A point-prevalence study of body mass indices in HIV-positive and HIV-negative patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 in South Africa.

Background: Obesity is now well recognised as a risk factor for severe COVID-19, but the true prevalence of obesity in hospitalised adults with COVID-19 remains unclear because formal body mass indices (BMIs) are not routinely measured on admission. Objectives: To describe the true prevalence of obesity measured by the BMI, and associated comorbidities, in patients hospitalised with severe COVID-19, including people with HIV (PWH). Methods: We conducted a point-prevalence study of measured BMI in consecutive patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to the medical COVID-19 wards in a tertiary academic hospital in Cape Town, South Africa (SA). Patients were enrolled over a 2-week period during the peak of the first COVID-19 wave in SA. Results: We were able to measure the BMI in 122 of the 146 patients admitted during the study period. The prevalence of HIV was 20% (n=24/122). Most of the participants were overweight or obese (n=104; 85%), and 84 (68.9%) met criteria for obesity. The mean (standard deviation) BMI was 33 (7.5), and 34.5 (9.1) in PWH. Of PWH, 83% (n=20/24) were overweight or obese and 75% (n=18) met criteria for obesity. Multimorbidity was present in 22 (92%) of PWH. Conclusion: We found that most patients, including PWH, met criteria for being overweight or obese. The high prevalence of obesity in PWH and severe COVID-19 reinforces the need for targeted management of non-communicable diseases, including obesity, in PWH. Study synopsis: What the study adds. We found that the true prevalence of obesity, including in people with HIV (PWH), measured with the formal body mass index in hospitalised patients with severe COVID-19 was much higher than reported previously.Multimorbidity was present in over half of all patients, and in 92% of PWH. Implications of the findings. Urgent public health measures are required to tackle the rise in obesity, including in low- and middle-income countries.HIV care must integrate management of non-communicable diseases, including obesity.The pathogenic mechanism of the link between obesity and severe COVID-19 needs further research.

Factors Contributing to Delays to Accessing Appendectomy in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Appendicitis is one of the most common emergency surgical conditions worldwide. Delays in accessing appendectomy can lead to complications. Evidence on these delays in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is lacking. The aim of this review was to identify and synthesise the available evidence on delays to accessing appendectomy in LMICs. METHODS: This scoping review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews framework. The delays and their interconnectivity in LMICs were synthesised and interpreted using the Three Delays framework. We reviewed Africa Wide EBSCOhost, PubMed-Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, African Journals Online (AJOL), and Bioline databases. RESULTS: Our search identified 21 893 studies, of which 78 were included in the final analysis. All of the studies were quantitative. Fifty per cent of the studies included all three types of delays. Delays in seeking care were influenced by a lack of awareness of appendicitis symptoms, and the use of self and alternative medication, which could be linked to delays in receiving care, and the barrier refusal of medical treatment due to fear. Financial concerns were a barrier observed throughout the care pathway. CONCLUSION: This review highlighted the need for additional studies on delays to accessing appendectomy in additional LMICs. Our review demonstrates that in LMICs, persons seeking appendectomy present late to health-care facilities due to several patient-related factors. After reaching a health-care facility, accessing appendectomy can further be delayed owing to a lack of adequate hospital resources.

Corticosteroids in critical COVID-19: Are all corticosteroids equal?

BACKGROUND: The hyperinflammation seen as part of a dysregulated immune response to SARS-CoV-2 in its most severe form leads to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), multiorgan failure and death. Corticosteroid therapy targets this hyperinflammation, otherwise known as a cytokine storm. It is the only therapeutic agent to date with a mortality benefit, with clear guidelines from national and international health authorities guiding its use. Objectives. To compare severity-of-illness indices, survival, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay and potential ICU complications in patients treated with different corticosteroid regimens (high-dose hydrocortisone, high-dose methylprednisolone and lower-dose dexamethasone). Methods. In this single-centre descriptive retrospective observational study of a cohort of patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to a COVID-dedicated ICU, we compared patients treated with the three different corticosteroid regimens. Results. In 242 cases we could not demonstrate any statistically or clinically significant difference in the outcome of patients with critical COVID-19 treated with high-dose intravenous hydrocortisone (n=88) or methylprednisolone (n=46) compared with a relatively lower dose of dexamethasone (n=108). The survival rates were 38.6%, 39.1% and 33.3%, respectively (p=0.68). Patients treated with methylprednisolone tended to have a shorter length of ICU stay (median (interquartile range) 6 (4 - 10), 4 (2 - 8) and 5 (2 - 8) days; p=0.015) and fewer episodes of nosocomial sepsis (47.7%, 32.6% and 48.1%; p=0.01). Conclusions. Hydrocortisone or methylprednisolone can be given as an alternative to dexamethasone in the management of critical COVID-19, and this is a feasible alternative, especially in resource-constrained settings.

Bacterial infection, antibiotic use and COVID-19: Lessons from the intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: Empirical broad-spectrum antibiotics are frequently prescribed to patients with severe COVID-19, motivated by concern about bacterial coinfection. There is no evidence of benefit from such a strategy, while the dangers of inappropriate antibiotics are well described. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the frequency, profile and related outcomes of infections by bacterial pathogens in patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: This was a prospective, descriptive study in a dedicated COVID-19 ICU in Cape Town, South Africa, involving all adult patients admitted to the ICU with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia between 26 March and 31 August 2020. We collected data on patient comorbidities, laboratory results, antibiotic treatment, duration of admission and in-hospital outcome. RESULTS: We included 363 patients, who collectively had 1 199 blood cultures, 308 tracheal aspirates and 317 urine cultures performed. We found positive cultures for pathogens in 20 patients (5.5%) within the first 48 hours of ICU admission, while 73 additional patients (20.1%) had positive cultures later during their stay. The most frequently isolated pathogens at all sites were Acinetobacter baumannii (n=54), Klebsiella species (n=13) and coagulase-negative staphylococci (n=9). Length of ICU stay (p<0.001) and intubation (p<0.001) were associated with positive cultures on multivariate analysis. Disease severity (p=0.5), early antibiotic use (p=0.5), diabetes mellitus (p=0.1) and HIV (p=0.9) were not associated with positive cultures. Positive cultures, particularly for tracheal aspirates (p<0.05), were associated with longer ICU length of stay and mortality. Early empirical antibiotic use was not associated with mortality (odds ratio 2.5; 95% confidence interval 0.95 - 6.81). CONCLUSIONS: Bacterial coinfection was uncommon in patients at the time of admission to the ICU with severe COVID-19. Avoiding early empirical antibiotic therapy is therefore reasonable. Strategies to avoid coinfection and outbreaks in hospital, such as infection prevention and control, as well as the strict use of personal protective equipment, are important to improve outcomes.

Comparison of patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to an intensive care unit in South Africa during the first and second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The second wave of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), dominated by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Beta variant, has been reported to be associated with increased severity in South Africa (SA). Objectives: To describe and compare clinical characteristics, management and outcomes of COVID-19 patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) in SA during the first and second waves. Methods: In a prospective, single-centre, descriptive study, we compared all patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to ICU during the first and second waves. The primary outcomes assessed were ICU mortality and ICU length of stay (LOS). Results: In 490 patients with comparable ages and comorbidities, no difference in mortality was demonstrated during the second compared with the first wave (65.9% v. 62.5%, p=0.57). ICU LOS was longer in the second wave (10 v. 6 days, p<0.001). More female admissions (67.1% v. 44.6%, p<0.001) and a greater proportion of patients were managed with invasive mechanical ventilation than with non-invasive respiratory support (39.0% v. 14%, p<0.001) in the second wave. Conclusion: While clinical characteristics were comparable between the two waves, a higher proportion of patients was invasively ventilated and ICU stay was longer in the second. ICU mortality was unchanged.

Knowledge, risk perception and access to healthcare services for HIV and tuberculosis among university students in Johannesburg, South Africa

background. An increasingly diverse body of students is entering university in South Africa. HIV and tuberculosis (TB) are pressing health issues for this vulnerable population and the university campus offers an opportunity to intervene with health promotion activities. Objectives. This study describes knowledge and risk perception of TB and HIV among high school leavers entering tertiary education. Methods. A cross-sectional survey among first-year students, aged 18-25 years, registered at one of three universities chosen for the study in Johannesburg, South Africa. Informed consent was obtained prior to completing a self-administered, close-ended, structured questionnaire. Factors associated with poor knowledge or high risk perception were identified using modified Poisson regression. Results. In total, 792 students were included; 53.3% (n=438) were categorised as having poor TB knowledge and 52.1% (n=412) poor HIV knowledge, while 43.4% (n=344) were categorised as having high TB risk perception and 39.8% (n=315) high HIV risk perception. Male students were more likely to have poor knowledge of HIV and perceive themselves at risk of acquiring HIV. Low socioeconomic status was associated with a high risk perception of HIV. One in 3 participants (30.6%) stated that they had never had an HIV test. In total, 24students (9 males, 15 female) reported that they were HIV-positive, of whom 15 (62.5%) were on antiretroviral therapy. Only 14.1% had been screened for TB in the past 6 months. Conclusion. The findings indicate a need to enhance health promotion activities among university students so as to aid preventive strategies for reducing the burden of HIV and TB infection