Search

BACKGROUND: The first national severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) serosurvey in India, done in May-June, 2020, among adults aged 18 years or older from 21 states, found a SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody seroprevalence of 0·73% (95% CI 0·34-1·13). We aimed to assess the more recent nationwide seroprevalence in the general population in India. METHODS: We did a second household serosurvey among individuals aged 10 years or older in the same 700 villages or wards within 70 districts in India that were included in the first serosurvey. Individuals aged younger than 10 years and households that did not respond at the time of survey were excluded. Participants were interviewed to collect information on sociodemographics, symptoms suggestive of COVID-19, exposure history to laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases, and history of COVID-19 illness. 3-5 mL of venous blood was collected from each participant and blood samples were tested using the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay. Seroprevalence was estimated after applying the sampling weights and adjusting for clustering and assay characteristics. We randomly selected one adult serum sample from each household to compare the seroprevalence among adults between the two serosurveys. FINDINGS: Between Aug 18 and Sept 20, 2020, we enrolled and collected serum samples from 29 082 individuals from 15 613 households. The weighted and adjusted seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies in individuals aged 10 years or older was 6·6% (95% CI 5·8-7·4). Among 15 084 randomly selected adults (one per household), the weighted and adjusted seroprevalence was 7·1% (6·2-8·2). Seroprevalence was similar across age groups, sexes, and occupations. Seroprevalence was highest in urban slum areas followed by urban non-slum and rural areas. We estimated a cumulative 74·3 million infections in the country by Aug 18, 2020, with 26-32 infections for every reported COVID-19 case. INTERPRETATION: Approximately one in 15 individuals aged 10 years or older in India had SARS-CoV-2 infection by Aug 18, 2020. The adult seroprevalence increased approximately tenfold between May and August, 2020. Lower infection-to-case ratio in August than in May reflects a substantial increase in testing across the country. FUNDING: Indian Council of Medical Research.

Background: India witnessed a severe second wave of COVID-19 during March and June 2021. We did the fourth nationwide serosurvey to estimate prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the general population aged >=6 years and health care workers (HCWs). Methods: We did a cross-sectional study between 14 June and 6 July 2021 in 700 clusters in the same 70 districts across 21 states/Union Territory. From each district, a minimum of 400 individuals aged >=6 years from general population and 100 HCWs from the district public health facilities were included. The serum samples were tested for the presence of IgG antibodies against S1-RBD and nucleocapsid protein of SARS-CoV-2 using chemiluminescence immunoassay. We estimated the weighted and test adjusted seroprevalence of IgG antibodies against S1-RBD and/or nucleocapsid protein along with 95% CI. Findings: Of the 28,975 sera tested, the weighted and test adjusted prevalence of IgG antibodies against S1-RBD and/or nucleocapsid protein among the general population aged >=6 years was 67.6% (95% CI: 66.4 – 68.7). The seroprevalence increased with age and was not different in rural and urban areas. Compared to unvaccinated adults (62.3%, 95% CI: 60.9 – 63.7), seroprevalence was significantly higher among individuals who received one (81.0%, 95% CI: 79.6 - 82.3) and two doses (89.8%, 95% CI: 88.4 - 91.1). The seroprevalence of IgG antibodies among 7,252 health care workers was 85.2% (95% CI: 83.5 - 86.7). Interpretation: Nearly one third of the population is still seronegative. It is necessary to accelerate the coverage of COVID-19 vaccination among adults and continue adherence to non-pharmaceutical interventions. Funding: Indian Council of Medical Research. Declaration of Interest: None to declare. Ethical Approval: The Institutional Human Ethics Committee of the ICMR National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai approved the study protocol.

Background: The first round of national serosurvey in India was conducted in May-June 2020 among adults from 21 States. The second serosurvey was conducted in August-September 2020 to estimate the nationwide seroprevalence for SARS-CoV-2 infection in the general population aged ten years and above. Methods: The household serosurvey was conducted among individuals aged ten years and above in the same 700 villages and wards from 70 districts selected during the first serosurvey. Blood samples were tested using the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay. Seroprevalence was estimated after applying the sampling weights and adjusting for clustering and assay characteristics. In order to compare the adult seroprevalence between the two surveys, we randomly selected one adult serum sample from each household. Findings: The weighted and adjusted prevalence of infection among 29,082 individuals aged ten years and above was 6·6% (95% CI: 5·8% - 7·4%). The seroprevalence among adults was 7·1% (95% CI: 6·2% – 8·2%). Seroprevalence was similar across age groups, sex, and occupation. Seroprevalence was highest in urban slum areas followed by urban non-slum and rural areas. We estimated a cumulative 74·3 million infections in the country, with 26 – 32 infections for every reported COVID-19 case by August 2020. Interpretation: Nearly one in 15 individuals aged ten years and above had SARS-CoV-2 infection by August 2020. The adult seroprevalence increased ten times between May and August 2020. Lower infection to case ratio in August compared to May reflects a substantial increase in testing across the country. Funding: The study was funded by the Indian Council of Medical Research, New Delhi, India. The study sponsor was involved in reviewing the study design, writing of the manuscript and the decision to submit the paper for publication. Declaration of Interests: The authors declare no competing interests. Ethics Approval Statement: The authors obtained written informed consent from individuals aged 18 years and older. We obtained assent from children aged between 10–17 years, and written informed consent from their parents or guardians prior to the survey. The Central Ethics Committee of Health Research of Indian Council of Medical Research and the Institutional Human Ethics Committee of ICMR-National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai approved the study protocol.

Medical profession which is a noble profession has now becoming a business. Medical professionals often forget their responsibilities towards their patients and conduct their professional work without observing the code of ethics and thereby violate the rights of the patients. Growing incidences of malpractice and medical negligence keep the patient resulting into the poor health or sometime in medical complications. Every now and then people slap or become aggressive if their patient dies in the hospital setting. They directly blame doctor for medical negligence. On the other hand doctors feel that medical profession is becoming very tough and patient and their relatives are no more passive recipient of the treatment. This paper explores the doctors’ experiences about the medical negligence.

Medical ethics are not merely a moral code but a legally sanctioned code of conduct acceptable and normal within the medical profession. This does not mean that morality or moral theories do not influence medical ethics, but medical ethics must be understood, analyzed and practiced from a rational standpoint. This rational component of professional conduct is legally codified under the code of medical ethics of the legally constituted medical council with which all qualified medical practitioners must be registered. Professional ethics of a doctor suggest that a doctor is supposed to treat the patient irrespective of caste, class, ethnic, gender and other biasness. Forty one per cent doctors straight away replied that they can refuse treatment whereas majority of the doctors i.e. fifty nine per cent still maintain that they cannot refuse treatment to any patient.