Search

Objective The aim of this study was to characterize Covid-19 cases and explore risk factors associated with mortality among hypertensive patients with COVID-19 country-wide. Methods We used a retrospective case control study design to provide a detailed account of cases and explore risk factors associated with mortality among hypertensive patients with COVID-19 country-wide. A total of 441 patients were included in the study in the ratio of one case to two controls (1:2), matched by age. Results Deaths due to Covid-19 varied with hypertensive condition with more deaths registered in hypertensive patients. Clinical signs and symptoms in Covid-19 patients varied greatly between hypertensive and non-hypertensive patients, with a leaning favouring the latter. The risk of death due to Covid-19 among hypertensive patients increased with age and meaningfully associated with underlining comorbidities such as HIV, TB, cardiovascular, and liver disease. Conclusion Our study reveals predictive factors for mortality in COVID-19 hypertensive patients that can be used by policy makers and health care practioners to identify those at a higher risk and determine proper treatment approach to achieve best possible clinical outcomes.

The increasing use of cluster randomised trials in low-resource settings raises unique ethical issues. The Ottawa Statement on the Ethical Design and Conduct of Cluster Randomised Trials is the first international ethical guidance document specific to cluster trials, but it is unknown if it adequately addresses issues in low-resource settings. In this paper, we seek to identify any gaps in the Ottawa Statement relevant to cluster trials conducted in low-resource settings. Our method is (1) to analyse a prototypical cluster trial conducted in a low-resource setting (PURE Malawi trial) with the Ottawa Statement; (2) to identify ethical issues in the design or conduct of the trial not captured adequately and (3) to make recommendations for issues needing attention in forthcoming revisions to the Ottawa Statement. Our analysis identified six ethical aspects of cluster randomised trials in low-resource settings that require further guidance. The forthcoming revision of the Ottawa Statement should provide additional guidance on these issues: (1) streamlining research ethics committee review for collaborating investigators who are affiliated with other institutions; (2) the classification of lay health workers who deliver study interventions as health providers or research participants; (3) the dilemma experienced by investigators when national standards seem to prohibit waivers of consent; (4) the timing of gatekeeper engagement, particularly when researchers face funding constraints; (5) providing ancillary care in health services or implementation trials when a routine care control arm is known to fall below national standards and (6) defining vulnerable participants needing protection in low-resource settings.

We estimated the seroprevalence of anti‐severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) antibodies in residents of African countries and explored its associated factors. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED, CINAHL, DOAJ and Google Scholar databases for peer reviewed articles and pre‐prints that reported anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 antibody seroprevalence of general or specific human populations resident in Africa. The eligible studies were evaluated using Joana Briggs Institute prevalence critical appraisal tool. Twenty‐three studies involving 27,735 individuals were included in our paper. The pooled seroprevalence of anti‐SARS‐CoV‐2 antibodies in Africa was 22% (95%CI: 14–31) with very high heterogeneity (I 2 = 100%, p

Background World Health Organisation (WHO) has approved and recommended several public health measures to halt the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The implementation of recommended interventions vary between higher income and Low and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs). The economical constraints within LMICs posed challenges in accessing resources for COVID-19 prevention. The study aimed to identify the workable community-based interventions being utilised in LMICs.Main body We applied systematic review approach for this study. Included articles were searched in eight online databases. The analysis was guided by the acceptable of best practice developed by the PROSPERO and COCHRANE for systematic search and selection of articles using pre-defined search terms. Furthermore, a PRISMA flow diagram was used to show the number of articles retrieved, retained, excluded with rationales given for every action. Studies conducted on community-based intervention for preventing COVID-19 and levels of knowledge, attitudes and practice (KAP) on community-based intervention for preventing COVID-19 regardless of the design were included. A mixed method appraisal tool (MMAT) was used to appraise studies.Six studies from LMICs were included for detail analysis after the systematic review screening process from 10,100 articles. The quality assessment using MMAT tool appraised these articles were all in highest quality. Among the six articles, 10 community-based interventions were implemented in LMICs. The three key workable and implemented interventions are: use of masks, social distance and hand wash. The review identified varying levels of KAP between LMICs and social-demographical factors affecting KAP in these settings.Conclusion This systematic review has identified the community-based interventions implemented in LMICs to prevent COVID-19 during the pandemic and key factors affecting the level of KAP among the population. This study re-affirms the importance of effective and suitable implementation of the identified interventions. More studies need to be conducted in LMICs to establish the effectiveness and adoption of the implemented and recommended interventions.

The increasing use of cluster randomised trials in low-resource settings raises unique ethical issues. The Ottawa Statement on the Ethical Design and Conduct of Cluster Randomised Trials is the first international ethical guidance document specific to cluster trials, but it is unknown if it adequately addresses issues in low-resource settings. In this paper, we seek to identify any gaps in the Ottawa Statement relevant to cluster trials conducted in low-resource settings. Our method is (1) to analyse a prototypical cluster trial conducted in a low-resource setting (PURE Malawi trial) with the Ottawa Statement; (2) to identify ethical issues in the design or conduct of the trial not captured adequately and (3) to make recommendations for issues needing attention in forthcoming revisions to the Ottawa Statement. Our analysis identified six ethical aspects of cluster randomised trials in low-resource settings that require further guidance. The forthcoming revision of the Ottawa Statement should provide additional guidance on these issues: (1) streamlining research ethics committee review for collaborating investigators who are affiliated with other institutions; (2) the classification of lay health workers who deliver study interventions as health providers or research participants; (3) the dilemma experienced by investigators when national standards seem to prohibit waivers of consent; (4) the timing of gatekeeper engagement, particularly when researchers face funding constraints; (5) providing ancillary care in health services or implementation trials when a routine care control arm is known to fall below national standards and (6) defining vulnerable participants needing protection in low-resource settings.