Search

Author(s): Simon Pollett, Michael A. Johansson, Nicholas G. Reich, David Brett-Major, Sara Y. Del Valle, Srinivasan Venkatramanan, Rachel Lowe, Travis Porco, Irina Maljkovic Berry, Alina Deshpande, Moritz U. G. Kraemer, [...]

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has had an unprecedented impact on multiple levels of society. Not only has the pandemic completely overwhelmed some health systems but it has also changed how scientific evidence is shared and increased the pace at which such evidence is published and consumed, by scientists, policymakers and the wider public. More significantly, the pandemic has created tremendous challenges for decision-makers, who have had to implement highly disruptive containment measures with very little empirical scientific evidence to support their decision-making process. Given this lack of data, predictive mathematical models have played an increasingly prominent role. In high-income countries, there is a long-standing history of established research groups advising policymakers, whereas a general lack of translational capacity has meant that mathematical models frequently remain inaccessible to policymakers in low-income and middle-income countries. Here, we describe a participatory approach to modelling that aims to circumvent this gap. Our approach involved the creation of an international group of infectious disease modellers and other public health experts, which culminated in the establishment of the COVID-19 Modelling (CoMo) Consortium. Here, we describe how the consortium was formed, the way it functions, the mathematical model used and, crucially, the high degree of engagement fostered between CoMo Consortium members and their respective local policymakers and ministries of health.

Background The importance of infectious disease epidemic forecasting and prediction research is underscored by decades of communicable disease outbreaks, including COVID-19. Unlike other fields of medical research, such as clinical trials and systematic reviews, no reporting guidelines exist for reporting epidemic forecasting and prediction research despite their utility. We therefore developed the EPIFORGE checklist, a guideline for standardized reporting of epidemic forecasting research. Methods and findings We developed this checklist using a best-practice process for development of reporting guidelines, involving a Delphi process and broad consultation with an international panel of infectious disease modelers and model end users. The objectives of these guidelines are to improve the consistency, reproducibility, comparability, and quality of epidemic forecasting reporting. The guidelines are not designed to advise scientists on how to perform epidemic forecasting and prediction research, but rather to serve as a standard for reporting critical methodological details of such studies. Conclusions These guidelines have been submitted to the EQUATOR network, in addition to hosting by other dedicated webpages to facilitate feedback and journal endorsement., Author(s): Simon Pollett 1, Michael A. Johansson 2, Nicholas G. Reich 3, David Brett-Major 4, Sara Y. Del Valle 5, Srinivasan Venkatramanan 6, Rachel Lowe 7,8, Travis Porco 9, Irina [...]

Mass-screen-and-treat and targeted mass-drug-administration strategies are being considered as a means to interrupt transmission of Plasmodium falciparum malaria. However, the effectiveness of such strategies will depend on the extent to which current and future diagnostics are able to detect those individuals who are infectious to mosquitoes. We estimate the relationship between parasite density and onward infectivity using sensitive quantitative parasite diagnostics and mosquito feeding assays from Burkina Faso. We find that a diagnostic with a lower detection limit of 200 parasites per microlitre would detect 55% of the infectious reservoir (the combined infectivity to mosquitoes of the whole population weighted by how often each individual is bitten) whereas a test with a limit of 20 parasites per microlitre would detect 83% and 2 parasites per microlitre would detect 95% of the infectious reservoir. Using mathematical models, we show that increasing the diagnostic sensitivity from 200 parasites per microlitre (equivalent to microscopy or current rapid diagnostic tests) to 2 parasites per microlitre would increase the number of regions where transmission could be interrupted with a mass-screen-and-treat programme from an entomological inoculation rate below 1 to one of up to 4. The higher sensitivity diagnostic could reduce the number of treatment rounds required to interrupt transmission in areas of lower prevalence. We predict that mass-screen-and-treat with a highly sensitive diagnostic is less effective than mass drug administration owing to the prophylactic protection provided to uninfected individuals by the latter approach. In low-transmission settings such as those in Southeast Asia, we find that a diagnostic tool with a sensitivity of 20 parasites per microlitre may be sufficient for targeted mass drug administration because this diagnostic is predicted to identify a similar village population prevalence compared with that currently detected using polymerase chain reaction if treatment levels are high and screening is conducted during the dry season. Along with other factors, such as coverage, choice of drug, timing of the intervention, importation of infections, and seasonality, the sensitivity of the diagnostic can play a part in increasing the chance of interrupting transmission. Nature 528, S94-S101 (3 December 2015), DOI: 10.1038/nature16040 This article has not been written or reviewed by Nature editors. Nature accepts no responsibility for the accuracy of the information provided., Plasmodium falciparum malaria was responsible for an estimated 584,000 (range 367,000-755,000) deaths in 2013, most of which occurred in young children in sub-Saharan Africa (1). Although the burden has reduced [...]

Abstract Background In low-resource settings, patients’ use of multiple healthcare sources may complicate chronic care and clinical outcomes as antiretroviral therapy (ART) continues to expand. However, little is known regarding patterns, drivers and consequences of using multiple healthcare sources. We therefore investigated factors associated with patterns of plural healthcare usage among patients taking ART in diverse South African settings. Methods A cross-sectional study of patients taking ART was conducted in two rural and two urban sub-districts, involving 13 accredited facilities and 1266 participants selected through systematic random sampling. Structured questionnaires were used in interviews, and participant’s clinic records were reviewed. Data collected included household assets, healthcare access dimensions (availability, affordability and acceptability), healthcare utilization and pluralism, and laboratory-based outcomes. Multiple logistic regression models were fitted to identify predictors of healthcare pluralism and associations with treatment outcomes. Prior ethical approval and informed consent were obtained. Results Nineteen percent of respondents reported use of additional healthcare providers over and above their regular ART visits in the prior month. A further 15% of respondents reported additional expenditure on self-care (e.g. special foods). Access to health insurance (Adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 6.15) and disability grants (aOR 1.35) increased plural healthcare use. However, plural healthcare users were more likely to borrow money to finance healthcare (aOR 2.68), and incur catastrophic levels of healthcare expenditure (27%) than non-plural users (7%). Quality of care factors, such as perceived disrespect by staff (aOR 2.07) and lack of privacy (aOR 1.50) increased plural healthcare utilization. Plural healthcare utilization was associated with rural residence (aOR 1.97). Healthcare pluralism was not associated with missed visits or biological outcomes. Conclusion Increased plural healthcare utilization, inequitably distributed between rural and urban areas, is largely a function of higher socioeconomic status, better ability to finance healthcare and factors related to poor quality of care in ART clinics. Plural healthcare utilization may be an indication of patients’ dissatisfaction with perceived quality of ART care provided. Healthcare expenditure of a catastrophic nature remained a persistent complication. Plural healthcare utilization did not appear to influence clinical outcomes. However, there were potential negative impacts on the livelihoods of patients and their households.

Abstract Background South Africa’s maternal mortality rate (625 deaths/100,000 live births) is high for a middle-income country, although over 90% of pregnant women utilize maternal health services. Alongside HIV/AIDS, barriers to Comprehensive Emergency Obstetric Care currently impede the country’s Millenium Development Goals (MDGs) of reducing child mortality and improving maternal health. While health system barriers to obstetric care have been well documented, “patient-oriented” barriers have been neglected. This article explores affordability, availability and acceptability barriers to obstetric care in South Africa from the perspectives of women who had recently used, or attempted to use, these services. Methods A mixed-method study design combined 1,231 quantitative exit interviews with sixteen qualitative in-depth interviews with women (over 18) in two urban and two rural health sub-districts in South Africa. Between June 2008 and September 2009, information was collected on use of, and access to, obstetric services, and socioeconomic and demographic details. Regression analysis was used to test associations between descriptors of the affordability, availability and acceptability of services, and demographic and socioeconomic predictor variables. Qualitative interviews were coded deductively and inductively using ATLAS ti.6. Quantitative and qualitative data were integrated into an analysis of access to obstetric services and related barriers. Results Access to obstetric services was impeded by affordability, availability and acceptability barriers. These were unequally distributed, with differences between socioeconomic groups and geographic areas being most important. Rural women faced the greatest barriers, including longest travel times, highest costs associated with delivery, and lowest levels of service acceptability, relative to urban residents. Negative provider-patient interactions, including staff inattentiveness, turning away women in early-labour, shouting at patients, and insensitivity towards those who had experienced stillbirths, also inhibited access and compromised quality of care. Conclusions To move towards achieving its MDGs, South Africa cannot just focus on increasing levels of obstetric coverage, but must systematically address the access constraints facing women during pregnancy and delivery. More needs to be done to respond to these “patient-oriented” barriers by improving how and where services are provided, particularly in rural areas and for poor women, as well as altering the attitudes and actions of health care providers.

Background: There is global concern with geographical and socio-economic inequalities in access to and use of maternal delivery services. Little is known, however, on how local-level socio-economic inequalities are related to the uptake of needed maternal health care. We conducted a study of relative socio-economic inequalities in use of hospital-based maternal delivery services within two rural sub-districts of South Africa. Methods: We used both population-based surveillance and facility-based clinical record data to examine differences in the relative distribution of socio-economic status (SES), using a household assets index to measure wealth, among those needing maternal delivery services and those using them in the Bushbuckridge sub-district, Mpumalanga, and Hlabisa sub-district, Kwa-Zulu Natal. We compared the SES distributions in households with a birth in the previous year with the household SES distributions of representative samples of women who had delivered in hospitals in these two sub-districts. Results: In both sub-districts, women in the lowest SES quintile were significantly under-represented in the hospital user population, relative to need for delivery services (8% in user population vs 21% in population in need; p < 0.001 in each sub-district). Exit interviews provided additional evidence on potential barriers to access, in particular the affordability constraints associated with hospital delivery. Conclusions: The findings highlight the need for alternative strategies to make maternal delivery services accessible to the poorest women within overall poor communities and, in doing so, decrease socioeconomic inequalities in utilisation of maternal delivery services.