Barriers to accessing sterile injecting equipment for people who inject drugs: An integrative review.

BACKGROUND: The global prevalence of hepatitis C virus infection is estimated to be 71 million, with an estimated 6.1 million of those having recently injected drugs. The recognised measures to prevent hepatitis C transmission in people who inject drugs are needle and syringe programmes. As people who inject drugs are at considerable risk of hepatitis C transmission, understanding the barriers they encounter when accessing needle and syringe programmes is important to support the hepatitis C elimination goal. OBJECTIVE: This integrative review aimed to synthesise research exploring the barriers to accessing sterile injecting equipment faced by people who inject drugs. METHODS: An integrative review was conducted guided by the PRISMA 2020 checklist, based on a systematic literature search using the following databases: CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, psychology & behavioural sciences collection, and Emcare, as well as Google Scholar. RESULTS: The search returned seven studies which met the criteria, and four key themes were identified: stigma; experienced and internalised, purchase experience, practical issues, and fear of negative consequences. Participants reported barriers such as the location of the services, and concerns around confidentiality when accessing services. In addition to this, the fear of arrest and the involvement of social services proved to discourage access to these services. CONCLUSIONS: People who inject drugs face many challenges when accessing sterile injecting equipment, such as stigma, purchase experience, practical issues and fears and concerns. To support the World Health Organisation Hepatitis C virus elimination plan, these barriers must be tackled to maximise the provision and reduce hepatitis C transmission and reinfection rates. Since the level of research on this topic is limited, further studies are strongly needed. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patient and public involvement were not used for this review.

Differential occupational risks to healthcare workers from SARS-CoV-2 observed during a prospective observational study.

We conducted voluntary Covid-19 testing programmes for symptomatic and asymptomatic staff at a UK teaching hospital using naso-/oro-pharyngeal PCR testing and immunoassays for IgG antibodies. 1128/10,034 (11.2%) staff had evidence of Covid-19 at some time. Using questionnaire data provided on potential risk-factors, staff with a confirmed household contact were at greatest risk (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.82 [95%CI 3.45-6.72]). Higher rates of Covid-19 were seen in staff working in Covid-19-facing areas (22.6% vs. 8.6% elsewhere) (aOR 2.47 [1.99-3.08]). Controlling for Covid-19-facing status, risks were heterogenous across the hospital, with higher rates in acute medicine (1.52 [1.07-2.16]) and sporadic outbreaks in areas with few or no Covid-19 patients. Covid-19 intensive care unit staff were relatively protected (0.44 [0.28-0.69]), likely by a bundle of PPE-related measures. Positive results were more likely in Black (1.66 [1.25-2.21]) and Asian (1.51 [1.28-1.77]) staff, independent of role or working location, and in porters and cleaners (2.06 [1.34-3.15]).

Avoiding bites and scratches? Understanding the public health implication of human-bat interactions in Ghana.

Zoonotic pathogens cause an estimated 70% of emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases in humans, affecting various aspects of human development on a global scale. The significance of bats as a source of emerging infectious diseases is being progressively appreciated. This study was undertaken post-Ebola virus disease in West Africa and assessed the public health implications of human-bat interactions by exploring the reasons for contact between humans and bats, as well as reported actions taken upon experiencing bat bites or scratches. The paper highlights the nuances of human-bat interactions, stressing zoonotic disease risk awareness as well as the sources of information. The study used questionnaires to solicit information from 788 respondents in five communities with significant bat populations. We show that bat consumption was one of the main reasons for human-bat interactions. More men across the various communities ate bat meat. Only a small number of respondents (4.4%) reported being bitten by a bat, and 6.1% had been scratched by a bat. More than 21% had come into direct contact with bat blood. An even lower number went to the hospital after been bitten or scratched by bats. There was little knowledge on post-exposure management. The most common places human-bat interactions occurred were at home and on farms. Seventy-three per cent of the respondents believed that bats carried diseases, with Ebola virus disease being the most mentioned. Respondents indicated that the way they interacted with bats had not changed, even though they believed bats carried diseases and 46% stated that they had not changed the way they interacted with bats over the last two years. Apart from providing information on avoiding bites and scratches, a more holistic framework is needed to reduce human-bat interactions. The paper recommends a comprehensive and coordinated approach to optimizing an effective response to a potential bat-borne zoonotic disease spillover.

Local classifications of fever and treatment sought among populations at risk of zoonotic diseases in Ghana.

In the past four decades, there has been an increase in the occurrence of zoonotic diseases. Some outbreaks have been devastating because of the inability of individuals and health workers to identify the diseases early. Generally, most zoonotic diseases are heralded by a fever. While fevers are common, they are often the symptoms of different diseases. This paper explores how a population at potential risk of zoonotic diseases identify fevers, and what treatments they seek when they develop fevers. The data are from focus group discussions and a survey of three communities in the Brong Ahafo, Volta and Greater Accra regions in Ghana. The quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics while the qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis. The findings indicate that the perceived causes of fever differ from the traditional biomedical view. While orthodox treatment was the preferred choice for most participants, rural dwellers utilised traditional medicine more than their urban counterparts. Though there is no record of bat-borne zoonotic disease in Ghana, our findings could be used as a proxy to indicate how populations at risk of exposure might respond in the event of a spillover event from a zoonosis. We recommend that educational campaigns on zoonotic diseases should target rural dwellers, especially farmers, who may be most at risk of zoonoses.

Living with Bats: The Case of Ve Golokuati Township in the Volta Region of Ghana.

Transmission of zoonotic pathogens from bats to humans through direct and indirect contact with bats raises public apprehension about living close to bats. In the township of Ve Golokuati in Ghana, several "camps" of Epomophorus gambianus roost in fruit trees that provide ecosystems services for residents. This study explored human-bat interaction in the township and the potential risks of disease transmission from bats to humans. Data were derived through questionnaire administration and participatory appraisal approach involving focus group discussions, participatory landscape mapping, and transect walk. The study found that most human activities within the township, such as petty-trading, domestic chores, and children's outdoor recreation, exposed people to bats. Though there have been no reported cases of disease spillover from bats to humans from the perspective of residents and from medical records, respondents whose activities brought them closer to bats within the township were found to be more likely to experience fevers than those who do not interact with bats frequently. The study recommends education of community members about the potential risks involved in human-bat interactions and makes suggestions for reducing the frequent interactions with and exposure to bats by humans.

Local disease-ecosystem-livelihood dynamics: reflections from comparative case studies in Africa.

This article explores the implications for human health of local interactions between disease, ecosystems and livelihoods. Five interdisciplinary case studies addressed zoonotic diseases in African settings: Rift Valley fever (RVF) in Kenya, human African trypanosomiasis in Zambia and Zimbabwe, Lassa fever in Sierra Leone and henipaviruses in Ghana. Each explored how ecological changes and human-ecosystem interactions affect pathogen dynamics and hence the likelihood of zoonotic spillover and transmission, and how socially differentiated peoples' interactions with ecosystems and animals affect their exposure to disease. Cross-case analysis highlights how these dynamics vary by ecosystem type, across a range from humid forest to semi-arid savannah; the significance of interacting temporal and spatial scales; and the importance of mosaic and patch dynamics. Ecosystem interactions and services central to different people's livelihoods and well-being include pastoralism and agro-pastoralism, commercial and subsistence crop farming, hunting, collecting food, fuelwood and medicines, and cultural practices. There are synergies, but also tensions and trade-offs, between ecosystem changes that benefit livelihoods and affect disease. Understanding these can inform 'One Health' approaches towards managing ecosystems in ways that reduce disease risks and burdens.This article is part of the themed issue 'One Health for a changing world: zoonoses, ecosystems and human well-being'.