Search

Maximizing uptake of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines among people in prison is essential in mitigating future outbreaks. We aimed to determine factors associated with willingness to receive SARS-CoV-2 vaccination before vaccine availability.We chose 3 Canadian federal prisons based on their low uptake of influenza vaccines in 2019-2020. Participants completed a self-administered questionnaire on knowledge, attitude and beliefs toward vaccines. The primary outcome was participant willingness to receive a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, measured using a 5-point Likert scale to the question, "If a safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine becomes available in prison, how likely are you to get vaccinated?" We calculated the association of independent variables (age, ethnicity, chronic health conditions, 2019-2020 influenza vaccine uptake and prison security level), identified a priori, with vaccine willingness using logistic regression and crude and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).We recruited 240 participants from Mar. 31 to Apr. 19, 2021 (median age 46 years; 19.2% female, 25.8% Indigenous). Of these, 178 (74.2%) were very willing to receive a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Participants who received the 2019-2020 influenza vaccine (adjusted OR 5.20, 95% CI 2.43-12.00) had higher odds of vaccine willingness than those who did not; those who self-identified as Indigenous (adjusted OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11-0.60) and in medium- or maximum-security prisons (adjusted OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.12-0.92) had lower odds of vaccine willingness than those who identified as white or those in minimum-security prisons, respectively.Most participants were very willing to receive vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 before vaccine roll-out. Vaccine promotion campaigns should target groups with low vaccine willingness (i.e., those who have declined influenza vaccine, identify as Indigenous or reside in high-security prisons).

Background Vaccine uptake rates have been historically low in correctional settings. To better understand vaccine hesitancy in these high-risk settings, we explored reasons for COVID-19 vaccine refusal among people in federal prisons. Methods Three maximum security all-male federal prisons in British Columbia, Alberta, and Ontario (Canada) were chosen, representing prisons with the highest proportions of COVID-19 vaccine refusal. Using a qualitative descriptive design and purposive sampling, individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with incarcerated people who had previously refused at least one COVID-19 vaccine until data saturation was achieved. An inductive–deductive thematic analysis of audio-recorded interview transcripts was conducted using the Conceptual Model of Vaccine Hesitancy. Results Between May 19-July 8, 2021, 14 participants were interviewed (median age: 30 years; n = 7 Indigenous, n = 4 visible minority, n = 3 White). Individual-, interpersonal-, and system-level factors were identified. Three were particularly relevant to the correctional setting: 1) Risk perception: participants perceived that they were at lower risk of COVID-19 due to restricted visits and interactions; 2) Health care services in prison: participants reported feeling “punished” and stigmatized due to strict COVID-19 restrictions, and failed to identify personal benefits of vaccination due to the lack of incentives; 3) Universal distrust: participants expressed distrust in prison employees, including health care providers. Interpretation Reasons for vaccine refusal among people in prison are multifaceted. Educational interventions could seek to address COVID-19 risk misconceptions in prison settings. However, impact may be limited if trust is not fostered and if incentives are not considered in vaccine promotion.

Canadian correctional institutions have been prioritized for COVID-19 vaccination given the multiple outbreaks that have occurred since the start of the pandemic. Given historically low vaccine uptake, we aimed to explore barriers and facilitators to COVID-19 vaccination acceptability among people incarcerated in federal prisons.Three federal prisons in Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia (Canada) were chosen based on previously low influenza vaccine uptake among those incarcerated. Using a qualitative design, semi-structured interviews were conducted with a diverse sample (gender, age, and ethnicity) of incarcerated people. An inductive-deductive analysis of audio-recorded interview transcripts was conducted to identify and categorize barriers and facilitators within the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF).From March 22-29, 2021, a total of 15 participants (n = 5 per site; n = 5 women; median age = 43 years) were interviewed, including five First Nations people and six people from other minority groups. Eleven (73%) expressed a desire to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, including two who previously refused influenza vaccination. We identified five thematic barriers across three TDF domains: social influences (receiving strict recommendations, believing in conspiracies to harm), beliefs about consequences (believing that infection control measures will not be fully lifted, concerns with vaccine-related side effects), and knowledge (lack of vaccine-specific information), and eight thematic facilitators across five TDF domains: environmental context and resources (perceiving correctional employees as sources of outbreaks, perceiving challenges to prevention measures), social influences (receiving recommendations from trusted individuals), beliefs about consequences (seeking individual and collective protection, believing in a collective "return to normal", believing in individual privileges), knowledge (reassurance about vaccine outcomes), and emotions (having experienced COVID-19-related stress).Lack of information and misinformation were important barriers to COVID-19 vaccine acceptability among people incarcerated in Canadian federal prisons. This suggests that educational interventions, delivered by trusted health care providers, may improve COVID-19 vaccine uptake going forward.

BACKGROUND: Simulations aim to supplement historic teacher-centric methods by facilitating experiential, self-guided learning and the application of students’ knowledge in a controlled environment. The objective of our study is to describe the methodology of developing and facilitating simulations, and to assess their effectiveness as an educational tool for global health training. METHODS: We describe the methodology used by Global Health Sim between October 2016 and March 2019 to design and facilitate simulations for participants at the high school through graduate school levels, and at conferences and online. Using a mixed-methods evaluation design, we assessed self-reported quantitative measures of content knowledge before and after participating in the simulation and different aspects of the simulation experience. We also conducted a qualitative thematic analysis of the experience and lessons learned as reported by evaluation respondents. RESULTS: We conducted a total of 20 simulations on six unique topics for 213 evaluation respondents. Self-reported knowledge of the topic increased an average of 3.3 points on a 10-point scale (4.1–7.4) and the seven aspects of the experience were rated highly (3–5 points on a 5-point Likert scale). Thematic analysis revealed an increased understanding of the complexity of global health problems and strategies for effectively responding to issues in a multidisciplinary manner. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents valued the opportunity to learn about the complexities of responding to global health events, which confirmed that simulations can be utilized as teaching tools for students and professionals. Further research is required to assess the long-term educational impact of simulations in global health.

Background: The Public Health Agency of Canada reviewed sexual transmission of HIV between serodiscordant partners to support examination of the criminal justice system response to HIV nondisclosure by the Department of Justice of Canada. We sought to determine HIV transmission risk when an HIV-positive partner takes antiretroviral therapy, has a suppressed viral load or uses condoms. Methods: We conducted an overview and systematic review update by searching MEDLINE and other databases (Jan. 1, 2007, to Mar. 13, 2017; and Nov. 1, 2012, to Apr. 27, 2017, respectively). We considered reviews and studies about absolute risk of sexual transmission of HIV between serodiscordant partners to be eligible for inclusion. We used A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) for review quality, Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) instrument for study risk of bias and then the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the quality of evidence across studies. We calculated HIV incidence per 100 person-years with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assigned risk categories according to potential for and evidence of HIV transmission. Results: We identified 12 reviews. We selected 1 review to estimate risk of HIV transmission for condom use without antiretroviral therapy (1.14 transmissions/100 person-years, 95% CI 0.56–2.04; low risk). We identified 11 studies with 23 transmissions over 10 511 person-years with antiretroviral therapy (0.22 transmissions/ 100 person-years, 95% CI 0.14–0.33; low risk). We found no transmissions with antiretroviral therapy and a viral load of less than 200 copies/mL across consecutive measurements 4 to 6 months apart (0.00 transmissions/100 person-years, 95% CI 0.00–0.28; negligible risk regardless of condom use). Interpretation: Based on high-quality evidence, there is a negligible risk of sexual transmission of HIV when an HIV-positive sex partner adheres to antiretroviral therapy and maintains a suppressed viral load of less than 200 copies/mL measured every 4 to 6 months. Sexual transmissions of HIV have occurred when viral load was more than 200 copies/mL with antiretroviral therapy or condoms alone were used, although the risk remains low. These findings will help to support patient and clinician decision-making, affect public health case management and contact tracing, and inform justice system responses to HIV nondisclosure.

Despite major advances in HIV testing, early detection of infection at the point of care (PoC) remains a key challenge. Although rapid antibody PoC and laboratory-based nucleic acid amplification tests dominate the diagnostics market, the viral capsid protein p24 is recognized as an alternative early virological biomarker of infection. However, the detection of ultra-low levels of p24 at the PoC has proven challenging. Here we review the landscape of p24 diagnostics to identify knowledge gaps and barriers and help shape future research agendas. Five hundred and seventy-four research articles to May 2018 that propose or evaluate diagnostic assays for p24 were identified and reviewed. We give a brief history of diagnostic development, and the utility of p24 as a biomarker in different populations such as infants, the newly infected, those on preexposure prophylaxis and self-testers. We review the performance of commercial p24 assays and consider elements such as immune complex disruption, resource-poor settings, prevalence, and assay antibodies. Emerging and ultrasensitive assays are reviewed and show a number of promising approaches but further translation has been limited. We summarize studies on the health economic benefits of using antigen testing. Finally, we speculate on the future uses of high-performance p24 assays, particularly, if available in self-test format.

Background Chronic Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) infection is characterised by the persistence of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg). Expanding HBV diagnosis and treatment programmes into low resource settings will require high quality but inexpensive rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) in addition to laboratory-based enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) to detect HBsAg. The purpose of this review is to assess the clinical accuracy of available diagnostic tests to detect HBsAg to inform recommendations on testing strategies in 2017 WHO hepatitis testing guidelines. Methods The systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using 9 databases. Two reviewers independently extracted data according to a pre-specified plan and evaluated study quality. Meta-analysis was performed. HBsAg diagnostic accuracy of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) was compared to enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and nucleic-acid test (NAT) reference standards. Subanalyses were performed to determine accuracy among brands, HIV-status and specimen type. Results Of the 40 studies that met the inclusion criteria, 33 compared RDTs and/or EIAs against EIAs and 7 against NATs as reference standards. Thirty studies assessed diagnostic accuracy of 33 brands of RDTs in 23,716 individuals from 23 countries using EIA as the reference standard. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 90.0% (95% CI: 89.1, 90.8) and 99.5% (95% CI: 99.4, 99.5) respectively, but accuracy varied widely among brands. Accuracy did not differ significantly whether serum, plasma, venous or capillary whole blood was used. Pooled sensitivity of RDTs in 5 studies of HIV-positive persons was lower at 72.3% (95% CI: 67.9, 76.4) compared to that in HIV-negative persons, but specificity remained high. Five studies evaluated 8 EIAs against a chemiluminescence immunoassay reference standard with a pooled sensitivity and specificity of 88.9% (95% CI: 87.0, 90.6) and 98.4% (95% CI: 97.8, 98.8), respectively. Accuracy of both RDTs and EIAs using a NAT reference were generally lower, especially amongst HIV-positive cohorts. Conclusions HBsAg RDTs have good sensitivity and excellent specificity compared to laboratory immunoassays as a reference standard. Sensitivity of HBsAg RDTs may be lower in HIV infected individuals. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12879-017-2772-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Although direct-acting antivirals can achieve sustained virological response rates greater than 90% in Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) infected persons, at present the majority of HCV-infected individuals remain undiagnosed and therefore untreated. While there are a wide range of HCV serological tests available, there is a lack of formal assessment of their diagnostic performance. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate he diagnostic accuracy of available rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) and laboratory based EIA assays in detecting antibodies to HCV. Methods We used the PRISMA checklist and Cochrane guidance to develop our search protocol. The search strategy was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42015023567). The search focused on hepatitis C, diagnostic tests, and diagnostic accuracy within eight databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Science Citation Index Expanded, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science, SCOPUS, Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde and WHO Global Index Medicus. Studies were included if they evaluated an assay to determine the sensitivity and specificity of HCV antibody (HCV Ab) in humans. Two reviewers independently extracted data and performed a quality assessment of the studies using the QUADAS tool. We pooled test estimates using the DerSimonian-Laird method, by using the software R and RevMan. 5.3. Results A total of 52 studies were identified that included 52,673 unique test measurements. Based on five studies, the pooled sensitivity and specificity of HCV Ab rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) were 98% (95% CI 98-100%) and 100% (95% CI 100-100%) compared to an enzyme immunoassay (EIA) reference standard. High HCV Ab RDTs sensitivity and specificity were observed across screening populations (general population, high risk populations, and hospital patients) using different reference standards (EIA, nucleic acid testing, immunoblot). There were insufficient studies to undertake subanalyses based on HIV co-infection. Oral HCV Ab RDTs also had excellent sensitivity and specificity compared to blood reference tests, respectively at 94% (95% CI 93-96%) and 100% (95% CI 100-100%). Among studies that assessed individual oral RDTs, the eight studies revealed that OraQuick ADVANCE® had a slightly higher sensitivity (98%, 95% CI 97-98%) compared to the other oral brands (pooled sensitivity: 88%, 95% CI 84-92%). Conclusions RDTs, including oral tests, have excellent sensitivity and specificity compared to laboratory-based methods for HCV antibody detection across a wide range of settings. Oral HCV Ab RDTs had good sensitivity and specificity compared to blood reference standards. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12879-017-2773-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Zika virus (ZIKV) is a mosquito-borne flavivirus associated with a febrile illness as well as severe complications, including microcephaly and Guillain-Barr&eacute, Syndrome. Antibody cross-reactivity between flaviviruses has been documented, and in regions where ZIKV is circulating, dengue virus (DENV) is also endemic, leaving the potential that previous exposure to DENV could alter clinical features of ZIKV infection. To investigate this, we performed a retrospective case-control study in which we compared Canadian travellers who had been infected with ZIKV and had serological findings indicating previous DENV or other flavivirus exposure (n = 16) to those without any previous exposure (n = 44). Patient samples were collected between February 2016 and September 2017 and submitted to Public Health Ontario for testing. ZIKV infection was determined using real-time RT-PCR and antibodies against DENV were identified by the plaque-reduction neutralization test. The mean time from symptom onset to sample collection was 5 days for both groups, the magnitude of viremia was not statistically different (Ct values: 35.6 vs. 34.9, p-value = 0.2). Clinical scores were also similar. Our findings indicate that previous DENV or other flavivirus exposure did not result in greater viremia or a higher illness score.

Between December 2013 and April 2016, the largest epidemic of Ebola virus disease (EVD) to date generated more than 28,000 cases and more than 11,000 deaths in the large, mobile populations of Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. Tracking the rapid rise and slower decline of the West African epidemic has reinforced some common understandings about the epidemiology and control of EVD but has also generated new insights. Despite having more information about the geographic distribution of the disease, the risk of human infection from animals and from survivors of EVD remains unpredictable over a wide area of equatorial Africa. Until human exposure to infection can be anticipated or avoided, future outbreaks will have to be managed with the classic approach to EVD control — extensive surveillance, rapid detection and diagnosis, comprehensive tracing of contacts, prompt patient isolation, supportive clinical care, rigorous efforts to prevent and control infection, safe and dignified burial, and engagement of the community. Empirical and modeling studies conducted during the West African epidemic have shown that large epidemics of EVD are preventable — a rapid response can interrupt transmission and restrict the size of outbreaks, even in densely populated cities. The critical question now is how to ensure that populations and their health services are ready for the next outbreak, wherever it may occur. Health security across Africa and beyond depends on committing resources to both strengthen national health systems and sustain investment in the next generation of vaccines, drugs, and diagnostics.

Despite efforts to control the outbreak of Ebola virus disease in West Africa, substantial transmission continues. As we reach the 1-year anniversary of the first known case from this outbreak, the WHO team updates the progress in controlling the epidemic.

BACKGROUND The development of envelope-specific neutralizing antibodies that can interfere with viral entry into target cells is important for the development of an HIV-1 vaccine. Another means of blocking viral entry is through the use of entry inhibitors such as the CCR5 inhibitor maraviroc (MVC), which can also repel cell-free virus particles from the cell surface. For this reason, we hypothesized that exposure to entry inhibitors might alter viral infectiousness and sensitivity to antibody-mediated neutralization. METHODS The CCR5-tropic HIV-1 variants BaL, AD8, and CC 1/85 were used to infect PM-1 cells in the presence of 2 entry inhibitors, enfuvirtide and MVC. After 4 hours, culture fluids were ultrafiltered and the infectiousness and susceptibility to broadly neutralizing antibodies (2F5, 4E10, 2G12, b12, VRC01, PG9) of viruses exposed to these entry inhibitors were assessed using TZM-bl cells. RESULTS Viruses exposed to the entry inhibitor MVC exhibited lower infectiousness than controls. Enfuvirtide exposure increased AD8 sensitivity to 2F5, 4E10, VRC01, and b12 and increased BaL sensitivity to 4E10 while lowering BaL sensitivity to b12 and VRC01. MVC-exposed BaL became less susceptible to the gp120-specific antibodies b12, 2G12, and VRC01. CONCLUSIONS Exposure to entry inhibitors altered HIV-1 infectiousness and sensitivity to gp120-specific neutralizing antibodies. This alteration of entry inhibitor-exposed virus has implications for the development of future entry inhibitors and for vaccine development.