The value of case reports in democratising evidence from resource-limited settings: results of an exploratory survey.

BACKGROUND: Following a knowledge management analysis, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) - a medical humanitarian non-governmental organisation (NGO) - identified significant loss of medical knowledge from the field, owing primarily to the absence of a platform on which to share clinical lessons learned in humanitarian and resource-limited settings (HRLS). Wishing to address these missed opportunities to retain important scientific and pragmatic knowledge, the NGO has begun to actively encourage its clinicians to publish case reports/series that bring new and/or practical insights of benefit to patients and population groups. In parallel, we wished to obtain a clearer understanding of how case reports (CRs)/series can best play their role as 'first-line evidence' from HRLS, especially in areas suffering from a significant lack of data. METHODS: We developed a survey with closed and open questions on 'The value of CRs from HRLS' to explore primarily (1) the reasons why this form of evidence from HRLS is often lacking, (2) what makes a case report/series worth sharing with the wider global health community, and (3) how we can ensure that published case reports/series reach their target audience. RESULTS: Over a 6-month period, 1115 health professionals responded to the survey. Participants included clinicians and public health specialists from all over the world, with a majority based in Africa. The main reason cited for the dearth of CRs from HRLS was that practitioners are simply not writing and/or submitting reports (as versus having their papers rejected) due mainly to (1) a lack of skills and (2) time constraints. A large majority of respondents felt the CRs are a valuable tool for HRLS given their ability to discuss how cases are managed with rudimentary means as well as to draw attention to emerging or underestimated public health problems and neglected populations. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the clinical knowledge gained in resource-challenged settings is being underutilised in the interest of patients and global health. Consequently, clinicians in HRLS need greater access to basic training in scientific investigation and writing in addition to awareness as to the potential value of sharing their clinical experience with a view to broadening evidence production from high-income to low-income settings.

Enhancing multi-sectoral collaboration in health: the open arena for public health as a model for bridging the knowledge-translation gap.

Effective public health interventions at local level must involve communities and stakeholders beyond the health services spectrum. A dedicated venue for structured discussion will ensure ongoing multi-sectoral collaboration more effectively than convening ad hoc meetings. Such a venue can be created using existing resources, at minimal extra cost. The University Hospital in Nice (France) has established an Open Arena for Public Health which can serve as a model for promoting collaborative partnerships at local level. The Arena has been successful in implementing sustainable interventions thanks to a set of principles, including: non-hierarchical governance and operating, fair representation of stakeholders, consensus as to best available evidence internationally and locally, policy dialogues: open, free-flowing discussions without preconceived solutions, and an experimental approach to interventions.

DAA treatment failures in a low-resource setting with a high burden of hepatitis C infections: a case series.

Globally, 58 million people are living with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and 1.5 million new patients are infected every year. The advent of direct acting antivirals (DAAs) has revolutionized the treatment of HCV, opening the door to the ambitious World Health Organization HCV infection elimination strategy by 2030. However, emerging resistance to DAAs could jeopardize any hope of achieving these targets. We discuss a series of 18 patients within a resource-limited setting, who after failing standard sofosbuvir-daclatasvir-based regimen also failed to respond to advanced pan-genotypic treatment regimens, i.e. sofosbuvir-velpatasvir, sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-ribavirin and sofosbuvir-velpatasvir-voxilaprevir. To avoid the spread of refractory HCV strains within the existing epidemic, we call for increased attention and research regarding patients failing treatment on standard pan-genotypic regimens and the spread of HCV-resistant strains within the communities.

Reproductive health in humanitarian settings in Lebanon and Iraq: results from four cross-sectional studies, 2014-2015.

BACKGROUND: Reproductive health is an important component of humanitarian response. Displaced women need access to family planning, antenatal care, and the presence of a skilled birth attendant at delivery. Since the beginning of the Syrian conflict in 2011, Lebanon and Iraq have been hosting large numbers of refugees, thereby straining local capacities to provide these services. In order to identify salient health needs, Médecins Sans Frontières conducted a survey in several sites hosting refugees and internally displaced persons across the region. Here we describe the reproductive health profile of Syrian refugees, Iraqi displaced persons, and vulnerable Lebanese and their use of services. METHODS: We conducted four cross-sectional surveys in 2014-2015 in two sites in Lebanon and two sites in Iraq. Depending on the site, two-stage cluster sampling or systematic sampling was intended, but non-probability methods were employed at the second stage due to implementation challenges. We collected information on overall health (including reproductive health) and demographic information from heads of households on the basis of a standardized questionnaire. Pearson chi-square tests were used to compare proportions, and generalized linear models were used to calculate odds ratios with regard to risk factors. All analyses were performed using the survey suite of commands in Stata version 14.1. RESULTS: A total of 23,604 individuals were surveyed, including 5925 women of childbearing age. Overall, it was reported that 7.5% of women were currently pregnant and 12.8% had given birth within the previous 12 months. It was reported that pregnancy was unplanned for 57% of currently pregnant women and 66.7% of women who had delivered in the previous year. A slight majority of women from both groups had accessed antenatal care at least once. Amongst women who had delivered in the previous year, 84.5% had done so with a skilled birth attendant and 22.1% had had a cesarean section. Location and head of household education were predictors of unplanned pregnancy in multivariable analysis. Head of household education was also significantly associated with higher uptake of antenatal care. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the large number of pregnant women and women having recently delivered in these settings, addressing their sexual and reproductive health needs emerges as a crucial aspect of humanitarian response. This study identified unmet needs for family planning and high cesarean section rates at all sites, suggesting both lack of access to certain services (contraception, antenatal care), but also over-recourse to cesarean section. These specific challenges can impact directly on maternal and child health and need today to be kept high on the humanitarian agenda.

Vaccination in tomorrow's society.

An international workshop organised by the Mérieux Foundation with the co-sponsorship of Aventis-Pasteur and the European Vaccine Manufacturers (Annecy, France; Feb 26-28), assembled policy makers, paediatricians, and journalists as well as representatives from industry, patient advocacy groups, research agencies, international organisations, non-governmental organisations, and coalitions to discuss "vaccination in tomorrow's society: new information pathways". The purpose of the workshop was to identify problems inherent to the social acceptance of vaccination, and ways of enhancing information sources and exchange of data. The discussions revealed three key areas for action: improving benefit and risk assessment tools, attentiveness to public concerns, and education and timely information for health-care professionals. For all these areas, it was agreed that greater financial and human resources commitment is needed.

Hepatitis B vaccination and French Society ten years after the suspension of the vaccination campaign: how should we raise infant immunization coverage rates?

In 1998, official concerns were first voiced over a possible association between hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination and multiple sclerosis (MS). Despite a number of studies that have demonstrated no such association, ten years on the French population's confidence in the vaccine remains shaken and immunization rates of infants have stagnated beneath 30%. With a chronic carriage of the virus estimated at 0.68%, it seems unlikely that France will be able to control the circulation of the virus. This article analyses attitudes towards HBV vaccination based on recent surveys: not only the public but also the vast majority of "vaccinators" (88%) questions the safety of the vaccine. Physicians opposed to vaccinating infants cite the possibility of adverse events occurring later in life and their lack of trust in the health authorities and the pharmaceutical industry. Both the general public and physicians feel more inclined to vaccinate adolescents and adults, even though it was for these age groups (especially the latter) that neurological adverse events were notified. It appears that above all, the usefulness of the vaccine and its safety profile for young children should be explained in understandable language by all those involved in public health, including the media. However, when opting for public health policies on the basis of statistical estimations, the importance of individual cases (e.g. MS in the family) should not be overlooked both for biological and ethical reasons.