Search

BackgroundCurrently, antivenoms are the only specific treatment available for snakebite envenoming. In Brazil, over 30% of patients cannot access antivenom within its critical care window. Researchers have therefore proposed decentralizing to community health centers to decrease time-to-care and improve morbidity and mortality. Currently, there is no evidence-based method to evaluate the capacity of health units for antivenom treatment, nor what the absolute minimum supplies and staff are necessary for safe and effective antivenom administration and clinical management.MethodsThis study utilized a modified-Delphi approach to develop and validate a checklist to evaluate the minimum requirements for health units to adequately treat snakebite envenoming in the Amazon region of Brazil. The modified-Delphi approach consisted of four rounds: 1) iterative development of preliminary checklist by expert steering committee; 2) controlled feedback on preliminary checklist via expert judge survey; 3) two-phase nominal group technique with new expert judges to resolve pending items; and 4) checklist finalization and closing criteria by expert steering committee. The measure of agreement selected for this study was percent agreement defined a priori as ≥75%.ResultsA valid, reliable, and feasible checklist was developed. The development process highlighted three key findings: (1) the definition of community health centers and its list of essential items by expert judges is consistent with the Brazilian Ministry of Health, WHO snakebite strategic plan, and a general snakebite capacity guideline in India (internal validity), (2) the list of essential items for antivenom administration and clinical management is feasible and aligns with the literature regarding clinical care (reliability), and (3) engagement of local experts is critical to developing and implementing an antivenom decentralization strategy (feasibility).ConclusionThis study joins an international set of evidence advocating for decentralization, adding value in its definition of essential care items; identification of training needs across the care continuum; and demonstration of the validity, reliability, and feasibility provided by engaging local experts. Specific to Brazil, further added value comes in the potential use of the checklist for health unit accreditation as well as its applications to logistics and resource distribution. Future research priorities should apply this checklist to health units in the Amazon region of Brazil to determine which community health centers are or could be capable of receiving antivenom and translate this expert-driven checklist and approach to snakebite care in other settings or other diseases in low-resource settings.

Sixty-eight percent of persons infected with HIV live in Africa, but as few as 67% of those know their infection status. The emergency department (ED) might be a critical access point to HIV testing. This study sought to measure and compare HIV prevalence in an ED injury population with other clinical and nonclinical populations across Tanzania. Adults (≥18 years) presenting to Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Center ED with acute injury of any severity were enrolled in a trauma registry. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compare HIV prevalence in the trauma registry with other population groups. Further, 759 injury patients were enrolled in the registry; 78.6% were men and 68.2% consented to HIV counseling and testing. The HIV prevalence was 5.02% (tested), 6.25% (self-report), and 5.31% (both). The systematic review identified 79 eligible studies reporting HIV prevalence (tested) in 33 clinical and 12 nonclinical population groups. Notable groups included ED injury patients (3.53%, 95% CI), multiple injury patients (10.67%, 95% CI), and people who inject drugs (17.43%, 95% CI). These findings suggest that ED injury patients might be at higher HIV risk compared to the general population, and the ED is a potential avenue to increasing HIV testing among young adults, particularly men.

Abstract Background Road traffic injuries (RTI) are the leading cause of death worldwide in children over 5 and adults aged 18–29. Nonfatal RTIs result in 20–50 million annual injuries. In Bangladesh, a new mechanism of RTI has emerged over the past decade known as a ‘scarf injury.’ Scarf injuries occur when scarves, part of traditional female dress, are caught in the driveshaft of an autorickshaw. The mechanism of injury results in novel, strangulation-like cervical spine trauma. This study aimed to understand the immediate emergency response, acute care pathway, and subsequent functional and health outcomes for survivors of scarf injuries. Methods Key informant interviews were conducted with female scarf injury survivors (n = 12), caregivers (n = 6), and health care workers (n = 15). Themes and subthemes were identified via inductive content analysis, then applied to the three-delay model to examine specific breakdowns in pre-hospital care and provide a basis for future interventions. Findings Over half of the scarf injury patients were between the ages of 10 and 15. All but two were tetraplegic. Participants emphasized less than optimal patient outcomes were due to unawareness of scarf injuries and spinal cord injuries among the general public and health professionals; unsafe and inefficient bystander first aid and transportation; and high cost of acute health care. Conclusions Females in Bangladesh are at significant risk of sustaining serious and life-threatening trauma through scarf injuries in autorickshaws, further worsened through inadequate care along the trauma care pathway. Interventions designed to increase awareness and knowledge of basic SCI care at the community and provider level would likely improve health and functional outcomes.

With the advancements in therapeutics and available treatment options, almost all deaths and permanent disabilities from snakebite envenoming (SBE) are preventable. The challenge lies in implementing these evidence-based treatments and practices across different settings and populations. This study aims to compare data on provider perceptions of SBE care across health systems and cultural contexts to inform potential implementation science approaches. We hypothesize different health systems and cultural contexts will influence specific perceived needs to provide adequate snakebite care within central tenets of care delivery (e.g., cost, access, human resources). We previously conducted exploratory descriptive studies in the US and Brazil in order to understand the experience, knowledge, and perceptions of health professionals treating SBE. In the US, in-depth interviews were performed with emergency physicians from January 2020 to March 2020. In BR, focus group discussions were conducted with health professionals from community health centers at the end of June 2021. The focus group discussions (BR) were originally analyzed through an inductive thematic analysis approach. We conducted a secondary qualitative analysis in which this codebook was then applied to the interviews (US) in a deductive content analysis. The analysis concluded in August 2022. Brazil participants were physicians (n=5) or nurses (n=20) from three municipalities in the State of Amazonas with an average of three years of professional experience. US participants were emergency physicians (n=16) with an average of 15 years of professional experience. Four main themes emerged: 1) barriers to adequate care on the patient and/or community side and 2) on the health system side, 3) perceived considerations for how to address SBE, and 4) identified needs for improving care. There were 25 subthemes within the four themes. These subthemes were largely the same across the Brazil and US data, but the rationale and content within each shared subtheme varied significantly. For example, the subtheme “role of health professionals in improving care” extended across Brazil and the US. Brazil emphasized the need for task-shifting and -sharing amongst health care disciplines, whereas the US suggested specialized approaches geared toward increasing access to toxicologists and other referral resources. Despite similar core barriers to adequate snakebite envenoming care and factors to consider when trying to improve care delivery, health professionals in different health systems and sociocultural contexts identified different needs. Accounting for, and understanding, these differences is crucial to the success of initiatives intended to strengthen snakebite envenoming care. Implementation science efforts, with explicit health professional input, should be applied to develop new and/or adapt existing evidence-based treatments and practices for SBE.

In the Brazilian Amazon, deaths and disabilities from snakebite envenomations (SBEs) are a major and neglected problem for the indigenous population. However, minimal research has been conducted on how indigenous peoples access and utilize the health system for snakebite treatment. A qualitative study was conducted to understand the experiences of health care professionals (HCPs) who provide biomedical care to indigenous peoples with SBEs in the Brazilian Amazon. Focus group discussions (FGDs) were carried out in the context of a three-day training session for HCPs who work for the Indigenous Health Care Subsystem. A total of 56 HCPs participated, 27 in Boa Vista and 29 in Manaus. Thematic analysis resulted in three key findings: Indigenous peoples are amenable to receiving antivenom but not to leaving their villages for hospitals; HCPs require antivenom and additional resources to improve patient care; and HCPs strongly recommend a joint, bicultural approach to SBE treatment. Decentralizing antivenom to local health units addresses the central barriers identified in this study (e.g., resistance to hospitals, transportation). The vast diversity of ethnicities in the Brazilian Amazon will be a challenge, and additional studies should be conducted regarding preparing HCPs to work in intercultural contexts.