Search

Some clinicians prescribe ivermectin for COVID-19 despite a lack of support from any credible South African professional body. They argue that when faced by clinical urgency, weak signals of efficacy should trigger action if harm is unlikely. Several recent reviews found an apparent mortality benefit by including studies at high risk of bias and with active rather than placebo controls. If these studies are discounted, the pooled mortality effect is no longer statistically significant, and evidence of benefit is very weak. Relying on this evidence could cause clinical harm if used to justify vaccine hesitancy. Clinicians remain responsible for ensuring that guidance they follow is both legitimate and reliable. In the ivermectin debate, evidence-based medicine (EBM) principles have largely been ignored under the guise thatin a pandemic the 'rules are different', probably to the detriment of vulnerable patients and certainly to the detriment of the profession's image. Medical schools and professional interest groups are responsible for transforming EBM from a taught but seldom-used tool into a process of lifelong learning, promoting a consistent call for evidence-based and unconflicted debate integral to clinical practice.

Background: Public health facilities are used by the majority of South Africans, and healthcare utilisation surveys have been a useful tool to estimate the burden of disease in a given area., Objectives: To describe care-seeking behaviour in a periurban site with a high prevalence of HIV infection, as well as barriers to seeking appropriate healthcare., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional household survey in 22 wards of the Msunduzi municipality in KwaZulu-Natal Province, South Africa, from October to December 2013 using a simple random sample of households selected from a 2011 census enumeration. A primary caregiver/adult decision-maker was interviewed regarding demographic data as well as health status and recent self-reported episodes of selected illnesses and healthcare utilisation., Results: Of the 2 238 eligible premises visited, 1 936 households (87%) with a total of 9 733 members were enrolled in the study. Of these, 635 (7%) reported one or more episodes of infectious illness during the study period. Public health clinics were most frequently consulted for all illnesses (361/635, 57%). Private healthcare (general practitioner, private clinic, private hospital) was sought by 90/635 of individuals (14%), only 13/635 (2%) reported seeking care from traditional healers, religious leaders or volunteers, and 71/635 (11%) did not seek any medical care for acute illnesses. Individuals in the lowest income group were more likely to seek care at public health facilities than those in the highest income group (70% v. 32%)., Conclusions: Public health facility-based surveillance may be representative of disease patterns in this community, although surveillance at household level shows that high-income individuals may be excluded because they were more likely to use private healthcare, and the proportion of individuals who died at home would have been missed by facility-based surveillance. Data obtained in such surveys may be useful for public health planning.

Following the discovery of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), our knowledge of HIV infection and management has increased rapidly, but implementation of interventions has been slow in resource-limited settings. In particular, interventions such as antiretroviral treatment (ART) and prevention of mother-to-child transmission were hindered owing to lack of access to antiretroviral drugs. This resulted in ongoing HIV transmission, morbidity and mortality associated with opportunistic infections. Notwithstanding the current progress in HIV prevention and treatment, challenges remain in preventing new infections in adolescents and supporting and treating HIV-infected adolescents. Barriers to successful treatment of infection in adolescents include denial of diagnosis, poor understanding or perception of future benefits of treatment and current-orientated thinking that may contribute to non-adherence to ART. Side-effects that lead to stigmatisation, such as lipoatrophy (stavudine, zidovudine), diarrhoea and flatulence (lopinavir/ritonavir) and gynaecomastia (efavirenz), maybe intolerable and prevent adherence to treatment. This article highlights common treatment issues in HIV adolescent care and provides guidance on their management in the South African setting.