a sociodemographic questionnaire, Self-Report Questionnaire (SRQ-20), Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4), and Parenting Sense of Competence Scale. Chi-square tests, correlations, and multiple linear regression were performed. Results showed that parents’ symptoms of CMD were negatively associated to perceived parental competence (β =− 0.130; p = 0.011) and family income (β =− 0.190; p = 0.024). Furthermore, perceived stress was the most related variable to parents’ symptoms of CMD (β = 0.618; p

Despite its global importance and the recognition of dementia as an international public health priority, interventions to reduce stigma of dementia are a relatively new and emerging field. The purpose of this review was to synthesize the existing literature and identify key components of interventions to reduce stigma of dementia. We followed Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review process to examine peer-reviewed literature of interventions to reduce dementia-related stigma. A stigma-reduction framework was used for classifying the interventions: education (dispel myths with facts), contact (interact with people with dementia), mixed (education and contact), and protest (challenge negative attitudes). From the initial 732 references, 21 studies were identified for inclusion. We found a variety of education, contact, and mixed interventions ranging from culturally tailored films to intergenerational choirs. Findings from our review can inform the development of interventions to support policies, programs, and practices to reduce stigma and improve the quality of life for people with dementia.

Mixed methods research (MMR) is versatile, pragmatic, and adaptable to constraints and opportunities during a research process. Although MMR has gain popularity in health services management research, little is known about how the research approach has been used and the quality of research. We conducted a systematic review of 198 MMR articles published in selected U.S.-based and international health services management journals from 2000 through 2018 to examine the extent of MMR application and scientific rigor. Results showed limited, yet increasing, use of MMR and a high degree of correspondence between MMR designs and study purposes. However, most articles did not clearly justify using MMR designs and the reporting of method details and research integration were inadequate in a significant portion of publications. We propose a checklist to assist the preparation and review of MMR manuscripts. Additional implications and recommendations to improve transparency, rigor, and quality in MMR are discussed.

The whole world is invaded by many micro organisms which are not only killing people but also ruining the quality of life of the people worldwide. Vaccination against major micro-organism is the only way out to protect the people. Pneumonia and influenza are two leading causes of death especially the elderly within the globe. Objective of the Study: It was to assess knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs of adults and elderly outpatients regarding pneumococcal vaccination at the Taif hospital cluster and to understand the factors that may influence pneumococcal vaccination among the elderly and younger adults. Materials and Methods: It was a cross sectional questionnaire study where Self-administered Monkey surveys was administered to a cohort of elderly and younger adult participants. The study was conducted for 4 months. Age group of the participants were within 20 - >80 years and included both Saudi and Non Saudi individual. The collected data were subjected to descriptive analysis to obtain the frequencies of the different variables and the correlation between them using cross tabs, paired-sample T-test, and Pearson’s Chi-square. p-value < 0.05 was taken as significant. Results: Overall 301 people participated in the study (response rate 91%). A total of 32.56% responded that they had received the pneumococcal vaccine. From the respondents above 12.45% were between 20-40 years old, 10.72% between 41-60 years old, and 8.65% between 61-70 years and 2.07% between 71 to > 80 years of age, indicating lower rates of vaccination among the elderly. Vaccination depends on the patient's health conditions. Despite the positive knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs of the participants about the importance of the vaccine, yet they did not respond well to take the vaccine as recommended by the international health authorities. Conclusion: From the present study it can be concluded that gender has no statistically significant association with vaccination. More is the education more is the adherence to vaccination. Saudi nationals adhered more to vaccination as compared to non Saudi. The results from our study showed that healthcare guidance and recommendation significantly influenced vaccine uptake in both the elderly and younger adults.

Marina White,1 Ute D Feucht,2– 4 Louise de Villiers du Toit,5 Theresa Rossouw,3– 5 Kristin L Connor1 1Health Sciences, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; 2Paediatrics, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, Gauteng, South Africa; 3Research Centre for Maternal, Fetal, Newborn & Child Health Care Strategies, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, Gauteng, South Africa; 4Maternal and Infant Health Care Strategies Unit, South African Medical Council, Pretoria, Gauteng, South Africa; 5Department of Immunology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, Gauteng, South AfricaCorrespondence: Kristin L ConnorDepartment of Health Sciences, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, K1S5B6, CanadaEmail kristin.connor@carleton.caUte D FeuchtResearch Centre for Maternal, Fetal, Newborn & Child Health Care Strategies, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, Gauteng Province, 0002, South AfricaEmail ute.feucht@up.ac.zaAbstract: The Siyakhula study is an ongoing, observational cohort study in Pretoria, South Africa, that aims to understand how maternal HIV infection and perinatal environmental factors shape development and health in infants who are HIV-exposed (in utero and during breastfeeding) but remain uninfected themselves (HEU). The Siyakhula Collaborative Workshop, which took place at the Research Centre for Maternal, Fetal, Newborn & Child Health Care Strategies at Kalafong Hospital in Pretoria, South Africa on November 15– 16, 2018, brought together a group of international health scientists, clinicians, and stakeholders, including women with lived experience, to build capacity for research and training on the impact of HIV infection on women’s and infants’ health across geographical and disciplinary boundaries. The workshop sought to summarise the state of knowledge on the effects of being HEU on infant development and health in the first two years of life, identify gaps in existing research on modifiable exposures that may be associated with poor infant development, and develop ideas for novel research and interventions to lessen or prevent adverse health outcomes in pregnant or breastfeeding people living with HIV. These proceedings summarise the pre-workshop consensus process that was used to identify priority areas to discuss during small-group breakout sessions, as well as the themes and key challenges that emerged from these discussions during the workshop.Keywords: HIV, PMTCT, breastfeeding, growth, neurodevelopment, immune

The global community has disproportionately invested in vaccines to fight Covid-19.- This is at the expense of alternative strategies and health system strengthening.- Social determinants and co-morbidities should be factored as part of any response strategy.- Risk-benefit analysis and the precaution principle should guide vaccination policy.- A more diversified response to Covid-19 and future diseases should be adopted., info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic is a major international public health crisis, which has led to over 3 million deaths as of April 2021. Several therapeutics have been tried for this deadly illness including antivirals, immunosuppressive agents and convalescent plasma (CP). In this study, we present our inner-city safety net hospital experience with CP therapy. Methods: This was a retrospective chart review of hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 who were treated with CP. Results: A total of 60 patients received CP during the study period. The mean age for patients in this study was 58.95 years. The most common presenting symptoms were shortness of breath (85%) and cough (73%). Hypertension (65%) and diabetes mellitus (55%) were the most common comorbidities in our patients. In our multivariate regression analysis, male sex, nausea and loss of appetite at presentation were associated with improvement in oxygenation after CP. Total survival time, history of obstructive airway disease, home use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin-receptor blockers were associated with decreased survival, whereas Hispanic ethnicity showed a trend towards lower survival after CP therapy. Conclusions: Our study highlights several important characteristics of inner-city safety net hospital patient population who might benefit from CP therapy.

A little more than a hundred years ago, the humanity plunged into the second wave of «the Spanish flu» just like in the spring of 2021 it plunged into the second wave of coronavirus. Despite the significant biological and virological differences between COVID-19 coronavirus and the Spanish flu, already known to us in the second year of the pandemic, the obvious significant similarity in the dynamics of the epidemiological scenarios of both pandemics is striking.It is officially believed that the epidemic in Europe began in the last months of the deadly First World War (1914—1918). Its development and the next catastrophic spread were caused by: unsanitary conditions, poor nutrition, overcrowding in trenches and refugee camps, the demobilization and the return of soldiers home, as also the rapid development of vehicles at the beginning of the 20th century (trains, cars, high-speed ships). The Spanish flu, caused by the H1N1 virus, had several «waves». It is difficult to estimate the exact number of those who had the Spanish flu, but presumably, this is 500—550 million people. About 25 million people died (some studies indicate a figure of 50 or even 100 million). Unfortunately, the mankind quickly forgot about this viral pandemic and consequently was objectively compelled, after a hundred years, to unexpectedly make the same mistake again and introduce quarantine as the only way to limit the further spread of the next viral pandemic of mankind. The Spanish flu significantly influenced all the further development of medicine. While before the deadly pandemic the private medical practice was widespread, in the process of its overcoming, the formation of the modern international health care system took place. In 1919, the International Bureau for Epidemic Control was founded in Vienna.

Since the Alma Ata Declaration of 1978, countries have varied in their progress towards establishing and sustaining comprehensive primary health care (PHC) and realizing its associated vision of ‘Health for All’. International health emergencies such as the coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic underscore the importance of PHC in underpinning health equity, including via access to routine essential services and emergency responsiveness. This review synthesizes the current state of knowledge about PHC impacts, implementation enablers and barriers, and knowledge gaps across the three main PHC components as conceptualized in the 2018 Astana Framework. A scoping review design was adopted to summarize evidence from a diverse body of literature with a modification to accommodate four discrete phases of searching, screening and eligibility assessment: a database search in PubMed for PHC-related literature reviews and multi-country analyses (Phase 1); a website search for key global PHC synthesis reports (Phase 2); targeted searches for peer-reviewed literature relating to specific components of PHC (Phase 3) and searches for emerging insights relating to PHC in the COVID-19 context (Phase 4). Evidence from 96 included papers were analysed across deductive themes corresponding to the three main components of PHC. Findings affirm that investments in PHC improve equity and access, healthcare performance, accountability of health systems and health outcomes. Key enablers of PHC implementation include equity-informed financing models, health system and governance frameworks that differentiate multi-sectoral PHC from more discrete service-focussed primary care, and governance mechanisms that strengthen linkages between policymakers, civil society, non-governmental organizations, community-based organizations and private sector entities. Although knowledge about, and experience in, PHC implementation continues to grow, critical knowledge gaps are evident, particularly relating to country-level, context-specific governance, financing, workforce, accountability and service coordination mechanisms. An agenda to guide future country-specific PHC research is outlined.