Search

Background: Antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent brucellosis after accidental exposure to Brucella is an important topic in public health. This study aimed to systematically review the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis following accidental exposure to Brucella in preventing human brucellosis disease. Methods: The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023456812). The outcomes included the incidence of brucellosis disease, adverse events rate, and antibiotic prophylaxis adherence. A comprehensive literature search, conducted until 20 November, 2023, involved Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and LILACS databases. Descriptive analysis and meta‐analysis using R software were performed, risk of bias was assessed using JBI Critical appraisal tools, and certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE tool. Results: Among 3102 initially identified records, eight studies involving 97 individuals accidentally exposed, all focused on high‐risk accidental exposure to Brucella in laboratory settings, were included in the review. All studies reported the prophylactic treatment comprising doxycycline at a dosage of 100 mg twice daily, combined with rifampicin at 600 mg, both administered over 21 days. Prophylaxis adherence was reported in 86% of cases, and incidence of brucellosis post‐treatment was 0.01. Adverse events, mainly gastrointestinal, occurred in 26% of cases. Critical appraisal revealed limitations in reporting demographics and clinical information. The certainty of evidence was rated as 'very low,' emphasising the need for caution in interpreting the observed outcomes due to study design constraints and the absence of comparative groups. Conclusions: PEP is an alternative practice reported in the literature, used in accidents with high‐risk exposure to Brucella. The currently available evidence of the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis is insufficient to support a recommendation for or against the widespread use of antibiotic prophylaxis, so caution is needed in interpreting results due to the very low certainty of evidence, primarily stemming from case series and lack of comparative groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Brucellosis, a widely spread zoonotic disease, poses significant diagnostic challenges due to its non-specific symptoms and underreporting. Timely and accurate diagnosis is crucial for effective patient management and public health control. However, a comprehensive comparative review of available diagnostic tests is lacking. Methodology/Principal findings: This systematic review addressed the following question: 'What is the accuracy of the available tests to confirm human brucellosis?' Two independent reviewers examined articles published up to January 2023. The review included original studies reporting symptomatic patients with brucellosis suspicion, through any index test, with sensitivity and/or specificity as outcomes. As exclusion criteria were considered: sample size smaller than 10 patients, studies focusing on complicated brucellosis, and those lacking essential information about index or comparator tests. Sensitivity and specificity were assessed, with consideration for the index test, and 'culture' and 'culture and standard tube agglutination test (SAT)' were used as reference standards. Bias assessment and certainty of evidence were carried out using the QUADAS-2 and GRADE tools, respectively. A total of 38 studies reporting diagnostic test performance for human brucellosis were included. However, the evidence available is limited, and significant variability was observed among studies. Regarding the reference test, culture and/or SAT are deemed more appropriate than culture alone. Rose Bengal, IgG/IgM ELISA, and PCR exhibited equally high performances, indicating superior overall diagnostic accuracy, with very low certainty of the evidence. Conclusions/Significance: This systematic review underscores the potential of the Rose Bengal test, IgG/IgM ELISA, and PCR as promising diagnostic tools for brucellosis. However, the successful implementation and recommendations for their use should consider the local context and available resources. The findings highlight the pressing need for standardization, improved reporting, and ongoing advancements in test development to enhance the accuracy and accessibility of brucellosis diagnosis. Author summary: Brucellosis represents a prevalent zoonotic condition that significantly impacts regions constrained by limited resources. Diagnosis, usually based on symptoms and incomplete data, leads to underreporting and delayed treatment. Our comprehensive systematic literature review focused on evaluating the practical effectiveness of current diagnostic approaches for brucellosis, to guide decision-makers. Our analysis involved 38 studies primarily conducted in Asian and African regions, revealing considerable outcome variability. When considering the reference test, culture and/or SAT are deemed more suitable than culture alone. While Rose Bengal, IgG/IgM ELISA, and PCR tests exhibited equally strong performances, the evidence remained notably limited. It is vital to recognize that apart from performance, factors such as accessibility, cost, and ease of use must also be factored into informed decision-making. Our findings emphasize the critical need to expand the scope of validation studies on diagnostic tests and the development of new, more robust, and easily accessible alternatives for addressing brucellosis. This pursuit is essential to meet the urgent demand for enhanced diagnostic capabilities in this field, providing improved methods to combat this challenging disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To evaluate the performance of the Cutaneous Leishmaniasis Impact Questionnaire (CLIQ) using the EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D-3L) as a reference standard (criterion validation); to evaluate the responsiveness of the instruments and estimate a cut-off point for the CLIQ to be able to discriminate between high and low impacts of cutaneous leishmaniasis on patients. Methods: Between 2020 and 2022, a longitudinal validation study was conducted at a reference centre for leishmaniasis in Brazil. The EQ-5D-3L and CLIQ questionnaires were administered before, during and after treatment for cutaneous leishmaniasis. The correlation between the instruments was assessed using Spearman's correlation coefficient, responsiveness was assessed using the Wilcoxon test, and CLIQ cut-off points were proposed based on results of the EQ-5Q-3L, dichotomized between patients reporting no problems' and 'some or extreme problems'. Results: There were satisfactory correlation coefficients between the two instruments before (-0.596) and during treatment (-0.551) and a low correlation between the instruments after the end of treatment (-0.389). In general, the responsiveness of the instruments was satisfactory. The CLIC scores that maximized sensitivity and specificity for recognizing impaired health status before and during treatment were 7 points and 17 points, respectively. However, at the end of treatment, based on the results for the EQ-5D-3L, the CLIC was not able to discriminate between individuals with high and low impacts of the disease. Conclusion: The CLIQ corresponds well with the EQ-5D-3L when applied before and during treatment but does not seem to be appropriate for follow-up evaluations after the end of treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Management & Health / Revista Gestão & Saúde is the property of Revista Gestao e Saude and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Ciência & Saúde Coletiva is the property of Associacao Brasileira de Pos-Graduacao em Saude Coletiva and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Patient satisfaction is an important criterion for assessing the quality of Brazilian mental health services at Psychosocial Care Centers (CAPS -- from the Portuguese 'Centro de Atenção Psicossocial'). The aim of this study was to evaluate the satisfaction of users at the main CAPS in a region of Minas Gerais state, Brazil, as well as associated factors. This was a cross-sectional study with 11 CAPS. Patients were interviewed using the Patient Satisfaction with Mental Health Services Scale (SATIS-BR) and a semi-structured questionnaire containing sociodemographic and clinical variables. The users were satisfied with the CAPS, particularly in terms of staff competence and the welcome received and care provided. The physical facilities and comfort at the centers obtained the lowest satisfaction scores on the scale. Almost half of the users were unfamiliar with basic aspects of their drug therapy, such as the name of medicines, and one-third reported inappropriate use of medications. Users of midsize CAPS and those providing treatment for alcohol and drug addiction were more satisfied than patients at mental health or 24-hour CAPS. Although this study identified a need for improvement in physical facilities, mechanisms of participation and patient empowerment, the users were satisfied with the CAPS care model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Scientia Medica is the property of EDIPUCRS - Editora Universitaria da PUCRS and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Introduction: Miltefosine is a new drug that was recently approved for the treatment of tegumentary leishmaniasis (TL) by the Brazilian health system. It has a teratogenic potential and requires follow-up of patients undergoing treatment. Improving compliance with best practices is essential to ensure the safe and appropriate use of this drug., Objective: This project aimed to implement best practices for the safe and appropriate use of miltefosine in the treatment of TL in the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil., Methods: This project was guided by the JBI Evidence Implementation Framework. Five best practice criteria were established based on the best available evidence. A baseline audit was conducted to measure current practice against best practice. Barriers to best practice were then identified and a follow-up audit was conducted to evaluate changes after the implementation of improvement strategies. Two sites were analyzed: a leishmaniasis reference service in Belo Horizonte, the capital of Minas Gerais, and 28 regional offices., Results: The baseline audit evaluated data from 197 miltefosine requests distributed across 13 regional sites. All requests from the reference service were compliant (100%). This is in contrast to the 60% compliance rate at the regional offices. The improvement strategies included intensifying direct communication with the regional health professionals, which increased the average compliance rate to 79.5%, 6 months after the interventions were introduced., Conclusion: This best practice implementation project effectively increased the compliance rate for the audited procedures. Communication from the reference site with the regional health professionals successfully increased compliance with best practices and promoted the safe and appropriate use of miltefosine. These strategies should analyzed and applied to improve other programs., Spanish Abstract: http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A184., Competing Interests: The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the University of Adelaide, JBI.)