Clinical features of COVID-19 in Ghana : Symptomatology, illness severity and comorbid non-communicable diseases

Objective: This analysis described the clinical features of COVID-19 in the early phase of the pandemic in Ghana. Methods: Data were extracted from two national COVID-19 treatment centers in Ghana for over 11 weeks(from March to May 2020). Descriptive and inferential statistics were performed. Modified Ordered Logistic and Negative Binomial Regression analysis were applied to establish factors associated with illness severity and Non-communicable Disease (NCDs) counts respectively. All analysis was conducted at the 95% confidence level (p-value ≤ 0.05) using Stata 16. Results: Among the 275 patients, the average age was 40.7±16.4, with a preponderance of males (54.5%). The three commonest symptoms presented were cough (21.3%), headache (15.7%), and sore throat (11.7%). Only 7.6% of the patients had a history of fever. Most patients were asymptomatic (51.65). Approximately 38.9% have an underlying co-morbid NCDs, with Hypertension (32.1%), Diabetes (9.9%), and Asthma (5.2%) being the three commonest. The odds of Moderate/severe (MoS) was significantly higher for those with unknown exposures to similar illness [aOR(95%CI) = 4.27(1.12-10.2)] compared with non-exposure to similar illness. An increased unit of NCD’s count significantly increased the odds of COVID-19 MoS illness by 26%[cOR(95%CI) =1.26(1.09-1.84)] and 67% (adjusting for age) [aOR(95%CI)=1.67(1.13-2.49)]. Conclusion: The presence of cardiovascular co-morbidities dictated the frequency of reported symptoms and severity of COVID-19 infection in this sample of Ghanaians. Physicians should be aware of the presence of co-morbid NCDs and prepare to manage effectively among COVID-19 patients

Adaptation of the Wound Healing Questionnaire universal-reporter outcome measure for use in global surgery trials (TALON-1 study): mixed-methods study and Rasch analysis

BackgroundThe Bluebelle Wound Healing Questionnaire (WHQ) is a universal-reporter outcome measure developed in the UK for remote detection of surgical-site infection after abdominal surgery. This study aimed to explore cross-cultural equivalence, acceptability, and content validity of the WHQ for use across low- and middle-income countries, and to make recommendations for its adaptation.MethodsThis was a mixed-methods study within a trial (SWAT) embedded in an international randomized trial, conducted according to best practice guidelines, and co-produced with community and patient partners (TALON-1). Structured interviews and focus groups were used to gather data regarding cross-cultural, cross-contextual equivalence of the individual items and scale, and conduct a translatability assessment. Translation was completed into five languages in accordance with Mapi recommendations. Next, data from a prospective cohort (SWAT) were interpreted using Rasch analysis to explore scaling and measurement properties of the WHQ. Finally, qualitative and quantitative data were triangulated using a modified, exploratory, instrumental design model.ResultsIn the qualitative phase, 10 structured interviews and six focus groups took place with a total of 47 investigators across six countries. Themes related to comprehension, response mapping, retrieval, and judgement were identified with rich cross-cultural insights. In the quantitative phase, an exploratory Rasch model was fitted to data from 537 patients (369 excluding extremes). Owing to the number of extreme (floor) values, the overall level of power was low. The single WHQ scale satisfied tests of unidimensionality, indicating validity of the ordinal total WHQ score. There was significant overall model misfit of five items (5, 9, 14, 15, 16) and local dependency in 11 item pairs. The person separation index was estimated as 0.48 suggesting weak discrimination between classes, whereas Cronbach's α was high at 0.86. Triangulation of qualitative data with the Rasch analysis supported recommendations for cross-cultural adaptation of the WHQ items 1 (redness), 3 (clear fluid), 7 (deep wound opening), 10 (pain), 11 (fever), 15 (antibiotics), 16 (debridement), 18 (drainage), and 19 (reoperation). Changes to three item response categories (1, not at all; 2, a little; 3, a lot) were adopted for symptom items 1 to 10, and two categories (0, no; 1, yes) for item 11 (fever).ConclusionThis study made recommendations for cross-cultural adaptation of the WHQ for use in global surgical research and practice, using co-produced mixed-methods data from three continents. Translations are now available for implementation into remote wound assessment pathways