A new commercial hub device designed to minimise catheter-related infections was evaluated in a prospective, randomised trial in the intensive care and surgical units of the Hospital de Tortosa Verge de la Cinta in patients in whom the central venous catheters were expected to remain indwelling for at least 7 days. The assessments conducted at catheter withdrawal included cultures of the skin at the catheter site and cultures of the catheter tip and the catheter hubs; moreover, in cases of suspected catheter-related sepsis, samples of peripheral blood and infusion solutions were also cultured. Of the 130 catheters evaluated, 26 (20%) were withdrawn because of suspected catheter-related sepsis; 10 (15%) were in the control group and 16 (24%) in the new product group. Catheter-related sepsis was diagnosed in nine patients, six of whom were in the new product group and three in the control group; all infections in the former group and only one in the latter group were caused by the catheter connection. The rates of catheter hub colonisation (10 cfu) and catheter colonisation (15 cfu in semiquantitative culture and/or >1,000 cfu in quantitative culture) of hub origin were not significantly different between the groups (15 cases in the control group vs. 20 cases in the new product group, and 5 cases in the control group vs. 11 cases in the new product group, respectively). The data indicate that the use of the new catheter hub device is no more effective in preventing catheter-related infection than standard good clinical procedures.

Background Detection and management of neglected tropical diseases such as cutaneous leishmaniasis present unmet challenges stemming from their prevalence in remote, rural, resource constrained areas having limited access to health services. These challenges are frequently compounded by armed conflict or illicit extractive industries. The use of mobile health technologies has shown promise in such settings, yet data on outcomes in the field remain scarce. Methods We adapted a validated prediction rule for the presumptive diagnosis of CL to create a mobile application for use by community health volunteers. We used human-centered design practices and agile development for app iteration. We tested the application in three rural areas where cutaneous leishmaniasis is endemic and an urban setting where patients seek medical attention in the municipality of Tumaco, Colombia. The application was assessed for usability, sensitivity and inter-rater reliability (kappa) when used by community health volunteers (CHV), health workers and a general practitioner, study physician. Results The application was readily used and understood. Among 122 screened cases with cutaneous ulcers, sensitivity to detect parasitologically proven CL was >95%. The proportion of participants with parasitologically confirmed CL was high (88%), precluding evaluation of specificity, and driving a high level of crude agreement between the app and parasitological diagnosis. The chance-adjusted agreement (kappa) varied across the components of the risk score. Time to diagnosis was reduced significantly, from 8 to 4 weeks on average when CHV conducted active case detection using the application, compared to passive case detection by health facility-based personnel. Conclusions Translating a validated prediction rule to a mHealth technology has shown the potential to improve the capacity of community health workers and healthcare personnel to provide opportune care, and access to health services for underserved populations. These findings support the use of mHealth tools for NTD research and healthcare.

Introduction There is insufficient evidence supporting the use of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for syphilis in people living with HIV (PLWH). We evaluated the diagnostic performance of two commercially available RDTs (Bioline and Determine) in PLWH in Cali, Colombia. Methods A cross-sectional field validation study on consecutive adults with confirmed HIV diagnosis attending three outpatient clinics. Both RDTs were performed on capillary blood (CB), obtained by finger prick, and sera, by venipuncture. A combination of treponemal enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and Treponema pallidum haemagglutination assay (TPHA) on serum samples was the reference standard. Rapid plasma reagin (RPR) and clinical criteria were added to define active syphilis. Sensitivity and specificity, predictive values and likelihood ratios (LR) of RDTs were estimated with their corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Stratified analyses by sample type, patient characteristics, non-treponemal titers, operator and re-training were performed. Results 244 PLWH were enrolled, of whom 112 (46%) had positive treponemal reference tests and 26/234 (11.1%) had active syphilis. The sensitivities of Bioline on CB and sera were similar (96.4% vs 94.6%, p = 0.6). In contrast, Determine had a lower sensitivity on CB than sera (87.5% vs 99.1%, p<0.001). Sensitivities were lower in PLWH not receiving ART (Bioline 87.1% and Determine 64.5%, p<0.001) and for one of the operators (Bioline 85% and Determine 60%, p<0.001). Specificities of the RDTs were > 95% in most analyses. Predictive values were 90% or higher. For active syphilis, the RDTs showed a similar performance pattern but with decreased specificities. Conclusion The studied RDTs have an excellent performance in PLWH to screen for syphilis and potentially for active syphilis, yet Determine performs better on sera than CB. Patient characteristics and potential difficulties operators may face in acquiring enough blood volume from finger pricks should be considered for the implementation and the interpretation of RDTs.

Cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) primarily affects people in remote settings with limited access to health services. mHealth tools offer an opportunity to overcome knowledge gaps about clinical response to treatment. We evaluated the validity of the Guaral+ST mobile application for the remote assessment of therapeutic response in patients with CL, through photographs of lesions captured with the app by community health volunteers. Patients with confirmed CL were followed at weeks 13 and 26 after completion of treatment to assess therapeutic response in two clinical settings in southwest Colombia. Direct evaluation of lesions performed by an experienced physician was considered the reference standard. Photographs of lesions taken by CHV or nurse assistants with the mobile app, were independently evaluated by three physicians to define clinical response. A summary measure of clinical outcome defined by the three physicians was considered the index test. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were estimated. Interrater reliability (kappa) was calculated. Among 53 participants with CL who had at least one follow-up visit, the sensitivity of therapeutic response evaluation through photographs taken with the Guaral+ST app, compared with direct evaluation by an expert physician, had high validity with sensitivity of 100% (95% confidence interval: 80.5–100%) and specificity of 97.2% (95% confidence interval: 85.5–99.9%). The chance-adjusted agreement (κ) was > 0.8, which is conventionally characterized as almost perfect. The high accuracy of the remote evaluation of photographs for the assessment of therapeutic response supports the use of mHealth tools for improving access to treatment follow-up for CL.