Background According to the World Health Organization, snakebites, a common occupational hazard in developing countries accounts for an annual loss of between 81,000 and 138, 000 lives following 5 million bites of which 2.7 million results in envenomation. Since snakebite-associated morbidity and mortality are more prevalent in agricultural economies such as Ghana, health professionals should be optimally knowledgeable on how to manage the incidence of snakebites. Lack of knowledge or overestimation of a professional's knowledge can affect heath delivery especially for emergencies such as snakebites. The three rurally situated Tongu districts in South-Eastern Ghana with agriculture as the major source of livelihood for their inhabitants, are prone to snakebites. This study, therefore, brings up the need to assess whether the health professionals in these districts are well-equipped knowledge-wise to handle such emergencies and whether they can rightly estimate their knowledge with regards to snakebite management. Methodology/Principal findings Data was collected using a de novo semi-structured questionnaire administered through google form whose link was sent via WhatsApp to 186 health workers made up of nurses, midwives, physician assistants, medical doctors, pharmacists, and pharmacy technicians. This data was analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 25. Association between variables was determined using the appropriate tools where necessary, using a confidence interval of 95% and significance assumed when p ≤ 0.05. This study found male health workers significantly more knowledgeable about snakebite management (11.53±5.67 vs 9.64±5.46; p = 0.022) but it was the females who overestimated their knowledge level (27.9% vs 24.1%). The medical doctors exhibited the best knowledge on snakebite management with the registered general nurses least knowledgeable. Although most professionals overestimated their knowledge, the registered general nurses were the worst at that (53.7%). Overall knowledge of health care professionals on snakebite management was below average [10.60±5.62/22 (48.2%)] but previous in-service training and involvement in the management of snakebite were associated with better knowledge. Respondents who had no previous training overestimated their knowledge level compared to those who had some post-qualification training on snakebite management (38.1% vs 7.5%). The greatest knowledge deficit of respondents was on the management of ASV associated adverse reactions. Conclusion Health workers in rural Ghana overestimated their knowledge about snakebite management although their knowledge was low. Training schools, therefore, need to incorporate snakebite management in their curriculum and health authorities should also expose health workers to more in-service training on this neglected tropical disease.

BackgroundAccording to the World Health Organization, snakebites, a common occupational hazard in developing countries accounts an annual loss of between 81,000 and 139, 000 lives following 5 million of bites of which 2.7 million results in envenomation. Since snakebite associated morbidity and mortality is more prevalent in agriculture economies such as Ghana, health professionals should be optimally knowledgeable on how to manage incidence of snakebites. Lack of knowledge or overestimation of a professional’s knowledge can be affects heath delivery especially for emergency situations such as snakebites. The three (3) Tongu districts South Eastern Ghana which are rurally situated with agriculture as the major source of livelihood for their inhabitants are prone to snakebite incidence hence the need to assess whether the health professionals in these districts are well equipped by way of knowledge to handle such emergencies and whether they are able to rightly estimate their knowledge with regards to snakebite management.Methodology/Principal findingsData was collected using a de novo semi-structured questionnaire administered through google form whose link was sent via to 186 health workers made up of nurses, midwives, physician assistants, medical doctors, pharmacists, and pharmacy technicians. This data was analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 25. Association between variables was determined using the appropriate tools where necessary, using a confidence interval of 95% and significance assumed when p ≤ 0.05. This study found male health workers significantly more knowledgeable about snakebite management (11.53±5.67 vrs 9.64±5.46; p = 0.022) but it was the females who overestimated their knowledge level (27.9% vrs 24.1%). The medical doctors exhibited the best knowledge on snakebite management with the registered general nurses least knowledgeable. Although most professionals overestimated their knowledge, the registered general nurses were the worst at that (53.7%). Overall knowledge of health care professionals on snakebite management was below average [10.60±5.62/22 (48.2%)] but previous in-service training and involvement in management of snakebite were associated with better knowledge. Respondents who had no previous training overestimated their knowledge level compared to those who had some post qualification training on snakebite management (7.5% vrs 38.1%). Greatest knowledge deficit of respondents was on the management of ASV associated adverse reactions.ConclusionHealth workers in rural Ghana overestimated their knowledge about snakebite management although their knowledge was low. Training schools therefore need to incorporate snakebite management in their curriculum and health authorities should also expose health workers to more in-service training on this neglected tropical disease.Author summaryWorld Health Organization estimates that every year between 81,000 and 139,000 die due snake bites across the world. Mismanagement of snakebites can result in increased disabilities and death if not handled by knowledgeable health workers. This study assessed if various categories of health workers made up of professionals from the medical, pharmaceutical and nursing categories in the three neighbouring Tongu districts in Ghana have the appropriate level of knowledge on snakebite management. Using a newly developed questionnaire, data was collected from the respondents using google forms sent to their WhatsApp platforms. Data was then analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 25. Results were presented in the form of tables and association between the variables also determined. The level of knowledge of sampled health workers on snakebite was below average especially among the nursing professionals. However, those who had some previous post qualification training on snakebite management exhibited a significant superior knowledge and least overestimated their knowledge hence policy makers should through workshops equip health workers especially the nurses on snakebites so that rural dwellers whose health care needs are mainly attended to by nurses can be better managed when they suffer snakebites.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the prevalence of food insecurity among patients with cancer and to validate the Hunger Vital Sign (HVS) instrument compared to the standard-of-care USDA 18-item Household Food Security Scale (HFSS). The secondary objective was to assess disparities in food access based on race, zip code and insurance status.PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with cancer who were hospitalized at The Ohio State University James Comprehensive Cancer Center (OSU-CCC) were identified to participate by the Department of Social Work. Each patient completed the HVS and the 18-item HFSS. The prevalence of food insecurity was estimated and 95% Wilson score confidence intervals were calculated. The agreement between the prevalence of food insecurity as measured by the two different instruments were compared through the use of McNemar’s test. Disparities in food access based on race, zip code and insurance status were further assessed with Fisher exact tests. RESULTS: One hundred and twelve patients participated. We found that the HVS identified food insecurity in 14.3% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 9.1, 21.7) of participants, whereas the 18-item HFSS identified 8.6% (95% CI: 4.8, 15.1) of participants. However, there was no significant difference between food insecurity as measured by the HVS and the 18-item HFSS (p = 0.289). There were also no significant differences in food insecurity based on race, insurance status or geographical location of patients.CONCLUSION: The HVS is an alternative to the 18-item HFSS as a valid tool to assess food security amongst hospitalized patients with cancer.