GP-support by means of AGnES-practice assistants and the use of telecare devices in a sparsely populated region in Northern Germany – proof of concept

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In many rural regions in Germany, the proportion of the elderly population increases rapidly. Simultaneously, about one-third of the presently active GPs will retire until 2010. Often it is difficult to find successors for vacant GP-practices. These regions require innovative concepts to avoid the imminent shortage in primary health care.</p> <p>The AGnES-concept comprises the delegation of GP-home visits to qualified AGnES-practice assistants (AGnES: GP-supporting, community-based, e-health-assisted, systemic intervention). Main objectives were the assessment of the acceptance of the AGnES-concept by the participating GPs, patients, and AGnES-practice assistants, the kind of delegated tasks, and the feasibility of home telecare in a GP-practice.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In this paper, we report first results of the implementation of this concept in regular GP-practices, conducted November 2005 – March 2007 on the Island of Rügen, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Germany. This study was meant as a proof of concept.</p> <p>The GP delegated routine home-visits to qualified practice employees (here: registered nurses). Eligible patients were provided with telecare-devices to monitor disease-related physiological values.</p> <p>All delegated tasks, modules conducted and questionnaire responses were documented. The participating patients were asked for their acceptance based on standardized questionnaires. The GPs and AGnES-practice assistants were asked for their judgement about different project components, the quality of health care provision and the competences of the AGnES-practice assistants.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>550 home visits were conducted. 105 patients, two GPs and three AGnES-practice assistants (all registered nurses) participated in the project. 48 patients used telecare-devices to monitor health parameters. 87.4% of the patients accepted AGnES-care as comparable to common GP-care. In the course of the project, the GPs delegated an increasing number of both monitoring and interventional tasks to the AGnES-practice assistants. The GPs agreed that delegating tasks to a qualified practice assistant relieves them in their daily work.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>A part of the GPs home visits can be delegated to AGnES-practice assistants to support GPs in regions with an imminent or already existing undersupply in primary care. The project triggered discussions among the institutions involved in the German healthcare system and supported a reconciliation of the respective competences of physicians and other medical professions.</p

An Adoption Framework for Mobile Augmented Reality Games: The Case of Pokémon Go

Pokémon Go was the first mobile augmented reality (AR) game to reach the top of the download charts of mobile applications. However, little is known about this new generation of mobile online AR games. Existing theories provide limited applicability for user understanding. Against this background, this research provides a comprehensive framework based on uses and gratification theory, technology risk research, and flow theory. The proposed framework aims to explain the drivers of attitudinal and intentional reactions, such as continuance in gaming or willingness to invest money in in-app purchases. A survey among 642 Pokémon Go players provides insights into the psychological drivers of mobile AR games. The results show that hedonic, emotional, and social benefits and social norms drive consumer reactions while physical risks (but not data privacy risks) hinder consumer reactions. However, the importance of these drivers differs depending on the form of user behavior

REVIEW OF THE CENTRAL AND SOUTH ATLANTIC SHELF AND DEEP-SEA BENTHOS: SCIENCE, POLICY, AND MANAGEMENT

The Central and South Atlantic represents a vast ocean area and is home to a diverse range of ecosystems and species. Nevertheless, and similar to the rest of the global south, the area is comparatively understudied yet exposed to increasing levels of multisectoral pressures. To counteract this, the level of scientific exploration in the Central and South Atlantic has increased in recent years and will likely continue to do so within the context of the United Nations (UN) Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development. Here, we compile the literature to investigate the distribution of previous scientific exploration of offshore (30 m+) ecosystems in the Central and South Atlantic, both within and beyond national jurisdiction, allowing us to synthesise overall patterns of biodiversity. Furthermore, through the lens of sustainable management, we have reviewed the existing anthropogenic activities and associated management measures relevant to the region. Through this exercise, we have identified key knowledge gaps and undersampled regions that represent priority areas for future research and commented on how these may be best incorporated into, or enhanced through, future management measures such as those in discussion at the UN Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction negotiations. This review represents a comprehensive summary for scientists and managers alike looking to understand the key topographical, biological, and legislative features of the Central and South Atlantic.This paper is an output of the UN Ocean Decade endorsed Challenger 150 Programme (#57). Challenger 150 is supported by the Deep Ocean Stewardship Initiative (DOSI) and the Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research’s (SCOR) working group 159 (NSF Grant OCE-1840868) for which KLH is co-chair. AEHB, KLH, KAM, SBu, and KS are supported by the UKRI funded One Ocean Hub NE/S008950/1. TA is supported by the BiodivRestore ERA-NET Cofund (GA N°101003777) with the EU and the following funding organisations: FCT, RFCT, AEI, DFG, and ANR. TA also acknowledges financial support to CESAM by FCT/MCTES (UIDP/50017/2 020+UIDB/50017/2020+ LA/P/0094/2020) through national funds. NB is supported by the John Ellerman Foundation. AB is supported by the German Research Foundation. DH, CO, AFB, LA, SBr, and KS received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement no. 818123 (iAtlantic); this output reflects only the author’s view and the European Union cannot be held responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. DH, AF, JT, and CW were additionally supported through the Cluster of Excellence “The Ocean Floor – Earth’s Uncharted Interface” (EXC-2077 – 390741603 by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft). CO also extends thanks to the HWK – Institute for Advanced Study, and PM to Dr. Alberto Martín, retired professor of Universidad Simón Bolívar in Caracas, Venezuela for facilitating references used in the Venezuela section.Peer reviewe

A year of genomic surveillance reveals how the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic unfolded in Africa.

The progression of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic in Africa has so far been heterogeneous, and the full impact is not yet well understood. In this study, we describe the genomic epidemiology using a dataset of 8746 genomes from 33 African countries and two overseas territories. We show that the epidemics in most countries were initiated by importations predominantly from Europe, which diminished after the early introduction of international travel restrictions. As the pandemic progressed, ongoing transmission in many countries and increasing mobility led to the emergence and spread within the continent of many variants of concern and interest, such as B.1.351, B.1.525, A.23.1, and C.1.1. Although distorted by low sampling numbers and blind spots, the findings highlight that Africa must not be left behind in the global pandemic response, otherwise it could become a source for new variants

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

The evolving SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in Africa: Insights from rapidly expanding genomic surveillance

INTRODUCTION Investment in Africa over the past year with regard to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) sequencing has led to a massive increase in the number of sequences, which, to date, exceeds 100,000 sequences generated to track the pandemic on the continent. These sequences have profoundly affected how public health officials in Africa have navigated the COVID-19 pandemic. RATIONALE We demonstrate how the first 100,000 SARS-CoV-2 sequences from Africa have helped monitor the epidemic on the continent, how genomic surveillance expanded over the course of the pandemic, and how we adapted our sequencing methods to deal with an evolving virus. Finally, we also examine how viral lineages have spread across the continent in a phylogeographic framework to gain insights into the underlying temporal and spatial transmission dynamics for several variants of concern (VOCs). RESULTS Our results indicate that the number of countries in Africa that can sequence the virus within their own borders is growing and that this is coupled with a shorter turnaround time from the time of sampling to sequence submission. Ongoing evolution necessitated the continual updating of primer sets, and, as a result, eight primer sets were designed in tandem with viral evolution and used to ensure effective sequencing of the virus. The pandemic unfolded through multiple waves of infection that were each driven by distinct genetic lineages, with B.1-like ancestral strains associated with the first pandemic wave of infections in 2020. Successive waves on the continent were fueled by different VOCs, with Alpha and Beta cocirculating in distinct spatial patterns during the second wave and Delta and Omicron affecting the whole continent during the third and fourth waves, respectively. Phylogeographic reconstruction points toward distinct differences in viral importation and exportation patterns associated with the Alpha, Beta, Delta, and Omicron variants and subvariants, when considering both Africa versus the rest of the world and viral dissemination within the continent. Our epidemiological and phylogenetic inferences therefore underscore the heterogeneous nature of the pandemic on the continent and highlight key insights and challenges, for instance, recognizing the limitations of low testing proportions. We also highlight the early warning capacity that genomic surveillance in Africa has had for the rest of the world with the detection of new lineages and variants, the most recent being the characterization of various Omicron subvariants. CONCLUSION Sustained investment for diagnostics and genomic surveillance in Africa is needed as the virus continues to evolve. This is important not only to help combat SARS-CoV-2 on the continent but also because it can be used as a platform to help address the many emerging and reemerging infectious disease threats in Africa. In particular, capacity building for local sequencing within countries or within the continent should be prioritized because this is generally associated with shorter turnaround times, providing the most benefit to local public health authorities tasked with pandemic response and mitigation and allowing for the fastest reaction to localized outbreaks. These investments are crucial for pandemic preparedness and response and will serve the health of the continent well into the 21st century

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570