One Health: The global challenge of epidemic and endemic leishmaniasis

'One Health' proposes the unification of medical and veterinary sciences with the establishment of collaborative ventures in clinical care, surveillance and control of cross-species disease, education, and research into disease pathogenesis, diagnosis, therapy and vaccination. The concept encompasses the human population, domestic animals and wildlife, and the impact that environmental changes ('environmental health') such as global warming will have on these populations. Visceral leishmaniasis is a perfect example of a small companion animal disease for which prevention and control might abolish or decrease the suffering of canine and human patients, and which aligns well with the One Health approach. In this review we discuss how surveillance for leishmaniases is undertaken globally through the control of anthroponootic visceral leishmaniasis (AVL) and zoonotic visceral leishmaniasis (ZVL). The ZVL epidemic has been managed to date by the culling of infected dogs, treatment of human cases and control of the sandfly vector by insecticidal treatment of human homes and the canine reservoir. Recently, preventive vaccination of dogs in Brazil has led to reduction in the incidence of the canine and human disease. Vaccination permits greater dog owner compliance with control measures than a culling programme. Another advance in disease control in Africa is provided by a surveillance programme that combines remote satellite sensing, ecological modelling, vector surveillance and geo-spatial mapping of the distribution of vectors and of the animal-to-animal or animal-to-human pathogen transmission. This coordinated programme generates advisory notices and alerts on emerging infectious disease outbreaks that may impede or avoid the spreading of visceral leishmaniasis to new areas of the planet as a consequence of global warming

A922 Sequential measurement of 1 hour creatinine clearance (1-CRCL) in critically ill patients at risk of acute kidney injury (AKI)

Meeting abstrac

Pooled analysis of WHO Surgical Safety Checklist use and mortality after emergency laparotomy

Background The World Health Organization (WHO) Surgical Safety Checklist has fostered safe practice for 10 years, yet its place in emergency surgery has not been assessed on a global scale. The aim of this study was to evaluate reported checklist use in emergency settings and examine the relationship with perioperative mortality in patients who had emergency laparotomy. Methods In two multinational cohort studies, adults undergoing emergency laparotomy were compared with those having elective gastrointestinal surgery. Relationships between reported checklist use and mortality were determined using multivariable logistic regression and bootstrapped simulation. Results Of 12 296 patients included from 76 countries, 4843 underwent emergency laparotomy. After adjusting for patient and disease factors, checklist use before emergency laparotomy was more common in countries with a high Human Development Index (HDI) (2455 of 2741, 89.6 per cent) compared with that in countries with a middle (753 of 1242, 60.6 per cent; odds ratio (OR) 0.17, 95 per cent c.i. 0.14 to 0.21, P <0001) or low (363 of 860, 422 per cent; OR 008, 007 to 010, P <0.001) HDI. Checklist use was less common in elective surgery than for emergency laparotomy in high-HDI countries (risk difference -94 (95 per cent c.i. -11.9 to -6.9) per cent; P <0001), but the relationship was reversed in low-HDI countries (+121 (+7.0 to +173) per cent; P <0001). In multivariable models, checklist use was associated with a lower 30-day perioperative mortality (OR 0.60, 0.50 to 073; P <0.001). The greatest absolute benefit was seen for emergency surgery in low- and middle-HDI countries. Conclusion Checklist use in emergency laparotomy was associated with a significantly lower perioperative mortality rate. Checklist use in low-HDI countries was half that in high-HDI countries.Peer reviewe

Organization and training at national level of antimicrobial stewardship and infection control activities in Europe: an ESCMID cross-sectional survey

Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) and Infection prevention and control (IPC) are two key complementary strategies that combat development and spread of antimicrobial resistance. The ESGAP (ESCMID Study Group for AMS), EUCIC (European Committee on Infection Control) and TAE (Trainee Association of ESCMID) investigated how AMS and IPC activities and training are organized, if present, at national level in Europe. From February 2018 to May 2018, an internet-based cross-sectional survey was conducted through a 36-item questionnaire, involving up to three selected respondents per country, from 38 European countries in total (including Israel), belonging to the ESGAP/EUCIC/TAE networks. All 38 countries participated with at least one respondent, and a total of 81 respondents. Education and involvement in AMS programmes were mandatory during the postgraduate training of clinical microbiology and infectious diseases specialists in up to one-third of countries. IPC was acknowledged as a specialty in 32% of countries. Only 32% of countries had both guidance and national requirements regarding AMS programmes, in contrast to 61% for IPC. Formal national staffing standards for AMS and IPC hospital-based activities were present in 24% and 63% of countries, respectively. The backgrounds of professionals responsible for AMS and IPC programmes varied tremendously between countries. The organization and training of AMS and IPC in Europe are heterogeneous and national requirements for activities are frequently lacking

The burden of injury in Central, Eastern, and Western European sub-region: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease 2019 Study.

Background Injury remains a major concern to public health in the European region. Previous iterations of the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study showed wide variation in injury death and disability adjusted life year (DALY) rates across Europe, indicating injury inequality gaps between sub-regions and countries. The objectives of this study were to: 1) compare GBD 2019 estimates on injury mortality and DALYs across European sub-regions and countries by cause-of-injury category and sex; 2) examine changes in injury DALY rates over a 20 year-period by cause-of-injury category, sub-region and country; and 3) assess inequalities in injury mortality and DALY rates across the countries. Methods We performed a secondary database descriptive study using the GBD 2019 results on injuries in 44 European countries from 2000 to 2019. Inequality in DALY rates between these countries was assessed by calculating the DALY rate ratio between the highest-ranking country and lowest-ranking country in each year. Results In 2019, in Eastern Europe 80 [95% uncertainty interval (UI): 71 to 89] people per 100,000 died from injuries; twice as high compared to Central Europe (38 injury deaths per 100,000; 95% UI 34 to 42) and three times as high compared to Western Europe (27 injury deaths per 100,000; 95%UI 25 to 28). The injury DALY rates showed less pronounced differences between Eastern (5129 DALYs per 100,000; 95% UI: 4547 to 5864), Central (2940 DALYs per 100,000; 95% UI: 2452 to 3546) and Western Europe (1782 DALYs per 100,000; 95% UI: 1523 to 2115). Injury DALY rate was lowest in Italy (1489 DALYs per 100,000) and highest in Ukraine (5553 DALYs per 100,000). The difference in injury DALY rates by country was larger for males compared to females. The DALY rate ratio was highest in 2005, with DALY rate in the lowest-ranking country (Russian Federation) 6.0 times higher compared to the highest-ranking country (Malta). After 2005, the DALY rate ratio between the lowest- and the highest-ranking country gradually decreased to 3.7 in 2019. Conclusions Injury mortality and DALY rates were highest in Eastern Europe and lowest in Western Europe, although differences in injury DALY rates declined rapidly, particularly in the past decade. The injury DALY rate ratio of highest- and lowest-ranking country declined from 2005 onwards, indicating declining inequalities in injuries between European countries

Global variation in anastomosis and end colostomy formation following left-sided colorectal resection

Background End colostomy rates following colorectal resection vary across institutions in high-income settings, being influenced by patient, disease, surgeon and system factors. This study aimed to assess global variation in end colostomy rates after left-sided colorectal resection. Methods This study comprised an analysis of GlobalSurg-1 and -2 international, prospective, observational cohort studies (2014, 2016), including consecutive adult patients undergoing elective or emergency left-sided colorectal resection within discrete 2-week windows. Countries were grouped into high-, middle- and low-income tertiles according to the United Nations Human Development Index (HDI). Factors associated with colostomy formation versus primary anastomosis were explored using a multilevel, multivariable logistic regression model. Results In total, 1635 patients from 242 hospitals in 57 countries undergoing left-sided colorectal resection were included: 113 (6·9 per cent) from low-HDI, 254 (15·5 per cent) from middle-HDI and 1268 (77·6 per cent) from high-HDI countries. There was a higher proportion of patients with perforated disease (57·5, 40·9 and 35·4 per cent; P < 0·001) and subsequent use of end colostomy (52·2, 24·8 and 18·9 per cent; P < 0·001) in low- compared with middle- and high-HDI settings. The association with colostomy use in low-HDI settings persisted (odds ratio (OR) 3·20, 95 per cent c.i. 1·35 to 7·57; P = 0·008) after risk adjustment for malignant disease (OR 2·34, 1·65 to 3·32; P < 0·001), emergency surgery (OR 4·08, 2·73 to 6·10; P < 0·001), time to operation at least 48 h (OR 1·99, 1·28 to 3·09; P = 0·002) and disease perforation (OR 4·00, 2·81 to 5·69; P < 0·001). Conclusion Global differences existed in the proportion of patients receiving end stomas after left-sided colorectal resection based on income, which went beyond case mix alone