Response to Mass-Casualty Incidents and Outbreaks: A Prehospital Disaster Training Package Developed for the National Emergency Medical Service in Sierra Leone

Sierra Leone is a country highly prone to disasters, still recovering from the catastrophic 2014 Ebola epidemic. In 2018, the country launched its first National Emergency Medical Service (NEMS) aiming to strengthen the provision of essential health services to the population with the long-term goal of creating a resilient health system able to effectively respond to and recover from emergencies. The Center for Research and Training in Disaster Medicine, Humanitarian Aid, and Global Health (CRIMEDIM), together with the Italian NGO Doctors with Africa (CUAMM), under the direct supervision of the Ministry of Health and Sanitation (MoHS), developed a prehospital Disaster Training Package (DTP) to be delivered to all NEMS personnel to boost the prehospital management of mass-casualty incidents (MCIs) and outbreaks. The DTP included a first phase in which NEMS local trainers underwent a training-of-trainers (ToT) course, enabling them to deliver cascade trainings to 16 district ambulance supervisors, 441 paramedics, 441 ambulance drivers, and 36 operators working in the NEMS operation center. This on-going training package represents the first Disaster Medicine training course for prehospital health professionals in Sierra Leone

IMPACT study on intervening with a manualised package to achieve treatment adherence in people with tuberculosis: protocol paper for a mixed-methods study, including a pilot randomised controlled trial

Kielmann, Karina - ORCID 0000-0001-5519-1658 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5519-1658Introduction Compared with the rest of the UK and Western Europe, England has high rates of the infectious disease tuberculosis (TB). TB is curable, although treatment is for at least 6 months and longer when disease is drug resistant. If patients miss too many doses (non-adherence), they may transmit infection for longer and the infecting bacteria may develop resistance to the standard drugs used for treatment. Non-adherence may therefore risk both their health and that of others. Within England, certain population groups are thought to be at higher risk of non-adherence, but the factors contributing to this have been insufficiently determined, as have the best interventions to promote adherence. The objective of this study was to develop a manualised package of interventions for use as part of routine care within National Health Services to address the social and cultural factors that lead to poor adherence to treatment for TB disease.Methods and analysis This study uses a mixed-methods approach, with six study components. These are (1) scoping reviews of the literature; (2) qualitative research with patients, carers and healthcare professionals; (3) development of the intervention; (4) a pilot randomised controlled trial of the manualised intervention; (5) a process evaluation to examine clinical utility; and (6) a cost analysis.Ethics and dissemination This study received ethics approval on 24 December 2018 from Camberwell St. Giles Ethics Committee, UK (REC reference 18/LO/1818). Findings will be published and disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations, published in an end of study report to our funder (the National Institute for Health Research, UK) and presented to key stakeholders.Trial registration number ISRCTN95243114Secondary identifying numbers University College London/University College London Hospitals Joint Research Office 17/0726. National Institute for Health Research, UK 16/88/06.https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-032760http://bmjopen.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/bmjopen-2019-0327609pubpub1

Diffusion of e-health innovations in 'post-conflict' settings: a qualitative study on the personal experiences of health workers.

BACKGROUND: Technological innovations have the potential to strengthen human resources for health and improve access and quality of care in challenging 'post-conflict' contexts. However, analyses on the adoption of technology for health (that is, 'e-health') and whether and how e-health can strengthen a health workforce in these settings have been limited so far. This study explores the personal experiences of health workers using e-health innovations in selected post-conflict situations. METHODS: This study had a cross-sectional qualitative design. Telephone interviews were conducted with 12 health workers, from a variety of cadres and stages in their careers, from four post-conflict settings (Liberia, West Bank and Gaza, Sierra Leone and Somaliland) in 2012. Everett Roger's diffusion of innovation-decision model (that is, knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation, contemplation) guided the thematic analysis. RESULTS: All health workers interviewed held positive perceptions of e-health, related to their beliefs that e-health can help them to access information and communicate with other health workers. However, understanding of the scope of e-health was generally limited, and often based on innovations that health workers have been introduced through by their international partners. Health workers reported a range of engagement with e-health innovations, mostly for communication (for example, email) and educational purposes (for example, online learning platforms). Poor, unreliable and unaffordable Internet was a commonly mentioned barrier to e-health use. Scaling-up existing e-health partnerships and innovations were suggested starting points to increase e-health innovation dissemination. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study showed ICT based e-health innovations can relieve information and communication needs of health workers in post-conflict settings. However, more efforts and investments, preferably driven by healthcare workers within the post-conflict context, are needed to make e-health more widespread and sustainable. Increased awareness is necessary among health professionals, even among current e-health users, and physical and financial access barriers need to be addressed. Future e-health initiatives are likely to increase their impact if based on perceived health information needs of intended users

Management and control of tuberculosis control in socially complex groups: a research programme including three RCTs

Background: Socially complex groups, including people experiencing homelessness, prisoners and drug users, have very high levels of tuberculosis, often complicated by late diagnosis and difficulty in adhering to treatment. / Objective: To assess a series of interventions to improve tuberculosis control in socially complex groups. / Design: A series of observational surveys, evaluations and trials of interventions. / Setting: The pan-London Find&Treat service, which supports tuberculosis screening and case management in socially complex groups across London. / Participants: Socially complex groups with tuberculosis or at risk of tuberculosis, including people experiencing homelessness, prisoners, drug users and those at high risk of poor adherence to tuberculosis treatment. Interventions and main outcome measures We screened 491 people in homeless hostels and 511 people in prison for latent tuberculosis infection, human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis B and hepatitis C. We evaluated an NHS-led prison radiographic screening programme. We conducted a cluster randomised controlled trial (2348 eligible people experiencing homelessness in 46 hostels) of the effectiveness of peer educators (22 hostels) compared with NHS staff (24 hostels) at encouraging the uptake of mobile radiographic screening. We initiated a trial of the use of point-of-care polymerase chain reaction diagnostics to rapidly confirm tuberculosis alongside mobile radiographic screening. We undertook a randomised controlled trial to improve treatment adherence, comparing face-to-face, directly observed treatment with video-observed treatment using a smartphone application. The primary outcome was completion of ≥ 80% of scheduled treatment observations over the first 2 months following enrolment. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of latent tuberculosis screening alongside radiographic screening of people experiencing homelessness. The costs of video-observed treatment and directly observed treatment were compared. / Results: In the homeless hostels, 16.5% of people experiencing homelessness had latent tuberculosis infection, 1.4% had current hepatitis B infection, 10.4% had hepatitis C infection and 1.0% had human immunodeficiency virus infection. When a quality-adjusted life-year is valued at £30,000, the latent tuberculosis screening of people experiencing homelessness was cost-effective provided treatment uptake was ≥ 25% (for a £20,000 quality-adjusted life-year threshold, treatment uptake would need to be > 50%). In prison, 12.6% of prisoners had latent tuberculosis infection, 1.9% had current hepatitis B infection, 4.2% had hepatitis C infection and 0.0% had human immunodeficiency virus infection. In both settings, levels of latent tuberculosis infection and blood-borne viruses were higher among injecting drug users. A total of 1484 prisoners were screened using chest radiography over a total of 112 screening days (new prisoner screening coverage was 43%). Twenty-nine radiographs were reported as potentially indicating tuberculosis. One prisoner began, and completed, antituberculosis treatment in prison. In the cluster randomised controlled trial of peer educators to increase screening uptake, the median uptake was 45% in the control arm and 40% in the intervention arm (adjusted risk ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 1.20). A rapid diagnostic service was established on the mobile radiographic unit but the trial of rapid diagnostics was abandoned because of recruitment and follow-up difficulties. We randomly assigned 112 patients to video-observed treatment and 114 patients to directly observed treatment. Fifty-eight per cent of those recruited had a history of homelessness, addiction, imprisonment or severe mental health problems. Seventy-eight (70%) of 112 patients on video-observed treatment achieved the primary outcome, compared with 35 (31%) of 114 patients on directly observed treatment (adjusted odds ratio 5.48, 95% confidence interval 3.10 to 9.68; p < 0.0001). Video-observed treatment was superior to directly observed treatment in all demographic and social risk factor subgroups. The cost for 6 months of treatment observation was £1645 for daily video-observed treatment, £3420 for directly observed treatment three times per week and £5700 for directly observed treatment five times per week. / Limitations: Recruitment was lower than anticipated for most of the studies. The peer advocate study may have been contaminated by the fact that the service was already using peer educators to support its work. / Conclusions: There are very high levels of latent tuberculosis infection among prisoners, people experiencing homelessness and drug users. Screening for latent infection in people experiencing homelessness alongside mobile radiographic screening would be cost-effective, providing the uptake of treatment was 25–50%. Despite ring-fenced funding, the NHS was unable to establish static radiographic screening programmes. Although we found no evidence that peer educators were more effective than health-care workers in encouraging the uptake of mobile radiographic screening, there may be wider benefits of including peer educators as part of the Find&Treat team. Utilising polymerase chain reaction-based rapid diagnostic testing on a mobile radiographic unit is feasible. Smartphone-enabled video-observed treatment is more effective and cheaper than directly observed treatment for ensuring that treatment is observed. / Future work: Trials of video-observed treatment in high-incidence settings are needed. / Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN17270334 and ISRCTN26184967. / Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 8, No. 9. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

Comparing research investment to United Kingdom institutions and published outputs for tuberculosis, HIV and malaria: A systematic analysis across 1997-2013

Background: The "Unfinished Agenda" of infectious diseases is of great importance to policymakers and research funding agencies that require ongoing research evidence on their effective management. Journal publications help effectively share and disseminate research results to inform policy and practice. We assess research investments to United Kingdom institutions in HIV, tuberculosis and malaria, and analyse these by numbers of publications and citations and by disease and type of science. Methods: Information on infection-related research investments awarded to United Kingdom institutions across 1997-2010 were sourced from funding agencies and individually categorised by disease and type of science. Publications were sourced from the Scopus database via keyword searches and filtered to include only publications relating to human disease and containing a United Kingdom-based first and/or last author. Data were matched by disease and type of science categories. Investment (United Kingdom pounds) and publications were compared to generate an 'investment per publication' metric; similarly, an 'investment per citation' metric was also developed as a measure of the usefulness of research. Results: Total research investment for all three diseases was £1.4 billion, and was greatest for HIV (£651.4 million), followed by malaria (£518.7 million) and tuberculosis (£239.1 million). There were 17,271 included publications, with 9,322 for HIV, 4,451 for malaria, and 3,498 for tuberculosis. HIV publications received the most citations (254,949), followed by malaria (148,559) and tuberculosis (100,244). According to UK pound per publication, tuberculosis (£50,691) appeared the most productive for investment, compared to HIV (£61,971) and malaria (£94,483). By type of science, public health research was most productive for HIV (£27,296) and tuberculosis (£22,273), while phase I-III trials were most productive for malaria (£60,491). According to UK pound per citation, tuberculosis (£1,797) was the most productive area for investment, compared to HIV (£2,265) and malaria (£2,834). Public health research was the most productive type of science for HIV (£2,265) and tuberculosis (£1,797), whereas phase I-III trials were most productive for malaria (£1,713). Conclusions: When comparing total publications and citations with research investment to United Kingdom institutions, tuberculosis research appears to perform best in terms of efficiency. There were more public health-related publications and citations for HIV and tuberculosis than other types of science. These findings demonstrate the diversity of research funding and outputs, and provide new evidence to inform research investment strategies for policymakers, funders, academic institutions, and healthcare organizations.Infectious Disease Research Networ

Multi-infection screening for migrant patients in UK primary care: Challenges and opportunities

Background Migrants in Europe face a disproportionate burden of undiagnosed infection, including tuberculosis, blood-borne viruses, and parasitic infections and many belong to an under-immunised group. The European Centre for Disease Control (ECDC) has called for innovative strategies to deliver integrated multi-disease screening to migrants within primary care, yet this is poorly implemented in the UK. We did an in-depth qualitative study to understand current practice, barriers and solutions to infectious disease screening in primary care, and to seek feedback on a collaboratively developed digitalised integrated clinical decision-making tool called Health Catch UP!, which supports multi-infection screening for migrant patients. Methods Two-phase qualitative study of UK primary healthcare professionals, in-depth semi-structured telephone-interviews were conducted. In Phase A, we conducted interviews with clinical staff (general practitioners (GPs), nurses, health-care-assistants (HCAs)); these informed data collection and analysis for phase B (administrative staff). Data were analysed iteratively, using thematic analysis. Results In phase A, 48 clinicians were recruited (25 GPs, 15 nurses, seven HCAs, one pharmacist) and 16 administrative staff (11 Practice-Managers, five receptionists) in phase B. Respondents were positive about primary care's ability to effectively deliver infectious disease screening. However, we found current infectious disease screening lacks a standardised approach and many practices have no system for screening meaning migrant patients are not always receiving evidence-based care (i.e., NICE/ECDC/UKHSA screening guidelines). Barriers to screening were reported at patient, staff, and system-levels. Respondents reported poor implementation of existing screening initiatives (e.g., regional latent TB screening) citing overly complex pathways that required extensive administrative/clinical time and lacked financial/expert support. Solutions included patient/staff infectious disease champions, targeted training and specialist support, simplified care pathways for screening and management of positive results, and financial incentivisation. Participants responded positively to Health Catch-UP!, stating it would systematically integrate data and support clinical decision-making, increase knowledge, reduce missed screening opportunities, and normalisation of primary care-based infectious disease screening for migrants. Conclusions Our results suggest that implementation of infectious disease screening in migrant populations is not comprehensively done in UK primary care. Primary health care professionals support the concept of innovative digital tools like Health Catch-UP! and that they could significantly improve disease detection and effective implementation of screening guidance but that they require robust testing and resourcing

Incidence and risk factors of surgical site infections and related antibiotic resistance in Freetown, Sierra Leone: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND: There is limited information on surgical site infections (SSI) and the related antibiotic resistance needed to guide their management and prevention in Sierra Leone. In this study, we aimed to establish the incidence and risk factors of SSI and the related antibiotic resistance among adults attending a tertiary hospital, and a secondary health facility in Freetown, Sierra Leone. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study designed to collect data from adult (18 years or older) patients who attended elective and emergency surgeries at two hospitals in Freetown between February and July, 2021. Data analysis was done using STATA version 16. RESULTS: Of 338 patients, 245 (72.5%) and 93 (27.5%) had their surgeries at the tertiary and secondary hospitals, respectively. Many were males 192 (56.8%), less than 35 years 164 (48.5%), and 39 (11.5%) developed an SSI. Of the 39 patients who acquired an SSI, 7 (17.9%) and 32 (82.1%) had their surgeries at the secondary and tertiary hospitals, respectively. The incidence of SSI is higher in contaminated 17 (43.6%) than in clean-contaminated 12 (30.8%) and clean 10 (25.6%) wounds. Wound swabs were collected in 29 (74.4%) patients, of which 18 (62.1%) had bacterial growth. In total, 49 isolates of 14 different bacteria including gram-negative 41 (83.7%) and gram-positive 8 (16.3%) isolates were identified. Of these, 32 (65.3%) were Enterobacteriaceae, 9 (18.4%) were Non-fermenting gram-negative bacilli and 10 (12.2%) were Enterococci. The most common isolates were Escherichia coli (12, 24.5%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (10, 20.4%), Acinetobacter baumannii (5, 10.2%), Klebsiella oxytoca (4, 8.2%) and Enterococcus faecalis (4, 8.2%). The Enterobacteriaceae were either resistance to carbapenems (4, 8.2%) or were extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) producing organisms (29, 59.2%). Male sex [p = 0.031], an ASA score >/= 2 [p = 0.020), administration of general anaesthesia [p = 0.018] and elevated fasting glucose [p = 0.033] were predictive of SSI. CONCLUSION: The incidence of SSI in this study is comparable to other low- and middle-income countries, but a substantial proportion of these postoperative wounds have an ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae. Therefore, routine surveillance of SSI and related antibiotic resistance is required in resource-limited settings

Hospital readmission among people experiencing homelessness in England: a cohort study of 2772 matched homeless and housed inpatients

BackgroundInpatients experiencing homelessness are often discharged to unstable accommodation or the street, which may increase the risk of readmission.MethodsWe conducted a cohort study of 2772 homeless patients discharged after an emergency admission at 78 hospitals across England between November 2013 and November 2016. For each individual, we selected a housed patient who lived in a socioeconomically deprived area, matched on age, sex, hospital, and year of discharge. Counts of emergency readmissions, planned readmissions, and Accident and Emergency (A&amp;E) visits post-discharge were derived from national hospital databases, with a median of 2.8 years of follow-up. We estimated the cumulative incidence of readmission over 12 months, and used negative binomial regression to estimate rate ratios.ResultsAfter adjusting for health measured at the index admission, homeless patients had 2.49 (95% CI 2.29 to 2.70) times the rate of emergency readmission, 0.60 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.68) times the rate of planned readmission and 2.57 (95% CI 2.41 to 2.73) times the rate of A&amp;E visits compared with housed patients. The 12-month risk of emergency readmission was higher for homeless patients (61%, 95% CI 59% to 64%) than housed patients (33%, 95% CI 30% to 36%); and the risk of planned readmission was lower for homeless patients (17%, 95% CI 14% to 19%) than for housed patients (30%, 95% CI 28% to 32%). While the risk of emergency readmission varied with the reason for admission for housed patients, for example being higher for admissions due to cancers than for those due to accidents, the risk was high across all causes for homeless patients.ConclusionsHospital patients experiencing homelessness have high rates of emergency readmission that are not explained by health. This highlights the need for discharge arrangements that address their health, housing and social care needs.</jats:sec

Longitudinal serum proteomics analyses identify unique and overlapping host response pathways in Lyme disease and West Nile virus infection

Advancement in proteomics methods for interrogating biological samples has helped identify disease biomarkers for early diagnostics and unravel underlying molecular mechanisms of disease. Herein, we examined the serum proteomes of 23 study participants presenting with one of two common arthropod-borne infections: Lyme disease (LD), an extracellular bacterial infection or West Nile virus infection (WNV), an intracellular viral infection. The LC/MS based serum proteomes of samples collected at the time of diagnosis and during convalescence were assessed using a depletion-based high-throughput shotgun proteomics (dHSP) pipeline as well as a non-depleting blotting-based low-throughput platform (MStern). The LC/MS integrated analyses identified host proteome responses in the acute and recovery phases shared by LD and WNV infections, as well as differentially abundant proteins that were unique to each infection. Notably, we also detected proteins that distinguished localized from disseminated LD and asymptomatic from symptomatic WNV infection. The proteins detected in both diseases with the dHSP pipeline identified unique and overlapping proteins detected with the non-depleting MStern platform, supporting the utility of both detection methods. Machine learning confirmed the use of the serum proteome to distinguish the infection from healthy control sera but could not develop discriminatory models between LD and WNV at current sample numbers. Our study is the first to compare the serum proteomes in two arthropod-borne infections and highlights the similarities in host responses even though the pathogens and the vectors themselves are different

Strategies and action points to ensure equitable uptake of COVID-19 vaccinations: A national qualitative interview study to explore the views of undocumented migrants, asylum seekers, and refugees.

Introduction: Early evidence confirms lower COVID-19 vaccine uptake in established ethnic minority populations, yet there has been little focus on understanding vaccine hesitancy and barriers to vaccination in migrants. Growing populations of precarious migrants (including undocumented migrants, asylum seekers and refugees) in the UK and Europe are considered to be under-immunised groups and may be excluded from health systems, yet little is known about their views on COVID-19 vaccines specifically, which are essential to identify key solutions and action points to strengthen vaccine roll-out. Methods: We did an in-depth semi-structured qualitative interview study of recently arrived migrants (foreign-born, >18 years old; <10 years in the UK) to the UK with precarious immigration status between September 2020 and March 2021, seeking their input into strategies to strengthen COVID-19 vaccine delivery and uptake. We used the 'Three Cs' model (confidence, complacency and convenience) to explore COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, barriers and access. Data were analysed using a thematic framework approach. Data collection continued until data saturation was reached, and no novel concepts were arising. The study was approved by the University of London ethics committee (REC 2020.00630). Results: We approached 20 migrant support groups nationwide, recruiting 32 migrants (mean age 37.1 years; 21 [66%] female; mean time in the UK 5.6 years [SD 3.7 years]), including refugees (n = 3), asylum seekers (n = 19), undocumented migrants (n = 8) and migrants with limited leave to remain (n = 2) from 15 different countries (5 WHO regions). 23 (72%) of 32 migrants reported being hesitant about accepting a COVID-19 vaccine and two (6%) would definitely not accept a vaccine. Participants communicated concerns over vaccine content, side-effects, lack of accessible information in an appropriate language, lack of trust in the health system and low perceived need. A range of barriers to accessing the COVID-19 vaccine were reported and concerns expressed that their communities would be excluded from or de-prioritised in the roll-out. Undocumented migrants described fears over being charged and facing immigration checks if they present for a vaccine. Participants (n = 10) interviewed after recent government announcements that COVID-19 vaccines can be accessed without facing immigration checks remained unaware of this. Participants stated that convenience of access would be a key factor in their decision around whether to accept a vaccine and proposed alternative access points to primary care services (for example, walk-in centres in trusted places such as foodbanks, community centres and charities), alongside promoting registration with primary care for all, and working closely with communities to produce accessible information on COVID-19 vaccination. Conclusions: Precarious migrants may be hesitant about accepting a COVID-19 vaccine and face multiple and unique barriers to access, requiring simple but innovative solutions to ensure equitable access and uptake. Vaccine hesitancy and low awareness around entitlement and relevant access points could be easily addressed with clear, accessible, and tailored information campaigns, co-produced and delivered by trusted sources within marginalised migrant communities. These findings have immediate relevance to the COVID-19 vaccination initiatives in the UK and in other European and high-income countries with diverse migrant populations. Funding: NIHR