Correction: Assessing independence in mobility activities in trauma care: Validity and reliability of the Activity Independence Measure-Trauma (AIM-T) in humanitarian settings.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001723.].

Assessing independence in mobility activities in trauma care: Validity and reliability of the Activity Independence Measure-Trauma (AIM-T) in humanitarian settings.

The importance of measuring outcomes after injury beyond mortality and morbidity is increasingly recognized, though underreported in humanitarian settings. To address shortcomings of existing outcome measures in humanitarian settings, the Activity Independence Measure-Trauma (AIM-T) was developed, and is structured in three subscales (i.e., core, lower limb, and upper limb). This study aimed to assess the AIM-T construct validity (structural validity and hypothesis testing) and reliability (internal consistency, inter-rater reliability and measurement error) in four humanitarian settings (Burundi, Iraq, Cameroon and Central African Republic). Patients with acute injury (n = 195) were assessed using the AIM-T, the Barthel Index (BI), and two pain scores. Structural validity was assessed through confirmatory factor analysis. Hypotheses were tested regarding correlations with BI and pain scores using Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC) and differences in AIM-T scores between patients' subgroups, using standardized effect size Cohen's d (d). Internal consistency was assessed with Cronbach's alpha (α). AIM-T was reassessed by a second rater in 77 participants to test inter-rater reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The results showed that the AIM-T structure in three subscales had an acceptable fit. The AIM-T showed an inverse weak to moderate correlation with both pain scores (PCC<0.7, p≤0.05), positive strong correlation with BI (PCC≥0.7, p≤0.05), and differed between all subgroups (d≥0.5, p≤0.05). The inter-rater reliability in the (sub)scales was good to excellent (ICC 0.86-0.91) and the three subscales' internal consistency was adequate (α≥0.7). In conclusion, this study supports the AIM-T validity in measuring independence in mobility activities and its reliability in humanitarian settings, as well as it informs on its interpretability. Thus, the AIM-T could be a valuable measure to assess outcomes after injury in humanitarian settings.

Implementation of targeted cholera response activities, Cameroon.

Objective: To describe the implementation of case-area targeted interventions to reduce cholera transmission using a rapid, localized response in Kribi district, Cameroon. Methods: We used a cross-sectional design to study the implementation of case-area targeted interventions. We initiated interventions after rapid diagnostic test confirmation of a case of cholera. We targeted households within a 100-250 metre perimeter around the index case (spatial targeting). The interventions package included: health promotion, oral cholera vaccination, antibiotic chemoprophylaxis for nonimmunized direct contacts, point-of-use water treatment and active case-finding. Findings: We implemented eight targeted intervention packages in four health areas of Kribi between 17 September 2020 and 16 October 2020. We visited 1533 households (range: 7-544 per case-area) hosting 5877 individuals (range: 7-1687 per case-area). The average time from detection of the index case to implementation of interventions was 3.4 days (range: 1-7). Oral cholera vaccination increased overall immunization coverage in Kribi from 49.2% (2771/5621 people) to 79.3% (4456/5621 people). Interventions also led to the detection and prompt management of eight suspected cases of cholera, five of whom had severe dehydration. Stool culture was positive for Vibrio cholerae O1 in four cases. The average time from onset of symptoms to admission of a person with cholera to a health facility was 1.2 days. Conclusion: Despite challenges, we successfully implemented targeted interventions at the tail-end of a cholera epidemic, after which no further cases were reported in Kribi up until week 49 of 2021. The effectiveness of case-area targeted interventions in stopping or reducing cholera transmission needs further investigation.

Implementation of targeted cholera response activities, Cameroon

Objective To describe the implementation of case-area targeted interventions to reduce cholera transmission using a rapid, localized response in Kribi district, Cameroon. Methods We used a cross-sectional design to study the implementation of case-area targeted interventions. We initiated interventions after rapid diagnostic test confirmation of a case of cholera. We targeted households within a 100­250 metre perimeter around the index case (spatial targeting). The interventions package included: health promotion, oral cholera vaccination, antibiotic chemoprophylaxis for nonimmunized direct contacts, point-of-use water treatment and active case-finding. Findings We implemented eight targeted intervention packages in four health areas of Kribi between 17 September 2020 and 16 October 2020. We visited 1533 households (range: 7­544 per case-area) hosting 5877 individuals (range: 7­1687 per case-area). The average time from detection of the index case to implementation of interventions was 3.4 days (range: 1­7). Oral cholera vaccination increased overall immunization coverage in Kribi from 49.2% (2771/5621 people) to 79.3% (4456/5621 people). Interventions also led to the detection and prompt management of eight suspected cases of cholera, five of whom had severe dehydration. Stool culture was positive for Vibrio cholerae O1 in four cases. The average time from onset of symptoms to admission of a person with cholera to a health facility was 1.2 days. Conclusion Despite challenges, we successfully implemented targeted interventions at the tail-end of a cholera epidemic, after which no further cases were reported in Kribi up until week 49 of 2021. The effectiveness of case-area targeted interventions in stopping or reducing cholera transmission needs further investigation

Effectiveness of case-area targeted interventions including vaccination on the control of epidemic cholera: protocol for a prospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Cholera outbreaks in fragile settings are prone to rapid expansion. Case-area targeted interventions (CATIs) have been proposed as a rapid and efficient response strategy to halt or substantially reduce the size of small outbreaks. CATI aims to deliver synergistic interventions (eg, water, sanitation, and hygiene interventions, vaccination, and antibiotic chemoprophylaxis) to households in a 100-250 m 'ring' around primary outbreak cases. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We report on a protocol for a prospective observational study of the effectiveness of CATI. Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) plans to implement CATI in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Cameroon, Niger and Zimbabwe. This study will run in parallel to each implementation. The primary outcome is the cumulative incidence of cholera in each CATI ring. CATI will be triggered immediately on notification of a case in a new area. As with most real-world interventions, there will be delays to response as the strategy is rolled out. We will compare the cumulative incidence among rings as a function of response delay, as a proxy for performance. Cross-sectional household surveys will measure population-based coverage. Cohort studies will measure effects on reducing incidence among household contacts and changes in antimicrobial resistance. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The ethics review boards of MSF and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine have approved a generic protocol. The DRC and Niger-specific versions have been approved by the respective national ethics review boards. Approvals are in process for Cameroon and Zimbabwe. The study findings will be disseminated to the networks of national cholera control actors and the Global Task Force for Cholera Control using meetings and policy briefs, to the scientific community using journal articles, and to communities via community meetings.

Serologic response to SARS-CoV-2 in an African population.

Official case counts suggest Africa has not seen the expected burden of COVID-19 as predicted by international health agencies, and the proportion of asymptomatic patients, disease severity, and mortality burden differ significantly in Africa from what has been observed elsewhere. Testing for SARS-CoV-2 was extremely limited early in the pandemic and likely led to under-reporting of cases leaving important gaps in our understanding of transmission and disease characteristics in the African context. SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence and serologic response data could help quantify the burden of COVID-19 disease in Africa to address this knowledge gap and guide future outbreak response, adapted to the local context. However, such data are widely lacking in Africa. We conducted a cross-sectional seroprevalence survey among 1,192 individuals seeking COVID-19 screening and testing in central Cameroon using the Innovita antibody-based rapid diagnostic. Overall immunoglobulin prevalence was 32%, IgM prevalence was 20%, and IgG prevalence was 24%. IgM positivity gradually increased, peaking around symptom day 20. IgG positivity was similar, gradually increasing over the first 10 days of symptoms, then increasing rapidly to 30 days and beyond. These findings highlight the importance of diagnostic testing and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 transmission in Cameroon, which likely resulted in artificially low case counts. Rapid antibody tests are a useful diagnostic modality for seroprevalence surveys and infection diagnosis starting 5-7 days after symptom onset. These results represent the first step towards better understanding the SARS-CoV-2 immunological response in African populations.

Performance and operational feasibility of antigen and antibody rapid diagnostic tests for COVID-19 in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients in Cameroon: a clinical, prospective, diagnostic accuracy study.

BACKGROUND: Real-time PCR is recommended to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, PCR availability is restricted in most countries. Rapid diagnostic tests are considered acceptable alternatives, but data are lacking on their performance. We assessed the performance of four antibody-based rapid diagnostic tests and one antigen-based rapid diagnostic test for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection in the community in Cameroon. METHODS: In this clinical, prospective, diagnostic accuracy study, we enrolled individuals aged at least 21 years who were either symptomatic and suspected of having COVID-19 or asymptomatic and presented for screening. We tested peripheral blood for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies using the Innovita (Biological Technology; Beijing, China), Wondfo (Guangzhou Wondfo Biotech; Guangzhou, China), SD Biosensor (SD Biosensor; Gyeonggi-do, South Korea), and Runkun tests (Runkun Pharmaceutical; Hunan, China), and nasopharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 antigen using the SD Biosensor test. Antigen rapid diagnostic tests were compared with Abbott PCR testing (Abbott; Abbott Park, IL, USA), and antibody rapid diagnostic tests were compared with Biomerieux immunoassays (Biomerieux; Marcy l'Etoile, France). We retrospectively tested two diagnostic algorithms that incorporated rapid diagnostic tests for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients using simulation modelling. FINDINGS: 1195 participants were enrolled in the study. 347 (29%) tested SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive, 223 (19%) rapid diagnostic test antigen-positive, and 478 (40%) rapid diagnostic test antibody-positive. Antigen-based rapid diagnostic test sensitivity was 80·0% (95% CI 71·0-88·0) in the first 7 days after symptom onset, but antibody-based rapid diagnostic tests had only 26·8% sensitivity (18·3-36·8). Antibody rapid diagnostic test sensitivity increased to 76·4% (70·1-82·0) 14 days after symptom onset. Among asymptomatic participants, the sensitivity of antigen-based and antibody-based rapid diagnostic tests were 37·0% (27·0-48·0) and 50·7% (42·2-59·1), respectively. Cohen's κ showed substantial agreement between Wondfo antibody rapid diagnostic test and gold-standard ELISA (κ=0·76; sensitivity 0·98) and between Biosensor and ELISA (κ=0·60; sensitivity 0·94). Innovita (κ=0·47; sensitivity 0·93) and Runkun (κ=0·43; sensitivity 0·76) showed moderate agreement. An antigen-based retrospective algorithm applied to symptomatic patients showed 94·0% sensitivity and 91·0% specificity in the first 7 days after symptom onset. For asymptomatic participants, the algorithm showed a sensitivity of 34% (95% CI 23·0-44·0) and a specificity of 92·0% (88·0-96·0). INTERPRETATION: Rapid diagnostic tests had good overall sensitivity for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection. Rapid diagnostic tests could be incorporated into efficient testing algorithms as an alternative to PCR to decrease diagnostic delays and onward viral transmission. FUNDING: Médecins Sans Frontières WACA and Médecins Sans Frontières OCG. TRANSLATIONS: For the French and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.