Search

Background: Scrub typhus is highly endemic in northern Thailand yet awareness and knowledge are low. We developed a community engagement project to improve awareness in communities at risk of contracting scrub typhus., Methods: We conducted a series of engagement sessions with healthcare workers and community health volunteers so they would, in turn, engage with their communities. We evaluated our activities by assessing the increase in scrub typhus knowledge, using a series of Likert-scale items and open-ended questions. Three to 6 months after the sessions, participants were followed up to collect their experiences training community members., Results: Of 134 participants who took part in eight sessions, 87.3% were community health volunteers. Disease knowledge increased substantially after the sessions and was well maintained for up to 5 mo. Satisfaction was high and, through participant feedback, engagement materials were improved to be more useful to the communities. People with higher education had higher scores and retention., Conclusions: Community engagement was shown to be an effective tool to develop and carry out health-promoting activities in a culturally and context-appropriate manner., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.)

Background: The COPCOV study (chloroquine/ hydroxychloroquine prevention of coronavirus disease), which started recruitment in April 2020, is a multi-country double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial which is being conducted in healthcare facilities involved in COVID-19 case management. Participants are staff employed in facilities managing people with proven or suspected COVID-19. As part of the study, we conducted a series of engagement sessions. The aims were to assess the feasibility of the study, to identify context-specific ethical issues, to understand possible concerns, to fine tune research procedures and to refine the COPCOV information materials. Methods: The COPCOV study was approved by relevant institutional review boards. The sessions described in this paper were part of the study. We conducted a series of engagement sessions, each involving a short presentation of the study, a section where attendees were asked to express their willingness to participate in such a study, which information they would need to change their view and an open Q&A section. Answers were transcribed and coded into themes by two independent investigators. Themes were derived from the data. They complemented other site-specific engagement, communication, and public relation activities such as press releases and websites. Results and conclusions: From 16 th March 2020 to 20 th January 2021, 12 engagement sessions were conducted in Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Nepal and the UK involving 213 attendees in total. Issues raised revolved around the social value and study rationale; safety of trial medications and risk-benefit balance; study design and commitments. These sessions helped us identify  concerns people had, which helped us refine information materials as well as complement site feasibility assessments. Our experience strongly supports the use of participatory practices prior to conducting clinical trials., Competing Interests: Competing interests: WS, JJC, EAA, SUS, MM, SV, CW, BH, VS, NJW and PYC are investigators or otherwise involved in the COPCOV study; Chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine prevention of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in the healthcare setting; a randomised, placebo-controlled prophylaxis study (ClinicalTrials.gov; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04303507; 11/03/2021)., (Copyright: © 2022 Perrone C et al.)

Background: The COPCOV study (chloroquine/ hydroxychloroquine prevention of coronavirus disease), which started recruitment in April 2020, is a multi-country double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial which is being conducted in healthcare facilities involved in COVID-19 case management. COPCOV aims to recruit healthcare workers and other staff employed in facilities managing people with proven or suspected COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a series of engagement sessions, each involving a short presentation of the study, a section where attendees were asked to express if they would be interested in participating in such a study and which information they would need to change their view and an open Q&A section. Answers were transcribed and coded into themes by two independent investigators. Themes were derived from the data. The aims were to assess the feasibility of the study at the respective sites, to identify context-specific ethical issues, to understand concerns potential participants might have, to fine tune research procedures and to refine COPCOV information materials. They complemented other site-specific engagement, communication and public relation activities such as press releases and websites. Results: From 16 th March 2020 to 20 th January 2021, 12 engagement sessions were conducted in Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Nepal and the UK involving 213 attendees in total. The sessions were designed to encourage potential participants and research professionals not directly involved in the project to interact with those who planned the study and those conducting it. Many attendees were keen to join the study while others had concerns. Questions raised revolved around the social value and study rationale; safety of trial medications and risk-benefit balance; study design and commitments. Conclusions: These sessions helped us refine information materials, identify misunderstandings about the study as well as complement site feasibility assessments. Our experience strongly supports the use of participatory practices prior to conducting clinical trials., Competing Interests: Competing interests: WS, JJC, EAA, SUS, MM, SV, CW, BH, VS, NJW and PYC are investigators or otherwise involved in the COPCOV study; Chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine prevention of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in the healthcare setting; a randomised, placebo-controlled prophylaxis study (ClinicalTrials.gov; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04303507; 11/03/2021)., (Copyright: © 2021 Perrone C et al.)

Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) analysis has great discriminative power for detecting similar molecular fingerprints of suspected tuberculosis (TB) clusters. The proportion of TB cases within clusters and the associated risk factors are important epidemiological parameters guiding appropriate outbreak control strategies in endemic settings. We conducted a hospital-based TB case-cohort study between 2003 and 2011 in the northernmost province of Thailand. We identified TB clusters by Mycobacterium tuberculosis WGS and analysed the risks of TB clustering and the characteristics of large clusters compared with small clusters. Among 1146 TB isolates, we identified 77 clusters with 251 isolates defined by a 5-single-nucleotide variant (SNV) cutoff and 112 clusters with 431 isolates defined by a 12-SNV cutoff. Twelve large clusters with 6 isolates or more in each cluster were identified by a 12-SNV cutoff. Sublineage 2.2.1 (both Ancestral and Modern) strains and imprisonment were independently associated with large clusters. Furthermore, although large clusters of Lineage 2.2.1/Ancestral strains included a high number of prisoners, Lineage 2.2.1/Modern strain clusters were only associated with treatment failures and drug resistance. Heterogeneity among lineage strains was observed with respect to large-cluster characteristics. Patients with an increased TB-transmission tendency should be priority targets for contact investigations and outbreak interventions to prevent ongoing transmission., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

Pharyngitis is usually caused by a viral infection for which antibiotics are often unnecessarily prescribed, adding to the burden of antimicrobial resistance. Identifying who needs antibiotics is challenging; microbiological confirmation and clinical scores are used but have limitations. In a cross-sectional study nested within a randomized controlled trial, we estimated the prevalence and antibiotic susceptibility profiles of group A Streptococcus (GAS) in patients presenting to primary care with a sore throat and fever in northern Thailand. We then evaluated the use of C-reactive protein (CRP) and clinical scores (Centor and FeverPAIN) to identify the presence of GAS. One hundred sixty-nine patients were enrolled, of whom 35 (20.7%) had β-hemolytic Streptococci (BHS) isolated from throat swab culture, and 11 (6.5%) had GAS. All GAS isolates were sensitive to penicillin G. The median CRP of those without BHS isolation was 10 mg/L (interquartile range [IQR] ≤ 8-18), compared with 18 mg/L (IQR 9-71, P = 0.0302) for those with GAS and 14 mg/L (IQR ≤ 8-38, P = 0.0516) for those with any BHS isolated. However, there were no significant relationships between CRP > 8 mg/L ( P = 0.112), Centor ≥ 3 ( P = 0.212), and FeverPAIN ≥ 4 ( P = 1.000), and the diagnosis of GAS compared with no BHS isolation. Identifying who requires antibiotics for pharyngitis remains challenging and necessitates further larger studies. C-reactive protein testing alone, although imperfect, can reduce prescribing compared with routine care. Targeted CRP testing through clinical scoring may be the most cost-effective approach to ruling out GAS infection.

Background: In southeast Asia, antibiotic prescription in febrile patients attending primary care is common, and a probable contributor to the high burden of antimicrobial resistance. The objective of this trial was to explore whether C-reactive protein (CRP) testing at point of care could rationalise antibiotic prescription in primary care, comparing two proposed thresholds to classify CRP concentrations as low or high to guide antibiotic treatment., Methods: We did a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled trial in participants aged at least 1 year with a documented fever or a chief complaint of fever (regardless of previous antibiotic intake and comorbidities other than malignancies) recruited from six public primary care units in Thailand and three primary care clinics and one outpatient department in Myanmar. Individuals were randomly assigned using a computer-based randomisation system at a ratio of 1:1:1 to either the control group or one of two CRP testing groups, which used thresholds of 20 mg/L (group A) or 40 mg/L CRP (group B) to guide antibiotic prescription. Health-care providers were masked to allocation between the two intervention groups but not to the control group. The primary outcome was the prescription of any antibiotic from day 0 to day 5 and the proportion of patients who were prescribed an antibiotic when CRP concentrations were above and below the 20 mg/L or 40 mg/L thresholds. The primary outcome was analysed in the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02758821, and is now completed., Findings: Between June 8, 2016, and Aug 25, 2017, we recruited 2410 patients, of whom 803 patients were randomly assigned to CRP group A, 800 to CRP group B, and 807 to the control group. 598 patients in CRP group A, 593 in CRP group B, and 767 in the control group had follow-up data for both day 5 and day 14 and had been prescribed antibiotics (or not) in accordance with test results (per-protocol population). During the trial, 318 (39%) of 807 patients in the control group were prescribed an antibiotic by day 5, compared with 290 (36%) of 803 patients in CRP group A and 275 (34%) of 800 in CRP group B. The adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 0·80 (95% CI 0·65-0·98) and risk difference of -5·0 percentage points (95% CI -9·7 to -0·3) between group B and the control group were significant, although lower than anticipated, whereas the reduction in prescribing in group A compared with the control group was not significant (aOR 0·86 [0·70-1·06]; risk difference -3·3 percentage points [-8·0 to 1·4]). Patients with high CRP concentrations in both intervention groups were more likely to be prescribed an antibiotic than in the control group (CRP ≥20 mg/L: group A vs control group, p<0·0001; CRP ≥40 mg/L: group B vs control group, p<0·0001), and those with low CRP concentrations were more likely to have an antibiotic withheld (CRP <20 mg/L: group A vs control group, p<0·0001; CRP <40 mg/L: group B vs control group, p<0·0001). 24 serious adverse events were recorded, consisting of 23 hospital admissions and one death, which occurred in CRP group A. Only one serious adverse event was thought to be possibly related to the study (a hospital admission in CRP group A)., Interpretation: In febrile patients attending primary care, testing for CRP at point of care with a threshold of 40 mg/L resulted in a modest but significant reduction in antibiotic prescribing, with patients with high CRP being more likely to be prescribed an antibiotic, and no evidence of a difference in clinical outcomes. This study extends the evidence base from lower-income settings supporting the use of CRP tests to rationalise antibiotic use in primary care patients with an acute febrile illness. A key limitation of this study is the individual rather than cluster randomised study design which might have resulted in contamination between the study groups, reducing the effect size of the intervention., Funding: Wellcome Trust Institutional Strategic Support Fund grant (105605/Z/14/Z) and Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND) funding from the Australian Government., (Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Antibiotic use in low-income and middle-income countries continues to rise despite the knowledge that antibiotic overuse can lead to antimicrobial resistance. There is a paucity of detailed data on the use of antibiotics in primary care in low-resource settings., Objective: To describe the presentation of acute infections and the indications for antibiotic prescription., Design: A 2-year retrospective review of routinely collected data., Setting: All 32 primary care units in one district in northern Thailand., Participants: Patients attending primary care with a history of fever, documented temperature, International Statistical Classification of Diseases 10 code for infection or prescribed a systemic antibiotic. Patients attending after the initiation of a study on C-reactive protein testing in four centres were excluded., Outcome Measures: The proportion of patients prescribed an antibiotic and the frequency of clinical presentations., Results: 762 868 patients attended the health centres, of whom 103 196 met the inclusion criteria, 5966 were excluded resulting in 97 230 attendances consisting of 83 661 illness episodes.46.9% (39 242) of the patients were prescribed an antibiotic during their illness. Indications for antibiotic prescription in the multivariable logistic regression analysis included male sex (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.21 (95% CI 1.16 to 1.28), p<0.001), adults (aOR 1.77 (95% CI 1.57 to 2), p<0.001) and a temperature >37.5°C (aOR 1.24 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.48), p=0.020). 77.9% of the presentations were for respiratory-related problems, of which 98.6% were upper respiratory tract infections. The leading infection diagnoses were common cold (50%), acute pharyngitis (18.9%) and acute tonsillitis (5%) which were prescribed antibiotics in 10.5%, 88.7% and 87.1% of cases, respectively. Amoxicillin was the most commonly prescribed antibiotic., Conclusions: Nearly half of the patients received an antibiotic, the majority of whom had a respiratory infection. The results can be used to plan interventions to improve the rational use of antibiotics. Further studies in private facilities, pharmacies and dental clinics are required., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

New and affordable point-of-care testing (POCT) solutions are hoped to guide antibiotic prescription and to help limit antimicrobial resistance (AMR)-especially in low- and middle-income countries where resource constraints often prevent extensive diagnostic testing. Anthropological and sociological research has illuminated the role and impact of rapid point-of-care malaria testing. This paper expands our knowledge about the social implications of non-malarial POCT, using the case study of a C-reactive-protein point-of-care testing (CRP POCT) clinical trial with febrile patients at primary-care-level health centres in Chiang Rai province, northern Thailand. We investigate the social role of CRP POCT through its interactions with (a) the healthcare workers who use it, (b) the patients whose routine care is affected by the test, and (c) the existing patient-health system linkages that might resonate or interfere with CRP POCT. We conduct a thematic analysis of data from 58 purposively sampled pre- and post-intervention patients and healthcare workers in August 2016 and May 2017. We find widespread positive attitudes towards the test among patients and healthcare workers. Patients' views are influenced by an understanding of CRP POCT as a comprehensive blood test that provides specific diagnosis and that corresponds to notions of good care. Healthcare workers use the test to support their negotiations with patients but also to legitimise ethical decisions in an increasingly restrictive antibiotic policy environment. We hypothesise that CRP POCT could entail greater patient adherence to recommended antibiotic treatment, but it could also encourage riskier health behaviour and entail potentially adverse equity implications for patients across generations and socioeconomic strata. Our empirical findings inform the clinical literature on increasingly propagated point-of-care biomarker tests to guide antibiotic prescriptions, and we contribute to the anthropological and sociological literature through a novel conceptualisation of the patient-health system interface as an activity space into which biomarker testing is introduced., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global health priority. Leading UK and global strategy papers to fight AMR recognise its social and behavioural dimensions, but current policy responses to improve the popular use of antimicrobials (eg, antibiotics) are limited to education and awareness-raising campaigns. In response to conceptual, methodological and empirical weaknesses of this approach, we study people's antibiotic-related health behaviour through three research questions.RQ1: What are the manifestations and determinants of problematic antibiotic use in patients' healthcare-seeking pathways?RQ2: Will people's exposure to antibiotic awareness activities entail changed behaviours that diffuse or dissipate within a network of competing healthcare practices?RQ3: Which proxy indicators facilitate the detection of problematic antibiotic behaviours across and within communities?, Methods: We apply an interdisciplinary analytical framework that draws on the public health, medical anthropology, sociology and development economics literature. Our research involves social surveys of treatment-seeking behaviour among rural dwellers in northern Thailand (Chiang Rai) and southern Lao PDR (Salavan). We sample approximately 4800 adults to produce district-level representative and social network data. Additional 60 cognitive interviews facilitate survey instrument development and data interpretation. Our survey data analysis techniques include event sequence analysis (RQ1), multilevel regression (RQ1-3), social network analysis (RQ2) and latent class analysis (RQ3)., Discussion: Social research in AMR is nascent, but our unprecedentedly detailed data on microlevel treatment-seeking behaviour can contribute an understanding of behaviour beyond awareness and free choice, highlighting, for example, decision-making constraints, problems of marginalisation and lacking access to healthcare and competing ideas about desirable behaviour., Trial Registration Number: NCT03241316; Pre-results.