Epidemiology of childhood injuries in Saudi Arabia: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Injury is the leading cause of death among Saudi children. Despite that, much remains unknown on the epidemiology and the extent of burden. This scoping review aims to describe previous literature on injury burden, including types, causes, and outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a scoping literature search of English published articles on injuries among Saudi children between 0 to 18 years old using Scopus, MEDLINE, and Web of Science between January 2000 and December 2020. The primary outcome was the type and the cause of childhood injuries. Data extraction was based on specified data elements that included study characteristics and epidemiological parameters. The STROBE checklist was used to assess the quality of publications. RESULTS: The initial review identified 3,384 studies. Of which, 36 studies met the inclusion criteria. A total of 20,136 children were included; of them, 69% were males. Among studies that examined overall injuries, falls represented 31.9%, while 25.1% were due to Motor Vehicle Collision (MVC). The leading cause of fractures was falls (37.9%), followed by MVC (21.5%). The leading cause was flames (52.1%) followed by scald (36.4%) for burns. While for poisoning, medications were the leading cause of (39.9%), followed by toxic household products (25.7%). Weighted mortality rates were 5.2% for overall injuries, 8.3% for fractures of the skull and spine, and 17.4% for burns. CONCLUSIONS: MVC and falls are associated with the highest share of injuries in the kingdom. These findings can guide prevention efforts to reduce injury burden and improve population health. Further population-based research is warranted to explore the determinants of childhood injuries across all regions of Saudi Arabia.

The Global Expansion of LTBI Screening and Treatment Programs: Exploring Gaps in the Supporting Economic Evidence.

The global burden of latent TB infection (LTBI) and the progression of LTBI to active TB disease are important drivers of ongoing TB incidence. Addressing LTBI through screening and TB preventive treatment (TPT) is critical in order to end the TB epidemic by 2035. Given the limited resources available to health ministries around the world in the fight against TB, we must consider economic evidence for LTBI screening and treatment strategies to ensure that limited resources are used to achieve the biggest health impact. In this narrative review, we explore key economic evidence around LTBI screening and TPT strategies in different populations to summarize our current understanding and highlight gaps in existing knowledge. When considering economic evidence supporting LTBI screening or evaluating different testing approaches, a disproportionate number of economic studies have been conducted in high-income countries (HICs), despite the vast majority of TB burden being borne in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Recent years have seen a temporal shift, with increasing data from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), particularly with regard to targeting high-risk groups for TB prevention. While LTBI screening and prevention programs can come with extensive costs, targeting LTBI screening among high-risk populations, such as people living with HIV (PLHIV), children, household contacts (HHC) and immigrants from high-TB-burden countries, has been shown to consistently improve the cost effectiveness of screening programs. Further, the cost effectiveness of different LTBI screening algorithms and diagnostic approaches varies widely across settings, leading to different national TB screening policies. Novel shortened regimens for TPT have also consistently been shown to be cost effective across a range of settings. These economic evaluations highlight key implementation considerations such as the critical nature of ensuring high rates of adherence and completion, despite the costs associated with adherence programs not being routinely assessed and included. Digital and other adherence support approaches are now being assessed for their utility and cost effectiveness in conjunction with novel shortened TPT regimens, but more economic evidence is needed to understand the potential cost savings, particularly in settings where directly observed preventive therapy (DOPT) is routinely conducted. Despite the growth of the economic evidence base for LTBI screening and TPT recently, there are still significant gaps in the economic evidence around the scale-up and implementation of expanded LTBI screening and treatment programs, particularly among traditionally hard-to-reach populations.

How much does HIV self-testing cost in low and middle income countries? A systematic review of evidence from economic studies.

Objectives: HIV self-testing (HIVST) has been proposed as an innovative strategy to diagnose human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). While HIVST offers the potential to broaden accessibility of early HIV diagnosis and treatment initiation, this testing strategy incurs additional cost and requires confirmatory testing and treatment. We have conducted the first systematic review to summarize the current economic literature for HIVST in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Design: A search strategy was developed including key terms for HIV, self-testing and cost-effectiveness and was conducted in Medline and Embase databases. Studies were included that reported costs per outcome and included both cost-effectiveness and cost-utility outcome measures. The search strategy identified publications up until August 15, 2023 were included. Abstract and full text screening was conducted and a standardized data abstraction form was used for included studies. Costs are reported in USD, 2020. Results: Our search strategy identified 536 total titles from the search strategy, which were screened down to 25 relevant studies that provided both cost and outcome data on HIVST. There was significant heterogeneity in the HIVST intervention, study population, costs and outcomes reported among included studies. Cost per person tested ranged from $1.09-155. Cost per case diagnosed ranged from $20-1,277. Cost-utility estimates ranged from cost-saving to $1846 per DALY averted. Higher cost-effectiveness estimates were associated with more expensive testing algorithms with increased support for linkage to care and post-test counseling. Conclusion: All studies considered HIVST cost-effective although major drivers were identified included underlying HIV prevalence, testing cost and linkage to care. HIVST is likely to be cost-effective in a LMIC context, however policy makers should be aware of the drivers of cost-effectiveness when implementing HIVST programs as these underlying factors can impact the overall cost-effectiveness of HIVST.

Impact of mobile teams on tuberculosis treatment outcomes, Riyadh Region, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 2013-2015.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of the tuberculosis (TB) mobile teams on treatment outcomes in Riyadh Region by comparing patients who received treatment under mobile teams and those who did not, from 2013 to 2015. This was a retrospective descriptive study using National TB Control and Prevention Program data from 2013 to 2015 from Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Descriptive analyses were used to summarize characteristics of TB case-patients served by mobile teams and those who were not served. The χ2 test measured the significant differences between mobile-served and non-mobile-served case-patients. Exposure was whether or not the TB case-patient was under the care of the mobile team; the outcome of interest was whether or not treatment was successful, defined as treatment completed and cured. We found that the ratio of treatment success among mobile team case-patients was 1.28 greater than among those not served by mobile teams. The χ2 test showed a statistically significant finding (probability ratio=1.28; 95% confidence interval=1.21-1.35, p<0.01). Mobile teams increased the treatment success rate to 92%, compared to 71.77% among those not served by mobile teams. This study shows that community mobilization of mobile teams is an effective strategy to enhance TB treatment, reduced mortality and loss to follow-up and improve TB treatment outcomes.

Drug resistant tuberculosis in Saudi Arabia: an analysis of surveillance data 2014-2015.

Background: There is limited data that investigates the national rates of drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB) in Saudi Arabia.This study aimed to estimate the rates of multi-drug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB), rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (RR-TB), and monoresistance (MR) in Saudi Arabia. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on all TB cases reported to the National TB Control and Prevention Program (NTCPP) registry at the Saudi Ministry of Health between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2015. A total of 2098 TB patients with positive TB cultures were included in the study. Subgroup analyses and multivariate binary logistic regression models were performed with IBM SPSS 23.0. Results: Of the total TB cases, 4.4% (95% CI: 3.59%-5.40%) were found to have MDR-TB. The rates of MR were 3.8% (95% CI: 2.99%-4.67%) for ethambutol, 5.4% (95% CI: 4.50%-6.49%) for pyrazinamide, 10.2% (95% CI: 5.89%-11.52%) for isoniazid, 11% (95% CI: 9.70%-12.43%) for streptomycin, and 5.9% (95% CI: 4.90%-6.96%) for rifampicin. The high rates of MDR and RR-TB were found among the younger age group, female gender, and those who had a previous history of TB. We also discovered that renal failure tends to increase the risk of rifampicin resistance. Conclusions: National TB data in Saudi Arabia shows that the rate of MDR-TB was similar to the global rate reported by the World Health Organization (WHO). It is a relatively high rate as compared to Western countries. The proportion of MDR/RR-TB patients tends to be higher in the younger age group, female gender, and in patients with a previous history of TB treatment. Effective strategies for prevention of all multi-drug-resistant TB cases are warranted.