Seeking and reaching emergency care: A cross sectional household survey across two Liberian counties.

The overwhelming burden of morbidity and mortality from injury and medical conditions requiring acute care are borne by low- and middle-income countries lacking accessible, quality care systems. Current evidence suggests the lack of prehospital care systems likely contributes to this disproportionate burden. As an initial step in a longitudinal, collaborative effort to strengthen the chain of survival for emergency conditions in Liberia, baseline attitudes and behaviors in accessing and utilizing emergency care were characterized. A multistage, proportional, cluster sampling frame was employed to conduct a cross-sectional, community-based survey of 800 households across rural Lofa County and the greater capital (Monrovia) metropolitan area. The primary outcome was facility-based utilization of emergency care within the 12 months prior to survey administration. 43.9% of individuals surveyed reported a visit to an emergency unit in the last year. Multivariable logistic regression revealed increased adjusted odds of facility-based emergency care utilization in households that were low-income, non-English-speaking, lacking electricity, or had a non-durable roof. Among these individuals, 23.6% had sought care from a community health worker, family/friend, clinic, pharmacy, or traditional healer prior. The majority of persons seeking care do so without ambulance services. 34.8% of all households have called a community member for a medical emergency, but 88.9% of survey respondents report no first aid training and cite barriers to rendering aid. This represents the first household survey to assess the perceptions and utilization of emergency care in Liberia. Formal pre-hospital care provision is limited and substantial barriers to emergency care access exist. First aid training and acceptance is lacking, despite frequent reliance on community-based aid during emergencies.

Emergency care interventions for paediatric severe acute respiratory infections in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and narrative synthesis.

Background: Severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) are the leading cause of paediatric death globally, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Given the potential rapid clinical decompensation and high mortality rate from SARIs, interventions that facilitate the early care are critical to improving patient outcomes. Through this systematic review, we aimed to evaluate the impact of emergency care interventions on improving clinical outcomes of paediatric patients with SARIs in LMICs. Methods: We searched PubMed, Global Health, and Global Index Medicus for peer-reviewed clinical trials or studies with comparator groups published before November 2020. We included all studies which evaluated acute and emergency care interventions on clinical outcomes for children (29 days to 19 years) with SARIs conducted in LMICs. Due to observed heterogeneity of interventions and outcomes, we performed narrative synthesis. We assessed bias using the Risk of Bias 2 and Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions tools. Results: We screened 20 583, 99 of which met the inclusion criteria. Conditions studied included pneumonia or acute lower respiratory infection (61.6%) and bronchiolitis (29.3%). Studies evaluated medications (80.8%), respiratory support (14.1%), and supportive care (5%). We found the strongest evidence of benefit for decreasing risk of death for respiratory support interventions. Results were inconclusive on the utility of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). We found mixed results for interventions for bronchiolitis, but a possible benefit for hypertonic nebulised saline to decrease hospital length of stay. Early use of adjuvant treatments such as Vitamin A, D, and zinc for pneumonia and bronchiolitis did not appear to have convincing evidence of benefit on clinical outcomes. Conclusions: Despite the high global burden of SARI in paediatric populations, few emergency care (EC) interventions have high quality evidence for benefit on clinical outcomes in LMICs. Respiratory support interventions have the strongest evidence for benefit. Further research on the use of CPAP in diverse settings is needed, as is a stronger evidence base for EC interventions for children with SARI, including metrics on the timing of interventions. Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42020216117).

A systematic review of acute and emergency care interventions for adolescents and adults with severe acute respiratory infections including COVID-19 in low- and middle-income countries.

Background: Severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) remain a leading cause of death globally, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Early intervention is critical, considering the potential for rapid decompensation in patients with SARIs. We aimed to evaluate the impact of acute and emergency care interventions on improving clinical outcomes in patients >10 years old with SARIs in LMICs. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Global Health, and Global Index Medicus databases to identify peer-reviewed studies containing SARI, LMICs, and emergency care interventions. Studies published prior to November 2020 focusing on patients >10 years old were included. A narrative synthesis was performed due to the heterogeneity of identified articles. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 and Risk of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions tools. Results: 20 223 studies were screened and 58 met the inclusion criteria. Thirty-four studies focused on coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19), 15 on pneumonia, seven on influenza, one study on severe acute respiratory syndrome, and one on undifferentiated SARI. Few COVID-19 studies found a benefit of the tested intervention on clinical status, mortality, or hospital length-of-stay. Little to no benefit was found for azithromycin, convalescent plasma, or zinc, and potential harm was found for hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine. There was mixed evidence for immunomodulators, traditional Chinese medicine, and corticosteroids among COVID-19 studies, with notable confounding due to a lack of consistency of control group treatments. Neuraminidase inhibitor antivirals for influenza had the highest quality of evidence for shortening symptom duration and decreasing disease severity. Conclusions: We found few interventions for SARIs in LMICs with have high-quality evidence for improving clinical outcomes. None of the included studies evaluated non-pharmacologic interventions or were conducted in low-income countries. Further studies evaluating the impact of antivirals, immunomodulators, corticosteroids, and non-pharmacologic interventions for SARIs in LMICs are urgently needed. Registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020216117.