RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Research out of South Africa estimates the total unmet need for care for those with type 2 diabetes mellitus (diabetes) at 80%. We evaluated the care cascade using South Africa's National Health Laboratory Service (NHLS) database and assessed if HIV infection impacts progression through its stages. METHODS: The cohort includes patients from government facilities with their first glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) or plasma glucose (fasting (FPG); random (RPG)) measured between January 2012 to March 2015 in the NHLS. Lab-diagnosed diabetes was defined as HbA1c ≥ 6.5%, FPG ≥ 7.0mmol/l, or RPG ≥ 11.1mmol/l. Cascade stages post diagnosis were retention-in-care and glycaemic control (defined as an HbA1c < 7.0% or FPG < 8.0mmol/l or RPG < 10.0mmol/l) over 24-months. We estimated gaps at each stage nationally and by people living with HIV (PLWH) and without (PLWOH). RESULTS: Of the 373,889 patients tested for diabetes, 43.2% had an HbA1c or blood glucose measure indicating a diabetes diagnosis. Amongst those with lab-diagnosed diabetes, 30.9% were retained-in-care (based on diabetes labs) and 8.7% reached glycaemic control by 24-months. Prevalence of lab-diagnosed diabetes in PLWH was 28.6% versus 47.3% in PLWOH. Among those with lab-diagnosed diabetes, 34.3% of PLWH were retained-in-care versus 30.3% PLWOH. Among people retained-in-care, 33.8% of PLWH reached glycaemic control over 24-months versus 28.6% of PLWOH. CONCLUSIONS: In our analysis of South Africa's NHLS database, we observed that 70% of patients diagnosed with diabetes did not maintain in consistent diabetes care, with fewer than 10% reaching glycemic control within 24 months. We noted a disparity in diabetes prevalence between PLWH and PLWOH, potentially linked to different screening methods. These differences underscore the intricacies in care but also emphasize how HIV care practices could guide better management of chronic diseases like diabetes. Our results underscore the imperative for specialized strategies to bolster diabetes care in South Africa.
Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Infecções por HIV , Humanos , Glicemia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/terapia , Hemoglobinas Glicadas , Infecções por HIV/diagnóstico , Infecções por HIV/epidemiologia , Infecções por HIV/terapia , África do Sul/epidemiologiaRESUMO
Background: In low- and middle-income countries where SARS-CoV-2 testing is limited, seroprevalence studies can characterise the scale and determinants of the pandemic, as well as elucidate protection conferred by prior exposure. Methods: We conducted repeated cross-sectional serosurveys (July 2020 - November 2021) using residual plasma from routine convenient blood samples from patients with non-COVID-19 conditions from Cape Town, South Africa. SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid antibodies and linked clinical information were used to investigate: (1) seroprevalence over time and risk factors associated with seropositivity, (2) ecological comparison of seroprevalence between subdistricts, (3) case ascertainment rates, and (4) the relative protection against COVID-19 associated with seropositivity and vaccination statuses, to estimate variant disease severity. Findings: Among the subset sampled, seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in Cape Town increased from 39.2% in July 2020 to 67.8% in November 2021. Poorer communities had both higher seroprevalence and COVID-19 mortality. Only 10% of seropositive individuals had a recorded positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Antibody positivity before the start of the Omicron BA.1 wave (28 November 2021) was strongly protective for severe disease (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.15; 95%CI 0.05-0.46), with additional benefit in those who were also vaccinated (aOR 0.07, 95%CI 0.01-0.35). Interpretation: The high population seroprevalence in Cape Town was attained at the cost of substantial COVID-19 mortality. At the individual level, seropositivity was highly protective against subsequent infections and severe COVID-19. Funding: Wellcome Trust, National Health Laboratory Service, the Division of Intramural Research, NIAID, NIH (ADR) and Western Cape Government Health.
RESUMO
On 5 March 2020, South Africa recorded its first case of imported COVID-19. Since then, cases in South Africa have increased exponentially with significant community transmission. A multisectoral approach to containing and mitigating the spread of SARS-CoV-2 was instituted, led by the South African National Department of Health. A National COVID-19 Command Council was established to take government-wide decisions. An adapted World Health Organiszion (WHO) COVID-19 strategy for containing and mitigating the spread of the virus was implemented by the National Department of Health. The strategy included the creation of national and provincial incident management teams (IMTs), which comprised of a variety of work streams, namely, governance and leadership; medical supplies; port and environmental health; epidemiology and response; facility readiness and case management; emergency medical services; information systems; risk communication and community engagement; occupational health and safety and human resources. The following were the most salient lessons learnt between March and September 2020: strengthened command and control were achieved through both centralised and decentralised IMTs; swift evidenced-based decision-making from the highest political levels for instituting lockdowns to buy time to prepare the health system; the stringent lockdown enabled the health sector to increase its healthcare capacity. Despite these successes, the stringent lockdown measures resulted in economic hardship particularly for the most vulnerable sections of the population.
Assuntos
COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Controle de Doenças Transmissíveis/organização & administração , Pandemias , Busca de Comunicante , Humanos , Incidência , Programas de Rastreamento , SARS-CoV-2 , África do Sul/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: We describe the epidemiology of COVID-19 in South Africa following importation and during implementation of stringent lockdown measures. METHODS: Using national surveillance data including demographics, laboratory test data, clinical presentation, risk exposures (travel history, contacts and occupation) and outcomes of persons undergoing COVID-19 testing or hospitalised with COVID-19 at sentinel surveillance sites, we generated and interpreted descriptive statistics, epidemic curves, and initial reproductive numbers (Rt). FINDINGS: From 4 March to 30 April 2020, 271,670 SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests were performed (462 tests/100,000 persons). Of these, 7,892 (2.9%) persons tested positive (median age 37 years (interquartile range 28-49 years), 4,568 (58%) male, cumulative incidence of 13.4 cases/100,000 persons). Hospitalization records were found for 1,271 patients (692 females (54%)) of whom 186 (14.6%) died. Amongst 2,819 cases with data, 489/2819 (17.3%) travelled internationally within 14 days prior to diagnosis, mostly during March 2020 (466 (95%)). Cases diagnosed in April compared with March were younger (median age, 37 vs. 40 years), less likely female (38% vs. 53%) and resident in a more populous province (98% vs. 91%). The national initial Rt was 2.08 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.71-2.51). INTERPRETATION: The first eight weeks following COVID-19 importation were characterised by early predominance of imported cases and relatively low mortality and transmission rates. Despite stringent lockdown measures, the second month following importation was characterised by community transmission and increasing disease burden in more populous provinces.