The trajectory of COVID-19 pandemic and handwashing adherence: findings from 14 countries.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected people's engagement in health behaviors, especially those that protect individuals from SARS-CoV-2 transmission, such as handwashing/sanitizing. This study investigated whether adherence to the World Health Organization's (WHO) handwashing guidelines (the outcome variable) was associated with the trajectory of the COVID-19 pandemic, as measured by the following 6 indicators: (i) the number of new cases of COVID-19 morbidity/mortality (a country-level mean calculated for the 14 days prior to data collection), (ii) total cases of COVID-19 morbidity/mortality accumulated since the onset of the pandemic, and (iii) changes in recent cases of COVID-19 morbidity/mortality (a difference between country-level COVID-19 morbidity/mortality in the previous 14 days compared to cases recorded 14-28 days earlier). METHODS: The observational study (#NCT04367337) enrolled 6064 adults residing in Australia, Canada, China, France, Gambia, Germany, Israel, Italy, Malaysia, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, and Switzerland. Data on handwashing adherence across 8 situations (indicated in the WHO guidelines) were collected via an online survey (March-July 2020). Individual-level handwashing data were matched with the date- and country-specific values of the 6 indices of the trajectory of COVID-19 pandemic, obtained from the WHO daily reports. RESULTS: Multilevel regression models indicated a negative association between both accumulation of the total cases of COVID-19 morbidity (B = -.041, SE = .013, p = .013) and mortality (B = -.036, SE = .014 p = .002) and handwashing. Higher levels of total COVID-related morbidity and mortality were related to lower handwashing adherence. However, increases in recent cases of COVID-19 morbidity (B = .014, SE = .007, p = .035) and mortality (B = .022, SE = .009, p = .015) were associated with higher levels of handwashing adherence. Analyses controlled for participants' COVID-19-related situation (their exposure to information about handwashing, being a healthcare professional), sociodemographic characteristics (gender, age, marital status), and country-level variables (strictness of containment and health policies, human development index). The models explained 14-20% of the variance in handwashing adherence. CONCLUSIONS: To better explain levels of protective behaviors such as handwashing, future research should account for indicators of the trajectory of the COVID-19 pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.Gov, # NCT04367337.

An Integrative Adapt Therapy for common mental health symptoms and adaptive stress amongst Rohingya, Chin, and Kachin refugees living in Malaysia: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: This randomised controlled trial (RCT) aims to compare 6-week posttreatment outcomes of an Integrative Adapt Therapy (IAT) to a Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) on common mental health symptoms and adaptive capacity amongst refugees from Myanmar. IAT is grounded on psychotherapeutic elements specific to the refugee experience. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a single-blind RCT (October 2017 -May 2019) with Chin (39.3%), Kachin (15.7%), and Rohingya (45%) refugees living in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The trial included 170 participants receiving six 45-minute weekly sessions of IAT (97.6% retention, 4 lost to follow-up) and 161 receiving a multicomponent CBT also involving six 45-minute weekly sessions (96.8% retention, 5 lost to follow-up). Participants (mean age: 30.8 years, SD = 9.6) had experienced and/or witnessed an average 10.1 types (SD = 5.9, range = 1-27) of traumatic events. We applied a single-blind design in which independent assessors of pre- and posttreatment indices were masked in relation to participants' treatment allocation status. Primary outcomes were symptom scores of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Complex PTSD (CPTSD), Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), the 5 scales of the Adaptive Stress Index (ASI), and a measure of resilience (the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale [CDRS]). Compared to CBT, an intention-to-treat analysis (n = 331) at 6-week posttreatment follow-up demonstrated greater reductions in the IAT arm for all common mental disorder (CMD) symptoms and ASI domains except for ASI-3 (injustice), as well as increases in the resilience scores. Adjusted average treatment effects assessing the differences in posttreatment scores between IAT and CBT (with baseline scores as covariates) were -0.08 (95% CI: -0.14 to -0.02, p = 0.012) for PTSD, -0.07 (95% CI: -0.14 to -0.01) for CPTSD, -0.07 for MDD (95% CI: -0.13 to -0.01, p = 0.025), 0.16 for CDRS (95% CI: 0.06-0.026, p ≤ 0.001), -0.12 (95% CI: -0.20 to -0.03, p ≤ 0.001) for ASI-1 (safety/security), -0.10 for ASI-2 (traumatic losses; 95% CI: -0.18 to -0.02, p = 0.02), -0.03 for ASI-3 (injustice; (95% CI: -0.11 to 0.06, p = 0.513), -0.12 for ASI-4 (role/identity disruptions; 95% CI: -0.21 to -0.04, p ≤ 0.001), and -0.18 for ASI-5 (existential meaning; 95% CI: -0.19 to -0.05, p ≤ 0.001). Compared to CBT, the IAT group had larger effect sizes for all indices (except for resilience) including PTSD (IAT, d = 0.93 versus CBT, d = 0.87), CPTSD (d = 1.27 versus d = 1.02), MDD (d = 1.4 versus d = 1.11), ASI-1 (d = 1.1 versus d = 0.85), ASI-2 (d = 0.81 versus d = 0.66), ASI-3 (d = 0.49 versus d = 0.42), ASI-4 (d = 0.86 versus d = 0.67), and ASI-5 (d = 0.72 versus d = 0.53). No adverse events were recorded for either therapy. Limitations include a possible allegiance effect (the authors inadvertently conveying disproportionate enthusiasm for IAT in training and supervision), cross-over effects (counsellors applying elements of one therapy in delivering the other), and the brief period of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to CBT, IAT showed superiority in improving mental health symptoms and adaptative stress from baseline to 6-week posttreatment. The differences in scores between IAT and CBT were modest and future studies conducted by independent research teams need to confirm the findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered under Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) (http://www.anzctr.org.au/). The trial registration number is: ACTRN12617001452381.

A Naturalistic Evaluation of Group Integrative Adapt Therapy (IAT-G) with Rohingya Refugees During the Emergency Phase of a Mass Humanitarian Crisis in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh.

Background: Studies of scalable psychological interventions in humanitarian setting are usually carried out when the acute emergency has stabilized. We report the first evaluation of an evidence-based group psychological intervention, Group Integrative Adapt Therapy (IAT-G), during the emergency phase of a mass humanitarian crisis amongst Rohingya refugees in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh. Methods: We did a pragmatic naturalistic evaluation (2018-2020) of a seven-session group intervention with adult Rohingya refugees with elevated symptoms of depression (≥10 on the Patient Health Questionnaire) and/or posttraumatic stress disorder, PTSD, (≥3 on the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder-8), and functional impairment (≥17 on WHO Disability Assessment Schedule or WHODAS-brief). Screening was done across the most densely populated campsites. Blind assessments were completed at baseline, posttreatment, and at 3-month follow-up using culturally adapted measures of depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress symptoms, complicated bereavement, adaptive stress associated with disrupted psychosocial support systems, functional impairment, and resilience. Findings: 383 persons were screened and of the 144 persons who met inclusion criteria all participated in the group intervention. Compared to baseline scores, IAT-G participants recorded significantly lower mean scores on key outcome indices (mental health symptoms, adaptive stress, and functional impairment) at posttreatment and 3-month follow-up (all pairwise tests significant Ps<.05). From baseline to 3-month follow-up, score changes were greatest for functional impairment (d = 2.24), anxiety (d = 2.15) and depression (d = 1.9), followed by PTSD symptoms (d = 1.17). Interpretation: A group-based intervention designed specifically to reflect the refugee experience and adapted to the language and culture, showed positive outcomes in the context of a pragmatic, naturalistic trial implemented in a mass humanitarian emergency. Funding: United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; National Health and Medical Research Council Australia.

Profile of an HIV Testing and Counseling Unit in Bangladesh: Majority of New Diagnoses among Returning Migrant Workers and Spouses.

INTRODUCTION: Analysis of data from HIV testing and counseling (HTC) services provides an opportunity to identify important populations for targeting of HIV prevention efforts. Our primary aim was to describe the demographics of clients presenting to HTC in Bangladesh, a low HIV prevalence country. Our secondary aim was to determine the risk factors for HIV positivity among returning migrant workers who were tested. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of data collected between 2002 and 2010 from the first HTC service established in Bangladesh, located in three large cities. RESULTS: 8973 individuals attended HTC services, with 558 (6.2%) of clients testing positive for HIV, including 33 children. The majority of those who tested positive were aged 25-44 (71%), male (70%), and married (68%). Key populations considered at increased risk of HIV, such as female sex workers, people who inject drugs, and males who have sex with males accounted for only 11% of adults who tested positive. Notably, 75% of adults testing positive had a history of migrant work or was the spouse of a migrant worker. In multivariable logistic regression of those with a migrant work history presenting for HTC, we found rural residence, working in the Middle East, and longer duration of migrant work to be independently associated with testing positive, and female gender and higher level of education to be negatively associated. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that in Bangladesh, in addition to targeting traditional key populations, HIV prevention efforts should also focus on migrant workers and their spouses.