Background: Although comprehensive public health measures such as mass quarantine have been taken internationally, this has generally been ineffective, leading to a high infection and mortality rate. Despite the fact that the COVID-19 pandemic has been downgraded to epidemic status in many countries, the real number of infections is unknown, particularly in low-income countries. However, precision shielding is used in COVID-19 management, and requires estimates of mass infection in key groups. As a result, rapid tests for the virus could be a useful screening tool for asymptomatic virus shedders who are about to come into contact with sensitive groups. In Africa and other low- and middle-income countries there is high rate of COVID-19 under-diagnosis, due to the high cost of molecular assays. Exploring alternate assays to the reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for COVID-19 diagnosis is highly warranted. Aim: This review explored the feasibility of using alternate molecular, rapid antigen, and serological diagnostic assays to accurately and precisely diagnose COVID-19 in African populations, and to mitigate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RT-PCR diagnostic challenges in Africa. Method: We reviewed publications from internet sources and searched for appropriate documents available in English. This included Medline, Google Scholar, and Ajol. We included primary literature and some review articles that presented knowledge on the current trends on SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics in Africa and globally. Results: Based on our analysis, we highlight the utility of four different alternatives to RT-PCR. These include two isothermal nucleic acid amplification assays (loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) and recombinase polymerase amplification (RPA)), rapid antigen testing, and antibody testing for tackling difficulties posed by SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing in Africa. Conclusion: The economic burden associated COVID-19 mass testing by RT-PCR will be difficult for low-income nations to meet. We provide evidence for the utility and deployment of these alternate testing methods in Africa and other LMICs.
Background: This study determined awareness and occupational exposures to needlestick injuries (NSIs) and its associated risk factors among healthcare workers (HCWs) in the Kumasi Metropolis, Ghana. Materials and Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted among a total of 540 HCWs from three selected tertiary hospitals in the Kumasi Metropolis, Ghana. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire and analyzed. Results: All the study participants were aware of NSI and NSI-associated hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus, or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) acquisition. Most of them (63.6%) were trained on the safety use of sharps devices and the majority of them preferred safety-engineered devices (79.8%). A greater proportion of the participants has had HBV vaccination (85.9%). The prevalence of NSIs was approximately 47%. NSIs were highly ranked to occur at patient's bedside (28.5%) and clinical laboratories (24.6%). Handling of needles/sharp objects before usage (27.7%) and during usage (34.0%) ranked the second and first cause of NSIs among health workers, respectively. Compared with those with less than 5 years working experience, having worked at the health facility between 5 and 10 years (prevalence rate ration [PRR] = 2.07 [1.39–3.11], p = 0.0004), 11–15 years (PRR = 4.32 [2.14–8.73], p < 0.0001), and >15 years (PRR = 5.73 [2.40–13.70], p < 0.0001) were associated with increased events of NSI. Conclusion: Despite the high awareness of NSIs and its perceived risk of infection acquisition, the prevalence of NSIs was high among HCWs. There is, therefore, the need for employers to enforce the universal precaution practices, provide regular training and education, and ensure adherence of HCWs to safety precaution of needle usage disease.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.