Gamified antimicrobial decision support app (GADSA) changes antibiotics prescription behaviour in surgeons in Nigeria: a hospital-based pilot study.

AIMS: Surgical Antibiotic Prophylaxis (SAP) in Nigeria is often not evidence based. The aim of this study is to test if the GADSA application can change prescription behaviour of surgeons in Nigeria. In addition, the study aims to identify AMS strategies and policies for the future. METHODS: The GADSA gamified decision support app uses WHO and Sanford prescribing guidelines to deliver real-time persuasive technology feedback to surgeons through an interactive mentor. The app can advise on whether clinician's decisions align with SAP recommendations and provides the opportunity for clinicians to make adjustments. Twenty surgeons actively participated in a 6-month pilot study in three hospitals in Nigeria. The surgeons determined the risk of infection of a surgical procedure, and the need, type and duration of SAP. The study used a longitudinal approach to test whether the GADSA app significantly changed prescribing behaviour of participating surgeons by analysing the reported prescription decisions within the app. RESULTS: 321 SAP prescriptions were recorded. Concerning the surgical risk decision, 12% of surgeons changed their decision to be in line with guidelines after app feedback (p < 0.001) and 10% of surgeons changed their decision about the need for SAP (p = 0.0035) to align with guidelines. The change in decision making for SAP use in terms of "type" and "duration" to align with guidelines was similar with 6% and 5% respectively (both p-values < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the GADSA app, with its game based and feedback feature, could significantly change prescribing behaviour at the point of care in an African setting, which could help tackle the global challenge of antibiotic resistance.

Reported rates of all-cause serious adverse events following immunization with BNT-162b in 5-17-year-old children in the United States.

Vaccine development against COVID-19 has mitigated severe disease. However, reports of rare but serious adverse events following immunization (sAEFI) in the young populations are fuelling parental anxiety and vaccine hesitancy. With a very early season of viral illnesses including COVID-19, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), influenza, metapneumovirus and several others, children are facing a winter with significant respiratory illness burdens. Yet, COVID-19 vaccine and booster uptake remain sluggish due to the mistaken beliefs that children have low rates of severe COVID-19 illness as well as rare but severe complications from COVID-19 vaccine are common. In this study we examined composite sAEFI reported in association with COVID-19 vaccines in the United States (US) amongst 5-17-year-old children, to ascertain the composite reported risk associated with vaccination. Between December 13, 2020, and April 13, 2022, a total of 467,890,599 COVID-19 vaccine doses were administered to individuals aged 5-65 years in the US, of which 180 million people received at least 2 doses. In association with these, a total of 177,679 AEFI were reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event reporting System (VAERS) of which 31,797 (17.9%) were serious. The rates of ED visits per 100,000 recipients were 2.56 (95% CI: 2.70-3.47) amongst 5-11-year-olds, 18.25 (17.57-18.95) amongst 12-17-year-olds and 33.74 (33.36-34.13) amongst 18-65-year olds; hospitalizations were 1.07 (95% CI 0.87-1.32) per 100,000 in 5-11-year-olds, 6.83 (6.42-7.26) in 12-17-year olds and 8.15 (7.96-8.35) in 18-65 years; life-threatening events were 0.14 (95% CI: 0.08-0.25) per 100,000 in 5-11-year olds, 1.22 (1.05-1.41) in 12-17-year-olds and 2.96 (2.85-3.08) in 18-65 year olds; and death 0.03 (95% CI 0.01-0.10) per 100,000 in 5-11 year olds, 0.08 (0.05-0.14) amongst 12-17-year olds and 0.76 (0.71-0.82) in 18-65 years age group. The results of our study from national population surveillance data demonstrate rates of reported serious AEFIs amongst 5-17-year-olds which appear to be significantly lower than in 18-65-year-olds. These low risks must be taken into account in overall recommendation of COVID-19 vaccination amongst children.

Analyses of reported severe adverse events after immunization with SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in the United States: One year on.

Objective: To analyze rates of reported severe adverse events after immunization (sAEFI) attributed to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in the United States (US) using safety surveillance data. Methods: Observational study of sAEFI reported to the vaccine adverse events reporting system (VAERS) between December 13, 2020, to December 13, 2021, and attributed to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination programs across all US states and territories. All sAEFI in conjunction with mRNA (BNT-162b2 or mRNA-1273) or adenovector (Ad26.COV2.S) vaccines were included. The 28-day crude cumulative rates for reported emergency department (ED) visits and sAEFI viz. hospitalizations, life-threatening events and deaths following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination were calculated. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of reported sAEFI were compared between mRNA and adenovector vaccines using generalized Poisson regression models. Results: During the study period, 485 million SARS-CoV-2 vaccines doses were administered nationwide, and 88,626 sAEFI reported in VAERS. The 28-day crude cumulative reporting rates per 100,000 doses were 14.97 (95% confidence interval, 14.86-18.38) for ED visits, 5.32 (5.26-5.39) for hospitalizations, 1.72 (1.68-1.76) for life-threatening events, and 1.08 (1.05-1.11) for deaths. Females had two-fold rates for any reported AEFI compared to males, but lower adjusted IRRs for sAEFI. Cumulative rates per dose for reported sAEFI attributed to adenovector vaccine were 2-3-fold higher, and adjusted IRRs 1.5-fold higher than mRNA vaccines. Conclusions: Overall cumulative rates for reported sAEFI following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in the US over 1 year were very low; single-dose adenovector vaccine had 1.5-fold higher adjusted rates for reported sAEFI, which may however equate with multiple-doses mRNA vaccine regimens. These data indicate absence of high risks of sAEFI following SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and support safety equipoise between mRNA and adenovector vaccines. Public health messaging of these data is critical to overcome heuristic biases. Furthermore, these data may support ongoing adenovector vaccine use, especially in low- and middle-income countries due to affordability, logistical and cold chain challenges.

Exploring barriers to guideline implementation for prescription of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis in Nigeria.

Background: In Nigeria, the prescription of surgical antibiotic prophylaxis for prevention of surgical site infection tends to be driven by local policy rather than by published guidelines (e.g. WHO and Sanford). Objectives: To triangulate three datasets and understand key barriers to implementation using a behavioural science framework. Methods: Surgeons (N = 94) from three teaching hospitals in Nigeria participated in an online survey and in focus group discussions about barriers to implementation. The theoretical domains framework (TDF) was used to structure question items and interview schedules. A subgroup (N = 20) piloted a gamified decision support app over the course of 6 months and reported barriers at the point of care. Results: Knowledge of guidelines and intention to implement them in practice was high. Key barriers to implementation were related to environmental context and resources and concern over potential consequences of implementing recommendations within the Nigerian context applicable for similar settings in low-to-middle-income countries. Conclusions: The environmental context and limited resource setting of Nigerian hospitals currently presents a significant barrier to implementation of WHO and Sanford guidelines. Research and data collected from the local context must directly inform the writing of future international guidelines to increase rates of implementation.

National health governance, science and the media: drivers of COVID-19 responses in Germany, Sweden and the UK in 2020.

The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented global crisis in which governments had to act in a situation of rapid change and substantial uncertainty. The governments of Germany, Sweden and the UK have taken different paths allowing learning for future pandemic preparedness. To help inform discussions on preparedness, inspired by resilience frameworks, this paper reviews governance structures, and the role of science and the media in the COVID-19 response of Germany, Sweden and the UK in 2020. We mapped legitimacy, interdependence, knowledge generation and the capacity to deal with uncertainty.Our analysis revealed stark differences which were linked to pre-existing governing structures, the traditional role of academia, experience of crisis management and the communication of uncertainty-all of which impacted on how much people trusted their government. Germany leveraged diversity and inclusiveness, a 'patchwork quilt', for which it was heavily criticised during the second wave. The Swedish approach avoided plurality and largely excluded academia, while in the UK's academia played an important role in knowledge generation and in forcing the government to review its strategies. However, the vivant debate left the public with confusing and rapidly changing public health messages. Uncertainty and the lack of evidence on how best to manage the COVID-19 pandemic-the main feature during the first wave-was only communicated explicitly in Germany. All country governments lost trust of their populations during the epidemic due to a mix of communication and transparency failures, and increased questioning of government legitimacy and technical capacity by the public.

Adipose tissue metabolism and CD11b expression on monocytes in obese hypertensives.

At a given degree of adiposity, metabolic and cardiovascular risk varies markedly between individuals. Animal studies suggest that differentially expressed systemic activation of monocytes contributes to the obesity-associated risk variability. We tested the hypothesis that systemic monocyte activation is associated with changes in adipose tissue and skeletal muscle metabolism. In 17 obese hypertensive patients, we assessed CD11b expression on circulating monocytes, gene expression in adipose tissue biopsies, and obtained blood samples and adipose tissue and skeletal muscle microdialysis samples in the fasted state and during a glucose load. Patients were stratified into groups with higher and lower CD11b expression on monocytes. Expression of the macrophage marker CD68 was increased markedly in adipose tissue of subjects with higher CD11b expression. Although no differences in systemic insulin sensitivity were found between both groups, patients with higher peripheral CD11b expression showed a markedly augmented increase in dialysate glucose in adipose tissue during oral glucose tolerance testing and increased adipose tissue lipolysis as well. Our data demonstrate that human monocyte activation is associated with tissue-specific changes in glucose and lipid metabolism. These findings may be explained in part by monocyte/macrophage infiltration of adipose tissue, which appears to interfere with insulin responsiveness.