What Counts As 'Safe?': Exposure To Trauma And Violence Among Asylum Seekers From The Northern Triangle.

In 2019 the United States signed Asylum Cooperative Agreements with the Northern Triangle countries of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, in Central America. In November 2019 the Trump administration announced that these agreements would be used to permit the expedited removal of asylum seekers from the US, claiming that these countries provided comprehensive legal procedures for adjudicating asylum claims and protection against further persecution. To assess the presence of dangerous conditions in the three countries, we examined forensic medical evaluations of asylum seekers from the Northern Triangle who are in the US and who presented to an academic medical center asylum clinic in Boston, Massachusetts, from 2017 to 2020. Northern Triangle asylum seekers reported high rates of exposure to trauma and violence, including gender-based violence and violence perpetrated by gangs, and they also exhibited a high prevalence of trauma-related psychiatric disorders. Asylum seekers also reported state actors in Northern Triangle countries as perpetrators of violence and described denial of protection from the state when it was solicited. These findings cast doubt on key tenets underpinning the legal basis for the Asylum Cooperative Agreements. The agreements should be formally terminated and investigations undertaken to determine the impact on people who were subject to removal from the US during preliminary implementation.

Delirium in COVID-19: A case series and exploration of potential mechanisms for central nervous system involvement.

INTRODUCTION: Neuropsychiatric manifestations of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been described, including anosmia, ageusia, headache, paresthesia, encephalitis and encephalopathy. Little is known about the mechanisms by which the virus causes central nervous system (CNS) symptoms, and therefore little guidance is available regarding potential workup or management options. CASES: We present a series of four consecutive cases, seen by our psychiatry consultation service over a one-week period, each of which manifested delirium as a result of infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). DISCUSSION: The four cases highlighted here all occurred in older patients with premorbid evidence of cognitive decline. Unique features seen in multiple cases included rigidity, alogia, abulia, and elevated inflammatory markers. In all four cases, a change in mental status was the presenting symptom, and three of the four cases lacked significant respiratory symptoms. In addition to discussing unique features of the cases, we discuss possible pathophysiologic explanations for COVID-19 delirium. CONCLUSIONS: Delirium should be recognized as a potential feature of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and may be the only presenting symptom. Based on the high rates of delirium demonstrated in prior studies, hospitals should consider adding mental status changes to the list of testing criteria. Further research is needed to determine if delirium in COVID-19 represents a primary encephalopathy heralding invasion of the CNS by the virus, or a secondary encephalopathy related to systemic inflammatory response or other factors.

Stigma, Partners, Providers and Costs: Potential Barriers to PrEP Uptake among US Women.

BACKGROUND: Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) use has remained low among US women while significantly increasing among men who have sex with men. Besides lack of awareness, women face several social and structural barriers in gaining access to and using PrEP. METHODS: Four focus group discussions with 20 HIV-negative women who live in the Washington DC metropolitan area. RESULTS: The women expressed concerns about social and structural barriers to PrEP use. They were afraid that stigma related to using "HIV medicines" could affect PrEP use as well. They are worried that family and friends may question their reasons for taking anti-retrovirals and suspect that they were HIV-positive. They expected hostile reactions from male partners, including accusations of infidelity and introducing mistrust in their relationships. Communicating with health care providers about sexual matters in general and their need for PrEP in particular were identified as further barriers. Women reported that providers rarely ask about risk behaviors related to HIV acquisition; that short visits hinder establishing a trusting relationship to discuss sensitive matters. They were concerned that disclosure of risk behaviors may result in judgmental responses and harsh treatment from providers. Lastly, women were concerned that PrEP costs, including insurance coverage and copays, would keep PrEP out of their reach. While cognizant of the potential barriers, women were unwavering in their determination to find ways to circumvent challenges to PrEP access. CONCLUSION: Social and structural barriers may impede women's access to PrEP despite their own reported interest. Continued efforts to reduce HIV stigma, improve patient-provider relationships and ensure affordability of PrEP may increase the likelihood that women will use this important prevention modality.

Women want Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis but are Advised Against it by Their HIV-positive Counterparts.

OBJECTIVES: The latest advancement in HIV prevention, Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP), could reduce incidence among women. However, PrEP uptake has remained low among US women since its approval in 2012, while use has increased among men who have sex with men. This study addresses women's knowledge, attitudes and potential behaviors regarding PrEP. While HIV-negative women are the potential users of antiretroviral (ARV) medications for PrEP, HIV-positive women who have used ARVs could contribute immensely to our understanding of the complexities related to taking such medications. This study is the first to synthesize the opinions of both groups of women. METHODS: We conducted eight focus group discussions, segregated by sero-status; four with at-risk HIV-negative (20) and four with HIV-positive (19) women in Washington DC during 2014. Topics discussed include PrEP awareness, likelihood of use, barriers and target populations. RESULTS: PrEP awareness was almost non-existent and the HIV-negative women urged publicity. They expressed much enthusiasm about PrEP and wanted to use and recommend it to others despite recognizing potential complexities related to taking PrEP, such as side effects, access, duration and frequency of use. HIV-positive women were less supportive of PrEP for those same reasons based on their experience with taking ARVs. They preferred condoms over PrEP given relative efficacy, affordability, accessibility, and prevention of other STIs. CONCLUSIONS: There is an urgent need for PrEP public health campaigns catered to the needs and concerns of women, most importantly bolster their awareness of PrEP.