RESUMEN
The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is one of the biggest public health crises globally. Although Africa did not display the worst-case scenario compared to other continents, fears were still at its peak since Africa was already suffering from a heavy load of other life-threatening infectious diseases such as HIV/AIDS and malaria. Other factors that were anticipated to complicate Africa's outcomes include the lack of resources for diagnosis and contact tracing along with the low capacity of specialized management facilities per capita. The current review aims at assessing and generating discussions on the realities, and pros and cons of the WHO COVID-19 interim guidance 2020.5 considering the known peculiarities of the African continent. A comprehensive evaluation was done for COVID-19-related data published across PubMed and Google Scholar (date of the last search: August 17, 2020) with emphasis on clinical management and psychosocial aspects. Predefined filters were then applied in data screening as detailed in the methods. Specifically, we interrogated the WHO 2020.5 guideline viz-a-viz health priority and health financing in Africa, COVID-19 case contact tracing and risk assessment, clinical management of COVID-19 cases as well as strategies for tackling stigmatization and psychosocial challenges encountered by COVID-19 survivors. The outcomes of this work provide links between these vital sub-themes which may impact the containment and management of COVID-19 cases in Africa in the long-term. The chief recommendation of the current study is the necessity of prudent filtration of the global findings along with regional modelling of the global care guidelines for acting properly in response to this health threat on the regional level without exposing our populations to further unnecessary adversities.
RESUMEN
The evolving nature of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has necessitated periodic revisions of COVID-19 patient treatment and discharge guidelines. Since the identification of the first COVID-19 cases in November 2019, the World Health Organization (WHO) has played a crucial role in tackling the country-level pandemic preparedness and patient management protocols. Among others, the WHO provided a guideline on the clinical management of COVID-19 patients according to which patients can be released from isolation centers on the 10th day following clinical symptom manifestation, with a minimum of 72 additional hours following the resolution of symptoms. However, emerging direct evidence indicating the possibility of viral shedding 14 days after the onset of symptoms called for evaluation of the current WHO discharge recommendations. In this review article, we carried out comprehensive literature analysis of viral shedding with specific focus on the duration of viral shedding and infectivity in asymptomatic and symptomatic (mild, moderate, and severe forms) COVID-19 patients. Our literature search indicates that even though, there are specific instances where the current protocols may not be applicable ( such as in immune-compromised patients there is no strong evidence to contradict the current WHO discharge criteria.
RESUMEN
Extreme weather events pose significant threats to urban health in low- and middle-income countries, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa where there are systemic health challenges. This paper investigates health system vulnerabilities associated with flooding and extreme heat, along with strategies for resilience building by service providers and community members, in Accra and Tamale, Ghana. We employed field observations, rainfall records, temperature measurements, and semi-structured interviews in health facilities within selected areas of both cities. Results indicate that poor building conditions, unstable power supply, poor sanitation and hygiene, and the built environment reduce access to healthcare for residents of poor urban areas. Health facilities are sited in low-lying areas with poor drainage systems and can be 6 °C warmer at night than reported by official records from nearby weather stations. This is due to a combination of greater thermal inertia of the buildings and the urban heat island effect. Flooding and extreme heat interact with socioeconomic conditions to impact physical infrastructure and disrupt community health as well as health facility operations. Community members and health facilities make infrastructural and operational adjustments to reduce extreme weather stress and improve healthcare provision to clients. These measures include: mobilisation of residents to clear rubbish and unclog drains; elevating equipment to protect it from floods; improving ventilation during extreme heat; and using alternative power sources for emergency surgery and storage during outages. Stakeholders recommend additional actions to manage flood and heat impacts on health in their cities, such as, improving the capacity of drainage systems to carry floodwaters, and routine temperature monitoring to better manage heat in health facilities. Finally, more timely and targeted information systems and emergency response plans are required to ensure preparedness for extreme weather events in urban areas.
