One Health epidemic preparedness: Biosafety quality improvement training in Nigeria

Background and Aim: One of the key components of the O ne Health approach to epidemic preparedness is raising awareness and increasing the knowledge of emerging infectious diseases, prevention, and risk reduction. However, related research can involve significant risks to biosafety and biosecurity. For this purpose, we organized a multidisciplinary biosafety hands-on workshop to inform and increase the knowledge of infectious diseases and risk mitigation. This study aimed to describe the process and outcome of a hands-on biosafety training program using a One Health a pproach across a multidisciplinary and multi-specialty group in Nigeria. Materials and Methods: A face-to-face hands-on training for 48 participants was organized by the West African Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases (WAC-EID) at the Jos University Teaching Hospital, serving as a lead institution for the Nigeria project site. Topics covered included (1) an overview of the WAC-EID research; (2) overview of infection prevention and control; (3) safety in animal handling and restraint, sample collection, and processing; (4) safety in field studies including rodent, bird and bat handling; (5) safety practices in the collection of mosquito and other arthropod vectors; (6) personal protective equipment training (disinfection, donning and doffing); and (7) safety in sample collection, labeling, and transportation. The program was executed using a mixed method of slide presentations, practical hands-on sessions, and video demonstrations. Pre- and post-course evaluation assessments and evaluation measures were used to assess training. Results: A total of 48 trainees participated in this training, with 12 (25%), 16 (33.3%), 14 (29.2%), 6 (12.5%) categorized as ornithology, entomology, mammalogy, and clinical interest groups, respectively. The pass rate for the pre-test was 29.4%, while for the post-test, it was 57.1%, or a 28% improvement. 88.6% of the trainees rated the training as relevant to them. Conclusion: Didactic and hands-on biosafety training is relevant in this era of zoonotic epidemics and pandemic preparedness. During this training program, there was a clear demonstration of knowledge transfer that can change the current practices of participants and improve the safety of infectious diseases research

Liver abnormalities detected by ultrasound scan among apparently healthy population in Jos, Nigeria

Background: Most individuals with liver abnormalities are asymptomatic. Patients present most of the time with complications of liver cirrhosis. Abdominal ultrasound scan (USS) is relatively cheap, inexpensive, non-invasive, and readily available. It is a useful tool in screening common liver abnormalities such as cirrhosis, liver tumors, liver cysts, fatty liver and hepatomegaly. This study was aimed at identifying the common liver abnormalities in our environment, among apparently healthy individuals. Methods: We reviewed retrospectively the results of a mass screening exercise that was conducted at Farin gada community in Jos, Plateau state, by the Hepatology unit of the Jos University Teaching Hospital (JUTH). Two hundred and eighty (280) apparently healthy individuals (without documented symptoms and signs of liver diseases), aged 18 years and above were studied. The data was analyzed using SPSS version 23. Results: One hundred and fifty seven (56.1%) of the study subjects were females. The mean age of the study subjects was 37.8±13.6 years. The mean BMI in the study was 26.3±6.1 kg/m2, and 59(21.1%) were obese (BMI = 30kg/m2). The commonest liver abnormalities diagnosed by ultrasound were hepatomegaly (6.4%) and fatty liver (6.4%). Four (1.4%) had features of liver cirrhosis on USS and one participant had a liver tumor. Conclusion: The common USS-diagnosed liver abnormalities among apparently healthy individuals in our environment include fatty liver, hepatomegaly and liver cirrhosis

Assessment, endoscopy, and treatment in patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis during the COVID-19 pandemic (PROTECT-ASUC): a multicentre, observational, case-control study

BackgroundThere is a paucity of evidence to support safe and effective management of patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis during the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to identify alterations to established conventional evidence-based management of acute severe ulcerative colitis during the early COVID-19 pandemic, the effect on outcomes, and any associations with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and severe COVID-19 outcomes. MethodsThe PROTECT-ASUC study was a multicentre, observational, case-control study in 60 acute secondary care hospitals throughout the UK. We included adults (≥18 years) with either ulcerative colitis or inflammatory bowel disease unclassified, who presented with acute severe ulcerative colitis and fulfilled the Truelove and Witts criteria. Cases and controls were identified as either admitted or managed in emergency ambulatory care settings between March 1, 2020, and June 30, 2020 (COVID-19 pandemic period cohort), or between Jan 1, 2019, and June 30, 2019 (historical control cohort), respectively. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with acute severe ulcerative colitis receiving rescue therapy (including primary induction) or colectomy. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04411784. FindingsWe included 782 patients (398 in the pandemic period cohort and 384 in the historical control cohort) who met the Truelove and Witts criteria for acute severe ulcerative colitis. The proportion of patients receiving rescue therapy (including primary induction) or surgery was higher during the pandemic period than in the historical period (217 [55%] of 393 patients vs 159 [42%] of 380 patients; p=0·00024) and the time to rescue therapy was shorter in the pandemic cohort than in the historical cohort (p=0·0026). This difference was driven by a greater use of rescue and primary induction therapies with biologicals, ciclosporin, or tofacitinib in the COVID-19 pandemic period cohort than in the historical control period cohort (177 [46%] of 387 patients in the COVID-19 cohort vs 134 [36%] of 373 patients in the historical cohort; p=0·0064). During the pandemic, more patients received ambulatory (outpatient) intravenous steroids (51 [13%] of 385 patients vs 19 [5%] of 360 patients; p=0·00023). Fewer patients received thiopurines (29 [7%] of 398 patients vs 46 [12%] of 384; p=0·029) and 5-aminosalicylic acids (67 [17%] of 398 patients vs 98 [26%] of 384; p=0·0037) during the pandemic than in the historical control period. Colectomy rates were similar between the pandemic and historical control groups (64 [16%] of 389 vs 50 [13%] of 375; p=0·26); however, laparoscopic surgery was less frequently performed during the pandemic period (34 [53%] of 64] vs 38 [76%] of 50; p=0·018). Five (2%) of 253 patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during hospital treatment. Two (2%) of 103 patients re-tested for SARS-CoV-2 during the 3-month follow-up were positive 5 days and 12 days, respectively, after discharge from index admission. Both recovered without serious outcomes. InterpretationThe COVID-19 pandemic altered practice patterns of gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons in the management of acute severe ulcerative colitis but was associated with similar outcomes to a historical cohort. Despite continued use of high-dose corticosteroids and biologicals, the incidence of COVID-19 within 3 months was low and not associated with adverse COVID-19 outcomes