Background Air pollution is one of the world’s leading mortality risk factors contributing to seven million deaths annually. COVID-19 pandemic has claimed about one million deaths in less than a year. However, it is unclear whether exposure to acute and chronic air pollution influences the COVID-19 epidemiologic curve. Methods We searched for relevant studies listed in six electronic databases between December 2019 and September 2020. We applied no language or publication status limits. Studies presented as original articles, studies that assessed risk, incidence, prevalence, or lethality of COVID-19 in relation with exposure to either short-term or long-term exposure to ambient air pollution were included. All patients regardless of age, sex and location diagnosed as having COVID-19 of any severity were taken into consideration. We synthesised results using harvest plots based on effect direction. Results Included studies were cross-sectional (n = 10), retrospective cohorts (n = 9), ecological (n = 6 of which two were time-series) and hypothesis (n = 1). Of these studies, 52 and 48% assessed the effect of short-term and long-term pollutant exposure, respectively and one evaluated both. Pollutants mostly studied were PM2.5 (64%), NO2 (50%), PM10 (43%) and O3 (29%) for acute effects and PM2.5 (85%), NO2 (39%) and O3 (23%) then PM10 (15%) for chronic effects. Most assessed COVID-19 outcomes were incidence and mortality rate. Acutely, pollutants independently associated with COVID-19 incidence and mortality were first PM2.5 then PM10, NO2 and O3 (only for incident cases). Chronically, similar relationships were found for PM2.5 and NO2. High overall risk of bias judgments (86 and 39% in short-term and long-term exposure studies, respectively) was predominantly due to a failure to adjust aggregated data for important confounders, and to a lesser extent because of a lack of comparative analysis. Conclusion The body of evidence indicates that both acute and chronic exposure to air pollution can affect COVID-19 epidemiology. The evidence is unclear for acute exposure due to a higher level of bias in existing studies as compared to moderate evidence with chronic exposure. Public health interventions that help minimize anthropogenic pollutant source and socio-economic injustice/disparities may reduce the planetary threat posed by both COVID-19 and air pollution pandemics.

Background. Public markets were exempted from the restrictive regulations instituted to limit the rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). In the early stage of the pandemic, we assessed people’s knowledge, attitudes, and behavior on public markets towards COVID-19. Methods. We conducted a cross-sectional study from 16 to 29 April 2020 among sellers and customers frequenting the food sections of ten public markets in three large cities (Kolwezi, Likasi, and Lubumbashi) and one small town (Lwambo) of the former Katanga province. We administered a questionnaire on knowledge (about clinical characteristics, transmission and prevention) and on attitudes in relation to COVID-19. We also observed prevailing practices (hand-washing and mask-wearing). Results: Of the 347 included participants (83% women, 83% sellers), most had low socioeconomic status and a low level of education. Only 30% of participants had correct knowledge of COVID-19. The majority of the respondents (88%) showed no confidence in the government’s ability to manage the upcoming pandemic crisis. Nearly all respondents (98%) were concerned about the associated increase in food insecurity. Preventive practices were rarely in place. Conclusion: For an effective implementation of measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in Africa, appropriate health education programs to improve knowledge and attitudes are warranted among the population frequenting public markets.

Background: The consumption of energy drinks (EDs) is increasing in the general population, but little is known about the consumption of EDs among pupils in Africa. This study was designed to assess the consumption of EDs among pupils between 10 and 17 years of age and to assess average caffeine concentrations contained in EDs sold in Lubumbashi. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey in five schools using a standardised questionnaire taken face-to-face. Samples of locally purchased EDs were analysed by High Performance Liquid Chromatography with Ultra-Violet spectrometry (HPLC-UV). Results: Of 338 pupils (54% girls), 63% reported having consumed at least one ED in the last week and 34% drank at least one ED a day. The cheapest ED was the most widely consumed. Among pupils having consumed at least one ED in the last week, 79% reported consuming it for refreshment and 15% to get energy. For those who reported not consuming EDs, 40% reported that their parents or teachers forbade them to drink EDs. Some (14%) teenagers, mainly boys, mixed ED with alcohol. The concentrations of caffeine measured in twelve brands of EDs ranged from 7.6 to 29.4 mg/100 mL (median 23.3), giving caffeine contents of 37.5 to 160 mg (median 90 mg) per can or bottle. The estimated daily intake of caffeine through EDs was between 51.3 mg and 441.3 mg among those consuming EDs regularly. Conclusion: Our study convincingly demonstrates that caffeine-containing EDs are not only consumed by youngsters living in affluent societies. We documented widespread regular consumption of EDs among (pre-)adolescent schoolchildren living in Lubumbashi, a large city of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). In view of the global market expansion of caffeinated EDs, it is reasonable to suspect that similar surveys in other urban areas of sub-Saharan Africa would yield similar findings. Pricing and advertising regulations and education on EDs are necessary to limit the regular consumption of EDs among adolescents.

No abstract

No abstract