Post-COVID conditions response: a collaborative approach to -establishing multidisciplinary clinics in Ecuador.

INTRODUCTION: Worldwide, 3.7% (144.7 million) of people diagnosed with COVID-19 developed Post-COVID Conditions (PCC). Therefore, creating and implementing multidisciplinary rehabilitation clinics is important to address the needs of patients and improve overall recovery. This study was made possible with support from the United States Agency for International Development funded RISE program, under the terms of the cooperative agreement 7200AA19CA00003. METHODS: This case study was conducted in Ecuador and describes the creation and implementation of 21 PCC rehabilitation clinics in primary healthcare centers and secondary level hospitals in 7 provinces across the country. Data was gathered for the identification of partnering health facilities and needs, for the evaluation of knowledge enhancement in health professionals after a specific training program, and for the measurement of key performance indicators. This article emphasizes the organization, educational strategies, and implementation of rehabilitation programs tailored specifically for the management of Post-COVID Conditions in Ecuador. RESULTS: The implementation of PCC rehabilitation clinics involved a collaborative effort between the Ministry of Public Health (MOPH), the private sector and a non-governmental organization (Jhpiego). Twenty-one health facilities from the primary and secondary level of care were selected, and PCC rehabilitation implemented in 7 provinces of Ecuador. Additionally, 133 health providers were trained and a total of 13,846 patients treated, among whom 859 had a diagnosis of PCC. Medical doctors outperformed nurses in both pre- and post-tests scores. However, all healthcare professionals demonstrated comparable improvement in knowledge acquisition. Rehabilitation manuals were developed and adopted by the MOPH, rehabilitation equipment was donated and a mobile application, "RESPIRA", was developed and disseminated free of charge. CONCLUSION: The establishment of PCC rehabilitation clinics in Ecuador was successful in identifying patients in need of early rehabilitation. The insights of this study can serve as a guide for the development of similar initiatives in other countries. Tailored courses are essential to address disparities and ensure comprehensive skill development and promote equitable healthcare delivery.

Global Health Research Mentoring Competencies for Individuals and Institutions in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Mentoring is beneficial to mentors, mentees, and their institutions, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), that are faced with complex disease burdens, skills shortages, and resource constraints. Mentoring in global health research can be enhanced by defining key competencies, to enable the skill set required for effective mentoring, determine training needs for local research mentors, and facilitate institutional capacity building to support mentors. The latter includes advocating for resources, institutional development of mentoring guidelines, and financial and administrative support for mentoring. Nine core global health research mentoring competencies were identified: maintaining effective communication; aligning expectations with reasonable goals and objectives; assessing and providing skills and knowledge for success; addressing diversity; fostering independence; promoting professional development; promoting professional integrity and ethical conduct; overcoming resource limitations; and fostering institutional change. The competencies described in this article will assist mentors to sharpen their cognitive skills, acquire or generate new knowledge, and enhance professional and personal growth and job satisfaction. Similarly, the proposed competencies will enhance the knowledge and skills of mentees, who can continue and extend the work of their mentors, and advance knowledge for the benefit of the health of populations in LMICs.

Global Health Mentoring Toolkits: A Scoping Review Relevant for Low- and Middle-Income Country Institutions.

Capacity building in low- and middle-income country (LMIC) institutions hinges on the delivery of effective mentorship. This study presents an overview of mentorship toolkits applicable to LMIC institutions identified through a scoping review. A scoping review approach was used to 1) map the extent, range, and nature of mentorship resources and tools available and 2) to identify knowledge gaps in the current literature. To identify toolkits, we collected and analyzed data provided online that met the following criteria: written in English and from organizations and individuals involved in global health mentoring. We searched electronic databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, and Google search engine. Once toolkits were identified, we extracted the available tools and mapped them to pre-identified global health competencies. Only three of the 18 identified toolkits were developed specifically for the LMIC context. Most toolkits focused on individual mentor-mentee relationships. Most focused on the domains of communication and professional development. Fewer toolkits focused on ethics, overcoming resource limitations, and fostering institutional change. No toolkits discussed strategies for group mentoring or how to adapt existing tools to a local context. There is a paucity of mentoring resources specifically designed for LMIC settings. We identified several toolkits that focus on aspects of individual mentor-mentee relationships that could be adapted to local contexts. Future work should focus on adaptation and the development of tools to support institutional change and capacity building for mentoring.

Global Emergency Medicine: A Review of the Literature From 2016.

OBJECTIVES: The Global Emergency Medicine Literature Review (GEMLR) conducts an annual search of peer-reviewed and gray literature relevant to global emergency medicine (EM) to identify, review, and disseminate the most important new research in this field to a global audience of academics and clinical practitioners. METHODS: This year 13,890 articles written in four languages were identified by our search. These articles were distributed among 20 reviewers for initial screening based on their relevance to the field of global EM. An additional two reviewers searched the gray literature. All articles that were deemed appropriate by at least one reviewer and approved by their editor underwent formal scoring of overall quality and importance. Two independent reviewers scored all articles. RESULTS: A total of 716 articles met our inclusion criteria and underwent full review. Fifty-nine percent were categorized as emergency care in resource-limited settings, 17% as EM development, and 24% as disaster and humanitarian response. Nineteen articles received scores of 18.5 or higher out of a maximum score of 20 and were selected for formal summary and critique. Inter-rater reliability testing between reviewers revealed Cohen's kappa of 0.441. CONCLUSIONS: In 2016, the total number of articles identified by our search continued to increase. The proportion of articles in each of the three categories remained stable. Studies and reviews with a focus on infectious diseases, pediatrics, and the use of ultrasound in resource-limited settings represented the majority of articles selected for final review.

Global Emergency Medicine: A Review of the Literature From 2015.

OBJECTIVES: The Global Emergency Medicine Literature Review (GEMLR) conducts an annual search of peer-reviewed and gray literature relevant to global emergency medicine (EM) to identify, review, and disseminate the most important new research in this field to a global audience of academics and clinical practitioners. METHODS: This year 12,435 articles written in six languages were identified by our search. These articles were distributed among 20 reviewers for initial screening based on their relevance to the field of global EM. An additional two reviewers searched the gray literature. A total of 723 articles were deemed appropriate by at least one reviewer and approved by their editor for formal scoring of overall quality and importance. Two independent reviewers scored all articles. RESULTS: A total of 723 articles met our predetermined inclusion criteria and underwent full review. Sixty percent were categorized as emergency care in resource-limited settings (ECRLS), 17% as EM development (EMD), and 23% as disaster and humanitarian response (DHR). Twenty-four articles received scores of 18.5 or higher out of a maximum score 20 and were selected for formal summary and critique. Inter-rater reliability between reviewers gave an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.71 (95% confidence interval = 0.66 to 0.75). Studies and reviews with a focus on infectious diseases, trauma, and the diagnosis and treatment of diseases common in resource-limited settings represented the majority of articles selected for final review. CONCLUSIONS: In 2015, there were almost twice as many articles found by our search compared to the 2014 review. The number of EMD articles increased, while the number ECRLS articles decreased. The number of DHR articles remained stable. As in prior years, the majority of articles focused on infectious diseases.