Background The COVID-19 disease burden continues to be high worldwide and vaccines continue to be developed to help combat the pandemic. Acceptance and risk perception for COVID-19 vaccines is unknown in Botswana despite the government’s decision to roll out the vaccine nationally. Objectives This study aims to assess the acceptance rate and risk perception of COVID-19 vaccines amongst the general population in Botswana. Methods We interviewed 5300 adults in Botswana from 1–28 February 2021 using self-administered questionnaires. The main outcomes of the study were vaccine acceptance and hesitancy rates. Demographic, experiential and socio-cultural factors were explored for their association with outcome variables. Results Two-thirds of the participants were females (3199), with those aged 24–54 making the highest proportion (61%). The acceptance rate of COVID-19 vaccine was 73.4% (95% CI: 72.2%-74.6%) with vaccine hesitancy at 31.3% (95% CI: 30.0%-32.6%). When the dependent variable was vaccine acceptance, males had higher odds of accepting the vaccine compared to females (OR = 1.2, 95% CI: 1.0, 1.4). Individuals aged 55–64 had high odds of accepting the vaccine compared to those aged 65 and above (OR = 1.2, 95% CI: 0.6, 2.5). The odds of accepting the vaccine for someone with primary school education were about 2.5 times that of an individual with post graduate level of education. Finally, individuals with comorbidities had higher odds (OR = 1.2, 95% CI: 1.0, 1.5) of accepting the vaccine compared to those without any underlying conditions. Conclusion This study demonstrated a high acceptance rate for the COVID-19 vaccine and a low risk perception in Botswana. In order to achieve a high vaccine coverage and ensure a successful vaccination process, there is need to target populations with high vaccine hesitancy rates. A qualitative study to assess the factors associated with vaccine acceptance and hesitancy is recommended to provide an in-depth analysis of the findings.

Introduction: Emergency medicine is a critical component of quality public health service. In fact length of stay and waiting times in the Emergency department are key indicators of quality. The aim of this study was to determine waiting times and determinants of prolonged length of stay (LOS) in the Princess Marina Hospital Emergency Department. Methods: This was a retrospective observational study. It was done at Princess Marina, a referral hospital in Gaborone, Botswana. Triage forms of patients who presented between 19/11/ 2018 and 18/12/2018 were reviewed. Data from patient files was used to determine time duration from triage to being reviewed by a doctor, time duration from review by emergency doctor to patients' disposition and the time duration from patient's triage to disposition (length of stay). Prolonged length of stay was defined as duration > 6 hours. Results: A total of 1052 files representing patients seen over a 1-month period were reviewed. 72.5% of the patients had a prolonged length of stay. The median emergency doctor waiting time was 4.5 hours (IQR 1.6-8.3 hours) and the maximum was 27.1 hours. The median length of stay in the emergency department was 9.6 hours (IQR 5.8-14.6 hours) and the maximum was 45.9 hours. Patient's age (AOR 1.01), mental status (AOR 0.61), admission to internal medicine service (AOR 5.12) and pediatrics admissions (AOR 0.11) were significant predictors of prolonged length of stay in the emergency department. Conclusion: Princess Marina Hospital emergency department waiting times and length of stay are long. Age, normal mental status and internal medicine admission were independent predictors of prolonged stay (>6 hours). Admission to the pediatrics service was associated with shorter length of stay. There is a need for interventions to address the long waiting times and length of stay. Interventions should particularly focus on the identified predictors.

Background. Factors associated with overweight/obesity among antiretroviral therapy (ART) recipients have not been sufficiently studied in Botswana. Objectives. To: (i) estimate the prevalence and trends in overweight/obesity by duration of exposure to ART among recipients, (ii) assess changes in BMI categories among ART recipients between their first clinic visit (BMI-1) and their last clinic visit (BMI-2), (iii) identify ART regimen that predicts overweight/obesity better than the others and factors associated with BMI changes among ART recipients. Methods. A 12-year retrospective record-based review was conducted. Potential predictors of BMI change among patients after at least three years of ART exposure were examined using a multiple logistic regression model. Adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed. ART regimens, duration of exposure to ART, and recipients’ demographic and biomedical characteristics including the presence or absence of diabetes mellitus-related comorbidities (DRC), defined as any morbidity associated with type 2 diabetes as described in the international statistical classification of diseases and related health problems (ICD-10-CM) codebook index, were investigated as potential predictors of overweight/obesity. Results. Twenty-nine percent of recipients were overweight, 16.6% had obesity of whom 2.4% were morbidly-obese at the last clinic visit. Overweight/obese recipients were more likely to be female, to have DRC and less likely to have CD4 count between 201 and 249 cells/mm3. Neither the first-line nor the second-, third-line ART regimens predicted overweight/obesity better than the other and neither did the duration of exposure to ART. No significant linear trends were observed in the prevalence of overweight/obesity by the duration of exposure to ART. Conclusion. These results suggest that the ART regimens studied have a comparable effect on overweight/obesity and that the duration of exposure does not affect the outcome. This study calls for further research to elucidate the relative contribution of various factors to BMI change among recipients, including ART regimens.

Background. Policy changes are often necessary to contain the detrimental impact of epidemics such as those brought about by coronavirus disease (COVID-19). In the earlier phases of the emergence of COVID-19, China was the first to impose strict restrictions on movement (lockdown) on January 23rd, 2020. A strategy whose effectiveness in curtailing COVID-19 was yet to be determined. We, therefore, sought to study the impact of the lockdown in reducing the incidence of COVID-19. Methods. Daily cases of COVID-19 that occurred in China which were registered between January 12th and March 30th, 2020, were extracted from the Johns Hopkins CSSE team COVID-19 ArcGIS® dashboards. Daily cases reported were used as data points in the series. Two interrupted series models were run: one with an interruption point of 23 January 2020 (model 1) and the other with a 14-day deferred interruption point of 6th February (model 2). For both models, the magnitude of change (before and after) and linear trend analyses were measured, and β-coefficients reported with 95% confidence interval (CI) for the precision. Results. Seventy-eight data points were used in the analysis. There was an 11% versus a 163% increase in daily cases in models 1 and 2, respectively, in the preintervention periods ( p ≤ 0.001 ). Comparing the period immediately following the intervention points to the counterfactual, there was a daily increase of 2,746% ( p < 0.001 ) versus a decline of 207% ( p = 0.802 ) in model 2. However, in both scenarios, there was a statistically significant drop in the daily cases predicted for this data and beyond when comparing the preintervention periods and postintervention periods ( p < 0.001 ). Conclusion. There was a significant decrease the COVID-19 daily cases reported in China following the institution of a lockdown, and therefore, lockdown may be used to curtail the burden of COVID-19.

Background The recently emerged novel coronavirus, “severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2)”, caused a highly contagious disease called coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). It has severely damaged the world's most developed countries and has turned into a major threat for low‐ and middle‐income countries. Since its emergence in late 2019, medical interventions have been substantial, and most countries relied on public health measures collectively known as nonpharmaceutical interventions. Aims To centralize the accumulative knowledge on non‐pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) against COVID‐19 for each country under one worldwide consortium. Methods International COVID‐19 Research Network collaborators developed a cross‐sectional online‐survey to assess the implications of NPIs and sanitary supply on incidence and mortality of COVID‐19. Survey was conducted between January 1 and February 1, 2021, and participants from 92 countries/territories completed it. The association between NPIs, sanitation supplies and incidence and mortality were examined by multivariate regression, with log‐transformed value of population as an offset value. Results Majority of countries/territories applied several preventive strategies including social distancing (100.0%), quarantine (100.0%), isolation (98.9%), and school closure (97.8%). Individual‐level preventive measures such as personal hygiene (100.0%) and wearing facial mask (94.6% at hospital; 93.5% at mass transportation; 91.3% in mass gathering facilities) were also frequently applied. Quarantine at a designated place was negatively associated with incidence and mortality compared to home quarantine. Isolation at a designated place was also associated with reduced mortality compared to home isolation. Recommendations to use sanitizer for personal hygiene reduced incidence compared to recommendation to use soap did. Deprivation of mask was associated with increased incidence. Higher incidence and mortality were found in countries/territories with higher economic level. Mask deprivation was pervasive regardless of economic level. Conclusion NPIs against COVID‐19 such as using sanitizer, quarantine, and isolation can decrease incidence and mortality of COVID‐19. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.