Elective Cancer Surgery in COVID-19-Free Surgical Pathways During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: An International, Multicenter, Comparative Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19-free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19-free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS: Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19-free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19-free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score-matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION: Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19-free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Elective cancer surgery in COVID-19-free surgical pathways during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: An international, multicenter, comparative cohort study

PURPOSE As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19–free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19–free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19–free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19–free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score–matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19–free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

Acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination at different hypothetical efficacy and safety levels in ten countries in Asia, Africa, and South America

Vaccine hesitancy, defined as the reluctance or rejection in receiving a vaccine despite its availability, represents a major challenge to global health efforts aiming to control the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding the possible factors correlated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy using a refined well-informed approach can be helpful to address the phenomenon. The current study aimed to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rates using four hypothetical scenarios of varying levels of vaccine efficacy and safety profiles in ten Asian, African and South American countries. These scenarios included: 95% efficacy and 20% side effects (Vaccine A), 75% efficacy and 5% side effects (Vaccine B); 75% efficacy and 20% side effects (Vaccine C) and 50% efficacy and 5% side effects (Vaccine D). This study used a self-administered online survey that was distributed during February–May 2021. The total number of study respondents was 1337 with countries of residence as follows: India (21.1%), Pakistan (12.9%), Sudan (11.2%), Nigeria (9.3%), Iran (8.2%), Bangladesh and Brazil (7.9%), Chile (7.7%), Tunisia (7.6%), and Egypt (6.2%). The overall acceptance rates for COVID-19 vaccination were variable based on varying degrees of safety and efficacy as follows: 55.6% for Vaccine C, 58.3% for Vaccine D, 74.0% for Vaccine A and 80.1% for Vaccine B. The highest levels of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance were observed in Brazil followed by Chile across the four different safety and efficacy scenarios. The lowest COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rates were reported in Egypt and Tunisia for the low safety scenarios (20% side effects), and the low efficacy scenario (50% efficacy). The study revealed the potential effect of vaccine safety and efficacy on the intention to get COVID-19 vaccination. At the same efficacy level, higher possibility of side effects caused a large drop in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate. This indicates the importance of accurate communication regarding vaccine safety and efficacy on attitude towards the vaccine and intentions to get vaccinated. Regional differences in COVID-19 vaccine acceptance were observed with the Middle East/North African countries showing the lowest rates and the South American countries displaying the highest vaccine acceptance rates

Willingness-to-pay for COVID-19 vaccine in ten low-middle-income countries in Asia, Africa and South America: A cross-sectional study

Vaccine hesitancy is considered as one of the greatest challenges to control the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. A related challenge is the unwillingness of the general public to pay for vaccination. The objective of this study was to determine willingness-to-pay (WTP) for COVID-19 vaccine among individuals from ten low-middle-income countries (LMICs) in Asia, Africa, and South America. Data were collected using an online questionnaire distributed during February - May 2021 in ten LMICs (Bangladesh, Brazil, Chile, Egypt, India, Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan, Sudan, and Tunisia). The major response variable of in this study was WTP for a COVID-19 vaccine. The assessment of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was based on items adopted from the World Health Organization (WHO) Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) vaccine hesitancy scale constructs. In this study, 1337 respondents included in the final analysis where the highest number of respondents was from India, while the lowest number was from Egypt. A total of 88.9% (1188/1337) respondents were willing to pay for the COVID-19 vaccination, and 11.1% (149/1337) were not. The average WTP for COVID-19 vaccination was 87.9 US dollars ($), (range:$5-$200). The multivariate model analysis showed that the country, monthly household income, having a history of respiratory disease, the agreement that routine vaccines recommended by health workers are beneficial and having received the flu vaccination within the previous 12 months were strongly associated with the WTP. Based on the country of origin, the highest mean WTP for COVID-19 vaccine was reported in Chile, while the lowest mean WTP for the vaccine was seen among the respondents from Sudan. The availability of free COVID-19 vaccination services appears as a top priority in the LMICs for successful control of the ongoing pandemic. This is particularly important for individuals of a lower socio-economic status. The effects of complacency regarding COVID-19 extends beyond vaccine hesitancy to involve less willingness to pay for COVID-19 vaccine and a lower value of WTP for the vaccine

Willingness-to-pay for COVID-19 vaccine in ten low-middle-income countries in Asia, Africa and South America: A cross-sectional study

Vaccine hesitancy is considered as one of the greatest challenges to control the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. A related challenge is the unwillingness of the general public to pay for vaccination. The objective of this study was to determine willingness-to-pay (WTP) for COVID-19 vaccine among individuals from ten low-middle-income countries (LMICs) in Asia, Africa, and South America. Data were collected using an online questionnaire distributed during February - May 2021 in ten LMICs (Bangladesh, Brazil, Chile, Egypt, India, Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan, Sudan, and Tunisia). The major response variable of in this study was WTP for a COVID-19 vaccine. The assessment of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was based on items adopted from the World Health Organization (WHO) Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) vaccine hesitancy scale constructs. In this study, 1337 respondents included in the final analysis where the highest number of respondents was from India, while the lowest number was from Egypt. A total of 88.9% (1188/1337) respondents were willing to pay for the COVID-19 vaccination, and 11.1% (149/1337) were not. The average WTP for COVID-19 vaccination was 87.9 US dollars ($), (range:$5-$200). The multivariate model analysis showed that the country, monthly household income, having a history of respiratory disease, the agreement that routine vaccines recommended by health workers are beneficial and having received the flu vaccination within the previous 12 months were strongly associated with the WTP. Based on the country of origin, the highest mean WTP for COVID-19 vaccine was reported in Chile, while the lowest mean WTP for the vaccine was seen among the respondents from Sudan. The availability of free COVID-19 vaccination services appears as a top priority in the LMICs for successful control of the ongoing pandemic. This is particularly important for individuals of a lower socio-economic status. The effects of complacency regarding COVID-19 extends beyond vaccine hesitancy to involve less willingness to pay for COVID-19 vaccine and a lower value of WTP for the vaccine

Vaccine hesitancy among communities in ten countries in Asia, Africa, and South America during the COVID-19 pandemic

Vaccine hesitancy is considered one of the greatest threats to the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination programs. Lack of trust in vaccine benefits, along with concerns about side effects of the newly developed COVID-19 vaccine, might significantly contribute to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The objective of this study was to determine the level of vaccine hesitancy among communities in particular their belief in vaccination benefits and perceived risks of new vaccines. An online cross-sectional study was conducted in 10 countries in Asia, Africa, and South America from February to May 2021. Seven items from the WHO SAGE Vaccine Hesitancy Scale were used to measure a construct of belief in vaccination benefit, and one item measured perceived riskiness of new vaccines. A logistic regression was used to determine which sociodemographic factors were associated with both vaccine hesitancy constructs. A total of 1,832 respondents were included in the final analysis of which 36.2% (range 5.6–52.2%) and 77.6% (range 38.3–91.2%) of them were classified as vaccine hesitant in terms of beliefs in vaccination benefits and concerns about new vaccines, respectively. Respondents from Pakistan had the highest vaccine hesitancy while those from Chile had the lowest. Being females, Muslim, having a non-healthcare-related job and not receiving a flu vaccination during the past 12 months were associated with poor beliefs of vaccination benefits. Those who were living in rural areas, Muslim, and those who did not received a flu vaccination during the past 12 months had relatively higher beliefs that new vaccines are riskier. High prevalence of vaccine hesitancy in some countries during the COVID-19 pandemic might hamper COVID-19 vaccination programs worldwide. Programs should be developed to promote vaccination in those sociodemographic groups with relatively high vaccine hesitancy