Clinical questionWhat is the role of drug interventions in the treatment and prevention of covid-19?RecommendationsThe first version on this living guidance focuses on corticosteroids. It contains a strong recommendation for systemic corticosteroids in patients with severe and critical covid-19, and a weak or conditional recommendation against systemic corticosteroids in patients with non-severe covid-19. Corticosteroids are inexpensive and are on the World Health Organisation list of essential medicines.Howthis guideline was created This guideline reflects an innovative collaboration between the WHO and the MAGIC Evidence Ecosystem Foundation, driven by an urgent need for global collaboration to provide trustworthy and living covid-19 guidance. A standing international panel of content experts, patients, clinicians, and methodologists, free from relevant conflicts of interest, produce recommendations for clinical practice. The panel follows standards, methods, processes, and platforms for trustworthy guideline development using the GRADE approach. We apply an individual patient perspective while considering contextual factors (that is, resources, feasibility, acceptability, equity) for countries and healthcare systems.The evidenceA living systematic review and network meta-analysis, supported by a prospective meta-analysis, with data from eight randomised trials (7184 participants) found that systemic corticosteroids probably reduce 28 day mortality in patients with critical covid-19 (moderate certainty evidence; 87 fewer deaths per 1000 patients (95% confidence interval 124 fewer to 41 fewer)), and also in those with severe disease (moderate certainty evidence; 67 fewer deaths per 1000 patients (100 fewer to 27 fewer)). In contrast, systemic corticosteroids may increase the risk of death in patients without severe covid-19 (low certainty evidence; absolute effect estimate 39 more per 1000 patients, (12 fewer to 107 more)). Systemic corticosteroids probably reduce the need for invasive mechanical ventilation, and harms are likely to be minor (indirect evidence).Understanding the recommendationsThe panel made a strong recommendation for use of corticosteroids in severe and critical covid-19 because there is a lower risk of death among people treated with systemic corticosteroids (moderate certainty evidence), and they believe that all or almost all fully informed patients with severe and critical covid-19 would choose this treatment. In contrast, the panel concluded that patients with non-severe covid-19 would decline this treatment because they would be unlikely to benefit and may be harmed. Moreover, taking both a public health and a patient perspective, the panel warned that indiscriminate use of any therapy for covid-19 would potentially rapidly deplete global resources and deprive patients who may benefit from it most as potentially lifesaving therapy.UpdatesThis is a living guideline. Work is under way to evaluate other interventions. New recommendations will be published as updates to this guideline.Readers noteThis is version 1 of the living guideline, published on 4 September (BMJ 2020;370:m3379) version 1. Updates will be labelled as version 2, 3 etc. When citing this article, please cite the version number.SubmittedAugust 28AcceptedAugust 31

Clinical question What is the role of drugs in preventing covid-19? Why does this matter? There is widespread interest in whether drug interventions can be used for the prevention of covid-19, but there is uncertainty about which drugs, if any, are effective. The first version of this living guideline focuses on the evidence for hydroxychloroquine. Subsequent updates will cover other drugs being investigated for their role in the prevention of covid-19. Recommendation The guideline development panel made a strong recommendation against the use of hydroxychloroquine for individuals who do not have covid-19 (high certainty). How this guideline was created This living guideline is from the World Health Organization (WHO) and provides up to date covid-19 guidance to inform policy and practice worldwide. Magic Evidence Ecosystem Foundation (MAGIC) provided methodological support. A living systematic review with network analysis informed the recommendations. An international guideline development panel of content experts, clinicians, patients, an ethicist and methodologists produced recommendations following standards for trustworthy guideline development using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Understanding the new recommendation The linked systematic review and network meta-analysis (6 trials and 6059 participants) found that hydroxychloroquine had a small or no effect on mortality and admission to hospital (high certainty evidence). There was a small or no effect on laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (moderate certainty evidence) but probably increased adverse events leading to discontinuation (moderate certainty evidence). The panel judged that almost all people would not consider this drug worthwhile. In addition, the panel decided that contextual factors such as resources, feasibility, acceptability, and equity for countries and healthcare systems were unlikely to alter the recommendation. The panel considers that this drug is no longer a research priority and that resources should rather be oriented to evaluate other more promising drugs to prevent covid-19. Updates This is a living guideline. New recommendations will be published in this article and signposted by update notices to this guideline. Readers note This is the first version of the living guideline for drugs to prevent covid-19. It complements the WHO living guideline on drugs to treat covid-19. When citing this article, please consider adding the update number and date of access for clarity.

ObjectiveTo gain an understanding of the variation in available resources and clinical practices between neonatal units (NNUs) in the low-income and middle-income country (LMIC) setting to inform the design of an observational study on the burden of unit-level antimicrobial resistance (AMR).DesignA web-based survey using a REDCap database was circulated to NNUs participating in the Neonatal AMR research network. The survey included questions about NNU funding structure, size, admission rates, access to supportive therapies, empirical antimicrobial guidelines and period prevalence of neonatal blood culture isolates and their resistance patterns.Setting39 NNUs from 12 countries.PatientsAny neonate admitted to one of the participating NNUs.InterventionsThis was an observational cohort study.ResultsThe number of live births per unit ranged from 513 to 27 700 over the 12-month study period, with the number of neonatal cots ranging from 12 to 110. The proportion of preterm admissions <32 weeks ranged from 0% to 19%, and the majority of units (26/39, 66%) use Essential Medicines List ‘Access’ antimicrobials as their first-line treatment in neonatal sepsis. Cephalosporin resistance rates in Gram-negative isolates ranged from 26% to 84%, and carbapenem resistance rates ranged from 0% to 81%. Glycopeptide resistance rates among Gram-positive isolates ranged from 0% to 45%.ConclusionAMR is already a significant issue in NNUs worldwide. The apparent burden of AMR in a given NNU in the LMIC setting can be influenced by a range of factors which will vary substantially between NNUs. These variations must be considered when designing interventions to improve neonatal mortality globally.

The viability of a fungal formulation using the nematode-trapping fungus Duddingtonia flagrans was assessed for the biological control of horse cyathostomin. Two groups (fungus-treated and control without fungus treatment), consisting of eight crossbred mares (3-18 years of age) were fed on Cynodon sp. pasture naturally infected with equine cyathostome larvae. Each animal of the treated group received oral doses of sodium alginate mycelial pellets (1g/(10 kg live weight week)), during 6 months. Significant reduction (p<0.01) in the number of eggs per gram of feces and coprocultures was found for animals of the fungus-treated group compared with the control group. There was difference (p<0.01) of 78.5% reduction in herbage samples collected up to (0-20 cm) between the fungus-treated group and the control group, during the experimental period (May-October). Difference of 82.5% (p<0.01) was found between the fungus-treated group and the control group in the sampling distance (20-40 cm) from fecal pats. During the last 3 months of the experimental period (August, September and October), fungus-treated mares had significant weight gain (p<0.01) compared with the control group, an increment of 38 kg. The treatment with sodium alginate pellets containing the nematode-trapping fungus D. flagrans reduced cyathostomin in tropical southeastern Brazil and could be an effective tool for biological control of this parasitic nematode in horses.

objectives. To describe trends in the epidemiology of healthcare-associated Infections (HAIs) in pediatric/neonatal intensive care units (ICUs) and to evaluate risk factors and impact of multidrug resistance in children admitted to ICUs.design. Multicenter, retrospective, cohort study with a nested case-control study conducted from January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2014.setting. Three tertiary care pediatric hospitals in Italy and Brazil with a total of 103 ICU beds.patients. Inclusion criteria were admission to ICU during the study period, age at onset less than 18 years, and microbiologically confirmed HAI.results. A total of 538 HAIs in 454 children were included; 93.3% of patients had comorbidities. Bloodstream infections were the leading pattern (45.4%). The cumulative incidence of HAI was 3.6/100 ICU admissions and the crude 30-day fatality rate was 5.7/1,000 admissions. The most frequently isolated pathogens were Enterobacteriaceae, followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus. Forty-four percent of isolates were multidrug-resistant (MDR). Two multivariate logistic regressions were performed. Factors independently associated with an MDR-HAI were country, previous antibiotics, transplantation, major surgery, and colonization by an MDR strain. Factors independently associated with 30-day case fatality were country, previous transplantation, fungal infection, bloodstream infection, lower respiratory tract infection, and infection caused by MDR strains.conclusions. Infection control and prevention can limit the spread of MDR strains and improve outcomes. Targeted surveillance programs collecting neonatal and pediatric HAI/bloodstream infection data and outcomes would allow global benchmarking. The next step is to identify methods to monitor key HAIs and integrate these into affordable intervention programs. 2016;37:1302-1309 Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) are one of the most frequent adverse events affecting children admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol1,2 Exposure to invasive devices and procedures, immune suppression, and underlying conditions are considered as main determinants of patients' increased susceptibility.3,4 The impact of multidrug-resistant (MDR) organisms in pediatrics is increasing globally. [5][6][7] It is assumed that infections caused by MDR bacteria will have a worse prognosis because of the delay in the administration of appropriate therapy. However, it is difficult to estimate the clinical impact of MDR-HAI in children.Previous literature has shown conflicting results about the impact of different underlying risk factors on the clinical outcome of patients with HAI admitted to ICUs. There is no clear independent correlation between antimicrobial resistance and patients' mortality. [8][9][10][11] Clarifying the relationship between patient risk factors and pediatric HAI mortality could allow improved targeting of interventions on the patients most at risk of adverse outcome. The aims of this study were to describe trends i...