The Global Health Security Index is not predictive of vaccine rollout responses among OECD countries.

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to evaluate the utility of the Global Health Security (GHS) index in predicting the launch of COVID-19 vaccine rollout by Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) member countries. METHODS: Country-level data on the preparedness to respond to infectious disease threats through vaccination rollout were collected using the GHS index. OECD member countries were rank-ordered based on the percentage of their populations fully vaccinated against COVID-19. Rank-ordering was conducted from the lowest to the highest, with each country assigned a score ranging from 1 to 33. Spearman's rank correlation between the GHS index and the percentage of the population that is fully vaccinated was also performed. RESULTS: Israel, ranked 34th in the world on the GHS index for pandemic preparedness, had the highest percentage of the population that was fully vaccinated against COVID-19 within 2 months of the global vaccine rollout. The Spearman rank correlation coefficient between GHS index and the percentage of population fully vaccinated was -0.1378, with a p-value of 0.43. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest an absence of correlation between the GHS index rating and the COVID-19 vaccine rollout of OECD countries, indicating that the preparedness of OECD countries for infectious disease threats may not be accurately reflected by the GHS index.

Statins use and COVID-19 outcomes in hospitalized patients.

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need for novel therapeutic strategies for reversing COVID-19-related lung inflammation. Recent evidence has demonstrated that the cholesterol-lowering agents, statins, are associated with reduced mortality in patients with various respiratory infections. We sought to investigate the relationship between statin use and COVID-19 disease severity in hospitalized patients. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of COVID-19 patients admitted to the Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions between March 1, 2020 and June 30, 2020 was performed. The outcomes of interest were mortality and severe COVID-19 infection, as defined by prolonged hospital stay (≥ 7 days) and/ or invasive mechanical ventilation. Logistic regression, Cox proportional hazards regression and propensity score matching were used to obtain both univariable and multivariable associations between covariates and outcomes in addition to the average treatment effect of statin use. RESULTS: Of the 4,447 patients who met our inclusion criteria, 594 (13.4%) patients were exposed to statins on admission, of which 340 (57.2%) were male. The mean age was higher in statin users compared to non-users [64.9 ± 13.4 vs. 45.5 ± 16.6 years, p <0.001]. The average treatment effect of statin use on COVID-19-related mortality was RR = 1.00 (95% CI: 0.99-1.01, p = 0.928), while its effect on severe COVID-19 infection was RR = 1.18 (95% CI: 1.11-1.27, p <0.001). CONCLUSION: Statin use was not associated with altered mortality, but with an 18% increased risk of severe COVID-19 infection.

Factors associated with disease severity and mortality among patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the factors associated with disease severity and mortality in Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is imperative to effectively triage patients. We performed a systematic review to determine the demographic, clinical, laboratory and radiological factors associated with severity and mortality in COVID-19. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase and WHO database for English language articles from inception until May 8, 2020. We included Observational studies with direct comparison of clinical characteristics between a) patients who died and those who survived or b) patients with severe disease and those without severe disease. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two authors independently. RESULTS: Among 15680 articles from the literature search, 109 articles were included in the analysis. The risk of mortality was higher in patients with increasing age, male gender (RR 1.45, 95%CI 1.23-1.71), dyspnea (RR 2.55, 95%CI 1.88-2.46), diabetes (RR 1.59, 95%CI 1.41-1.78), hypertension (RR 1.90, 95%CI 1.69-2.15). Congestive heart failure (OR 4.76, 95%CI 1.34-16.97), hilar lymphadenopathy (OR 8.34, 95%CI 2.57-27.08), bilateral lung involvement (OR 4.86, 95%CI 3.19-7.39) and reticular pattern (OR 5.54, 95%CI 1.24-24.67) were associated with severe disease. Clinically relevant cut-offs for leukocytosis(>10.0 x109/L), lymphopenia(< 1.1 x109/L), elevated C-reactive protein(>100mg/L), LDH(>250U/L) and D-dimer(>1mg/L) had higher odds of severe disease and greater risk of mortality. CONCLUSION: Knowledge of the factors associated of disease severity and mortality identified in our study may assist in clinical decision-making and critical-care resource allocation for patients with COVID-19.

The Global Health Security Index is not predictive of coronavirus pandemic responses among Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has devastated many countries with ripple effects felt in various sectors of the global economy. In November 2019, the Global Health Security (GHS) Index was released as the first detailed assessment and benchmarking of 195 countries to prevent, detect, and respond to infectious disease threats. This paper presents the first comparison of Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development OECD countries' performance during the pandemic, with the pre-COVID-19 pandemic preparedness as determined by the GHS Index. Using a rank-based analysis, four indices were compared between select countries, including total cases, total deaths, recovery rate, and total tests performed, all standardized for comparison. Our findings suggest a discrepancy between the GHS index rating and the actual performance of countries during this pandemic, with an overestimation of the preparedness of some countries scoring highly on the GHS index and underestimation of the preparedness of other countries with relatively lower scores on the GHS index.

Estimating obstetric and gynecologic surgical rate: A benchmark of surgical capacity building in Ghana.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the annual rate of obstetric and gynecologic (ObGyn) operations performed in Ghana and establish a baseline for tracking the expansion of Ghana's surgical capacity. METHODS: Data were obtained for ObGyn operations performed in Ghana between 2014 and 2015 from a nationally representative sample of hospitals and scaled up for national estimates. Operations were classified as "essential" or "other" according to The World Bank's Disease Control Priorities Project. Data were used to calculate cesarean-to-total-operation ratio (CTR) and estimate the rate of cesarean deliveries based on the number of live births in 2014. RESULTS: A total of 90 044 (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 69 461-110 628) ObGyn operations were performed nationally over the 1-year period, yielding an annual national ObGyn operation rate of 881/100 000 females aged 12 years and over (95% UI 679-1082). Eighty-seven percent were essential procedures, 80% of which were cesarean deliveries. District hospitals performed 71% of ObGyn operations. The national rate of cesarean deliveries was 7.2% and the CTR was 0.27. CONCLUSION: The cesarean delivery rate of 7.2% suggests inadequate access to obstetric care. The CTR of 0.27 suggests inadequate overall surgical capacity. These measures, along with estimates of distribution of procedures by hospital level, provide useful baseline data to support surgical capacity building efforts in Ghana and similar countries.