Search

# Background In the wake of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, the development of the COVID-19 vaccine became a game-changing tool. However, the rapid development of the COVID-19 vaccine gave rise to various myths, misconceptions and hesitancies among people. # Methods A community-based household survey was conducted by the trained healthcare workers, i.e., Accredited Social Health Activist (ASHA) and Anganwadi Worker (AWW) in their respective villages. Information on socio-demographic profile, vaccination status and reasons for vaccine hesitancy in community members was collected during the survey. Details of the vaccination status of community members were cross-examined with government vaccination data. After survey administration, continuous sensitisation to every individual was carried out by trained healthcare workers making people aware and motivating them to vaccinate. Healthcare workers constantly followed up on individuals showcasing hesitancy, thereby building up vaccine confidence in them. # Results Out of the total study population (N=12,812), 90.1% were found eligible for COVID-19 vaccination (\>18 years), 57.8% individuals had received both doses of COVID-19 vaccine, and 23.2% had received only the first dose (partially vaccinated), whereas 9.1% were unvaccinated. The most reported vaccine hesitancy response was being worried about vaccine side effects at 9.2%. The other set of reasons reported among aged 60 years and above were being old (1.6%) and having a co-morbid condition (1.1%). Having an underlying illness was also reported in both age groups (45-60 years, and 60 years and older). Additionally, 18.2% of the unvaccinated and partially vaccinated eligible individuals reported planning to get vaccinated soon. # Conclusions The study reported many myths and misconceptions, and hesitancies related to the COVID-19 vaccine among the community members being a major lag in the vaccine acceptance and uptake. Therefore, adequate vaccine education is much needed to engage the non-medical group, as they mostly tend to have positive interactions with the community members. On that account, sustained community-based health promotion intervention can be effective.

Background and Objective: There have been numerous studies of oral health status of school children and young population; however, similar studies in elderly population in India are lacking. With advances in medical science and consequent increase in life expectancy, elderly population is on the rise and is a subject of growing concern for public health policy. Hence, an attempt was made to study factors influencing decayed, missing, and filled teeth (DMFT) index, oral health awareness, and dental treatment-seeking behavior of elderly population. Methods: A cross-sectional community-based survey was conducted between September 2014 and December 2014 in villages in rural Maharashtra. Sociodemographic and health-related information were collected from 352 participants 60 years of age and above in 10 villages. Results: Prevalence of dental caries was 76.4% in a study population with median DMFT score of 12 with interquartile range of 7–22. The majority of the participants cleaned their teeth with fingers using charcoal and mishri. Only 17.2% participants used toothbrush. About 39% participants had experienced dental pain, of which majority did not visit dentist. The median DMFT index who used toothbrush and toothpaste was significantly less when compared with participants who did not use tooth brush and tooth paste. The majority of the participants had one or more missing teeth, but only 2.2% were using dentures. Conclusion: There is an urgent need for comprehensive oral health educational programs, and accessible and affordable oral health services to be provided to rural community.

Multisectoral approach (MSA) refers to deliberate collaboration among various stakeholder groups (e.g., government, civil society, and private sector) and sectors (e.g., health, environment, and economy) to jointly achieve a policy outcome. By engaging multiple sectors, partners can leverage knowledge, expertise, reach, and resources, benefiting from their combined and varied strengths as they work toward the shared goal of producing better health outcomes. Improving public health (PH) is challenging because of the size of its population and wide variation in geography. MSA help in addressing identified health issues in focused way as it helps in pooling the resources and formulating the common objectives. One of the major advantages is optimization of usage of resources by avoiding duplication of inputs and activities which tremendously improve program effectiveness and efficiency. Willingness at the leadership and mandate at the policy level are necessary to plan and execute the successful multisectoral coordination. All the major stakeholders require to share the common vision and perspective. Developing institutional mechanism is utmost requirement as it will standardize the processes of intersectoral coordination (ISC). Creation of PH cadre is strategic move to meet the major health challenges being faced by the health system, and it would be anchor of establishing systematic ISC. There are many national and international examples of MSA applications such as for malaria elimination, tobacco control, HIV/AIDS prevention, Finland's community-based cardiovascular disease prevention project (North Karelia Project), and Singapore's Health Promotion Board. Promotion of MSA within the health system and with other ministries is seen as an important measure for effective implementation and improving efficiency.

INTRODUCTION:Malaria is a public health emergency in India and Odisha. The national malaria elimination programme aims to expedite early identification, treatment and follow-up of malaria cases in hot-spots through a robust health system, besides focusing on efficient vector control. This study, a result of mass screening conducted in a hot-spot in Odisha, aimed to assess prevalence, identify and estimate the risks and develop a management tool for malaria elimination. METHODS:Through a cross-sectional study and using WHO recommended Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT), 13221 individuals were screened. Information about age, gender, education and health practices were collected along with blood sample (5 μl) for malaria testing. Altitude, forestation, availability of a village health worker and distance from secondary health center were captured using panel technique. A multi-level poisson regression model was used to analyze association between risk factors and prevalence of malaria, and to estimate risk scores. RESULTS:The prevalence of malaria was 5.8% and afebrile malaria accounted for 79 percent of all confirmed cases. Higher proportion of Pv infections were afebrile (81%). We found the prevalence to be 1.38 (1.1664-1.6457) times higher in villages where the Accredited Social Health Activist (ASHA) didn't stay; the risk increased by 1.38 (1.0428-1.8272) and 1.92 (1.4428-2.5764) times in mid- and high-altitude tertiles. With regard to forest coverage, villages falling under mid- and highest-tertiles were 2.01 times (1.6194-2.5129) and 2.03 times (1.5477-2.6809), respectively, more likely affected by malaria. Similarly, villages of mid tertile and lowest tertile of education had 1.73 times (1.3392-2.2586) and 2.50 times (2.009-3.1244) higher prevalence of malaria. CONCLUSION:Presence of ASHA worker in villages, altitude, forestation, and education emerged as principal predictors of malaria infection in the study area. An easy-to-use risk-scoring system for ranking villages based on these risk factors could facilitate resource prioritization for malaria elimination.