A perspective on Master of Public Health (MPH) Graduates in India: Current role and way head

The public health sector of any country deals on the forefront and utilizes the multidisciplinary approach. In India the Masters of Public Health graduates are trained in unstandardized manner and lack a regulatory body. The gap created in serving the unserved can easily be fulfilled by utilization of this workforce in systematic manner, The emerging competition in the field, undervalued sector in terms of monitory benefits, poor demand and limited training institutions for MPH graduates along with the contribution of MPH during COVID 19 pandemic has been emphasized in the article. The perception of those working in the field has been highlighted with the way ahead of MPH program in India

Mental healthcare for young and adolescent LGBTQ+ individuals in the Indian subcontinent

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a significant change in the way healthcare is dispensed. During the pandemic, healthcare inequities were experienced by various sections of society, based on gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. The LGBTQ individuals were also affected by this inequity. There is a lack of information on this topic especially in the developing countries. Hence this issue requires further exploration and understanding. Previous literature briefly explored the mental, physical, and emotional turmoil faced by the LGBTQ community on a regular basis. They feared rejection by family and friends, bullying, physical assault, and religious biases. These issues prevented them from publicly speaking about their sexual orientation thereby making it difficult to collect reliable data. Although they require medical and psychological treatment, they are afraid to ask for help and access healthcare and mental health services. Being mindful of these difficulties, this article explores the various underlying causes of the mental health problems faced by LGBTQ individuals, especially, in the Indian subcontinent. The article also examines the status of healthcare services available to Indian sexual minorities and provides recommendations about possible remedial measures to ensure the well-being of LGBTQ individuals

Type 1 diabetes, COVID-19 vaccines and short-term safety: Subgroup analysis from the global COVAD study

AIMS/INTRODUCTION Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccinations have been proven to be generally safe in healthy populations. However, the data on vaccine safety in patients with type 1 diabetes are scarce. This study aimed to evaluate the frequency and severity of short-term (<7-day) adverse vaccination events (AEs) and their risk factors among type 1 diabetes patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS This study analyzed data from the COVID-19 vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) survey database (May to December 2021; 110 collaborators, 94 countries), comparing <7-day COVID-19 vaccine AE among type 1 diabetes patients and healthy controls (HCs). Descriptive statistics; propensity score matching (1:4) using the variables age, sex and ethnicity; and multivariate analyses were carried out. RESULTS This study analyzed 5,480 completed survey responses. Of all responses, 5,408 were HCs, 72 were type 1 diabetes patients (43 females, 48.0% white European ancestry) and Pfizer was the most administered vaccine (39%). A total of 4,052 (73.9%) respondents had received two vaccine doses. Patients with type 1 diabetes had a comparable risk of injection site pain, minor and major vaccine AEs, as well as associated hospitalizations to HCs. However, type 1 diabetes patients had a higher risk of severe rashes (3% vs 0.4%, OR 8.0, 95% confidence interval 1.7-36), P = 0.007), although reassuringly, these were rare (n = 2 among type 1 diabetes patients). CONCLUSIONS COVID-19 vaccination was safe and well tolerated in patients with type 1 diabetes with similar AE profiles compared with HCs, although severe rashes were more common in type 1 diabetes patients

COVID-19 breakthrough infections in type 1 diabetes mellitus: a cross-sectional study by the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) Group

To investigate the frequency, profile, and severity of COVID-19 breakthrough infections (BI) in patients with type I diabetes mellitus (T1DM) compared to healthy controls (HC) after vaccination. The second COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD-2) survey is a multinational cross-sectional electronic survey which has collected data on patients suffering from various autoimmune diseases including T1DM. We performed a subgroup analysis on this cohort to investigate COVID-19 BI characteristics in patients with T1DM. Logistic regression with propensity score matching analysis was performed. A total of 9595 individuals were included in the analysis, with 100 patients having T1DM. Among the fully vaccinated cohort, 16 (16%) T1DM patients had one BI and 2 (2%) had two BIs. No morbidities or deaths were reported, except for one patient who required hospitalization with oxygen without admission to intensive care. The frequency, clinical features, and severity of BIs were not significantly different between T1DM patients and HCs after adjustment for confounding factors. Our study did not show any statistically significant differences in the frequency, symptoms, duration, or critical care requirements between T1DM and HCs after COVID-19 vaccination. Further research is needed to identify factors associated with inadequate vaccine response in patients with BIs, especially in patients with autoimmune diseases

COVID-19 Vaccination-Related Delayed Adverse Events among Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

BACKGROUND: The safety profile of COVID-19 vaccination is well documented, but hesitancy among people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, often immunocompromised, remains high, partially due to a scarcity of data on safety over a longer term. We herein aimed to assess delayed adverse events (DAEs) occurring &gt;7 days after COVID-19 vaccination in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) versus other rheumatic autoimmune diseases (rAIDs), non-rheumatic AIDs (nrAIDs), and healthy controls (HCs).METHODS: Self-reported data were captured within the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD)-2 online survey, which comprised &gt;150 centres and responses from 106 countries, between February and June 2022. Logistic regression analysis adjusting for important confounders (age, sex, ethnicity) was used to compare groups.RESULTS: Of 7203 eligible individuals, 882 (12.2%) patients had SLE, 3161 (43.9%) patients had rAIDs, 426 (5.9%) patients had nrAIDs, and 2734 (38.0%) were HCs. SLE patients had a median age of 39 years (IQR: 31-50); 93.7% were women. SLE patients reported, more frequently, major DAEs (OR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.2-2.0; p = 0.001) and hospitalisation (OR: 2.2; 95% CI: 1.4-3.4; p &lt; 0.001) compared to HCs, severe rashes (OR: 2.4; 95% CI: 1.3-4.2; p = 0.004) compared to people with rAIDS, and hospitalisation (OR: 2.3; 95% CI: 1.1-4.9; p = 0.029) as well as several minor DAEs compared to people with nrAIDs. Differences were observed between vaccines in terms of frequency of major DAEs and hospitalisations, with the latter seen more frequently in patients receiving the Moderna vaccine. People with SLE with no autoimmune multimorbidity less frequently reported overall minor DAEs compared to SLE patients with comorbid nrAIDs (OR: 0.5; 95% CI: 0.3-1.0; p = 0.036).CONCLUSION: Hospitalisations post-vaccination were more frequent in SLE patients than in HCs. Monitoring of SLE patients following COVID-19 vaccination can help in identifying DAEs early, informing patients about expected DAEs, and supporting patients, especially those with autoimmune multimorbidity.</p

COVID-19 Vaccination In Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) Study : Vaccine Safety In Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies

In this study we investigated COVID-19 vaccination-related adverse events (ADEs) 7 days postvaccination in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) and other systemic autoimmune and inflammatory disorders (SAIDs). Seven-day vaccine ADEs were collected in an international patient self-reported e-survey. Descriptive statistics were obtained and multivariable regression was performed. Ten thousand nine hundred respondents were analyzed (1227 IIM cases, 4640 SAID cases, and 5033 healthy controls [HCs]; median age, 42 [interquartile range, 30-455] years; 74% female; 45% Caucasian; 69% completely vaccinated). Major ADEs were reported by 76.3% of the IIM patients and 4.6% reported major ADEs. Patients with active IIMs reported more frequent major (odds ratio [OR], 2.7; interquartile range [IQR], 1.04-7.3) and minor (OR, 1.5; IQR, 1.1-2.2) ADEs than patients with inactive IIMs. Rashes were more frequent in IIMs (OR, 2.3; IQR, 1.2-4.2) than HCs. ADEs were not impacted by steroid dose, although hydroxychloroquine and intravenous/subcutaneous immunoglobulins were associated with a higher risk of minor ADEs (OR, 1.9; IQR, 1.1-3.3; and OR, 2.2; IQR, 1.1-4.3, respectively). Overall, ADEs were less frequent in inclusion-body myositis (IBM) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer) vaccine recipients. Seven-day postvaccination ADEs were comparable in patients with IIMs, SAIDs, and HCs, except for a higher risk of rash in IIMs. Patients with dermatomyositis with active disease may be at higher risk, and IBM patients may be at lower risk of specific ADEs. Overall, the benefit of preventing severe COVID-19 through vaccination likely outweighs the risk of vaccine-related ADEs. Our results may inform future guidelines regarding COVID-19 vaccination in patients with SAIDs, specifically in those with IIMs. Studies to evaluate long-term outcomes and disease flares are needed to shed more light on developing future COVID-19 vaccination guidelines

Impaired health-related quality of life in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies : a cross-sectional analysis from the COVAD-2 e-survey

OBJECTIVES To investigate health-related quality of life in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) compared with those with non-IIM autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs), non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs) and without autoimmune diseases (controls) using Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) instrument data obtained from the second COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD-2) e-survey database. METHODS Demographics, diagnosis, comorbidities, disease activity, treatments and PROMIS instrument data were analysed. Primary outcomes were PROMIS Global Physical Health (GPH) and Global Mental Health (GMH) scores. Factors affecting GPH and GMH scores in IIMs were identified using multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS We analysed responses from 1582 IIM, 4700 non-IIM AIRD and 545 nrAID patients and 3675 controls gathered through 23 May 2022. The median GPH scores were the lowest in IIM and non-IIM AIRD patients {13 [interquartile range (IQR) 10-15] IIMs vs 13 [11-15] non-IIM AIRDs vs 15 [13-17] nrAIDs vs 17 [15-18] controls, P < 0.001}. The median GMH scores in IIM patients were also significantly lower compared with those without autoimmune diseases [13 (IQR 10-15) IIMs vs 15 (13-17) controls, P < 0.001]. Inclusion body myositis, comorbidities, active disease and glucocorticoid use were the determinants of lower GPH scores, whereas overlap myositis, interstitial lung disease, depression, active disease, lower PROMIS Physical Function 10a and higher PROMIS Fatigue 4a scores were associated with lower GMH scores in IIM patients. CONCLUSION Both physical and mental health are significantly impaired in IIM patients, particularly in those with comorbidities and increased fatigue, emphasizing the importance of patient-reported experiences and optimized multidisciplinary care to enhance well-being in people with IIMs

Cancer and myositis: Who, when, and how to screen

Cancer screening in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) is essential because an increased risk of cancer in IIMs has been well demonstrated. However, a consensus regarding cancer screening approaches is lacking. Therefore, the approach presented in this review reflects available evidence and our clinical experiences. Patients with IIMs should be evaluated for 3 distinct types of risk categories: (a) clinical with their history, physical examination, and laboratory parameters; (b) based on IIMs subtypes; and (c) based on serology e myositis specific and associated autoantibodies. Further, according to these characteristics, patients should be classified as low risk, moderate risk, and high risk for cancer. In our approach, all patients with IIM within 3 years of disease onset should undertake cancer screening according to their risk stratification. First, irrespective of risk, all patients should undergo age and gender-appropriate screening as per local guidelines. Patients at low-risk stratification should undertake basic cancer screening with routine blood counts, labs, and imaging; at moderate-risk stratification, patients should undertake enhanced cancer screening including CT chest; and at high-risk stratification, patients should undertake comprehensive cancer screening including PET/CT at baseline. Consensus guidelines among all major stakeholders, including rheumatologists, neurologists, der-matologists, and oncologists representing different parts of the world, establishing uniform cancer screening approaches in pa-tients with IIM, are the need of the hour.(c) 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd