BackgroundHealthcare waste is produced from various therapeutic procedures performed in hospitals, such as chemotherapy, dialysis, surgery, delivery, resection of gangrenous organs, autopsy, biopsy, injections, etc. These result in the production of non-hazardous waste (75–95%) and hazardous waste (10–25%), such as sharps, infectious, chemical, pharmaceutical, radioactive waste, and pressurized containers (e.g., inhaler cans). Improper healthcare waste management may lead to the transmission of hepatitis B, Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.MethodsThis evaluation of waste management practices was carried out at gynaecology, obstetrics, paediatrics, medicine and orthopaedics wards at Government of Nepal Civil Service Hospital, Kathmandu from February 12 to October 15, 2013, with the permission from healthcare waste management committee at the hospital. The Individualized Rapid Assessment tool (IRAT), developed by the United Nations Development Program Global Environment Facility project, was used to collect pre-interventional and post-interventional performance scores concerning waste management. The healthcare waste management committee was formed of representing various departments. The study included responses from focal nurses and physicians from the gynaecology, obstetrics, paediatrics, medicine and orthopaedics wards, and waste handlers during the study period. Data included average scores from 40 responders. Scores were based on compliance with the IRAT.ResultsThe waste management policy and standard operating procedure were developed after interventions, and they were consistent with the national and international laws and regulations. The committee developed a plan for recycling or waste minimization. Health professionals, such as doctors, nurses and waste handlers, were trained on waste management practices. The programs included segregation, collection, handling, transportation, treatment and disposal of waste, as well as occupational health and safety issues. The committee developed a plan for treatment and disposal of chemical and pharmaceutical waste. Pretest and posttest evaluation scores were 26% and 86% respectively.ConclusionsDuring the pre-intervention period, the hospital had no HCWM Committee, policy, standard operating procedure or proper color coding system for waste segregation, collection, transportation and storage and the specific well-trained waste handlers. Doctors, nurses and waste handlers were trained on HCWM practices, after interventions. Significant improvements were observed between the pre- and post-intervention periods.

Rationale for Review Heterologous prime-boost doses of COVID-19 vaccines (‘mix-and-match’ approach) are being studied to test for the effectiveness of Oxford (AZD1222), Pfizer (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273) and Novavax (NVX-CoV2373) vaccines for COVID in ‘Com-Cov2 trial’ in UK, and that of Oxford and Pfizer vaccines in ‘CombivacS trial’ in Spain. Later, other heterologous combinatios of CoronaVac (DB15806), Janssen (JNJ-78436735), CanSino (AD5-nCOV), and other were also being trialed to explore their effectiveness. Previously, such a strategy was deployed for HIV, Ebola virus, malaria, tuberculosis, influenza, and hepatitis B to develop the artificial acquired active immunity. The present review explores the science behind such an approach for candidate COVID-19 vaccines developed using eleven different platforms approved by the World Health Organization. Key findings The candidate vaccines’ pharmaceutical parameters (e.g. platforms, number needed to vaccinate and intervals, adjuvanted status, excipients and preservatives added, efficacy and effectiveness, vaccine adverse events, and boosters), and clinical aspects must be analysed for the mix-and-match approach. Heterologous prime-boost trials showed safety, effectiveness, higher systemic reactogenicity, well tolerability with improved immunogenicity, and flexibility profiles for future vaccinations, especially during acute and global shortages, compared to the homologous counterparts. Conclusions/recommendations. Still, large controlled trials are warranted to address challenging variants of concerns including Omicron and other, and to generalize the effectiveness of the approach in regular as well as emergency use during vaccine scarcity.

BackgroundCounseling has a significant role in improving knowledge, attitude and practice outcomes of pregnant women towards medication use. Proper counseling thus could be beneficial to prevent any medication related misadventure during pregnancy. The present study was aimed to assess the knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) of pregnant women towards their medications, to provide counseling regarding their understanding of medication use during pregnancy and evaluate the impacts of such counseling.MethodsPre- post interventional (counseling) study was conducted at Manipal Teaching Hospital, Nepal among pregnant women who presented with complication and were prescribed at least one medication. A total of 275 pregnant women were included in the study. A structured questionnaire was used to assess the knowledge, attitude and practice of pregnant women before and after counseling. The impacts of counseling were then evaluated using suitable statistical methods.ResultsOf the total participants 229 completed the post counseling survey. Majority of the participants were in the age group 20-24 (43.2%), primigravida (59.4%) and in third trimester (58.6%). Housewives comprised 61.1% of participants and majority had received a University degree (33.2%).The mean and median scores assessed before counseling showed that there was no significant difference in the KAP scores with respect to age, trimester and gravidity whereas KAP scores with respect to occupation and level of education were statistically significant. There was an increase in mean and median KAP scores after counseling and the impacts of counseling was found to be statistically significant (p = <0.001).ConclusionCounseling had a positive impact on knowledge, attitude and practice of pregnant women towards medication and thus it could be considered a suitable method to encourage safe medication during pregnancy.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12884-017-1316-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Financial relationships between healthcare professionals and pharmaceutical companies have historically caused conflicts of interest and unduly influenced patient care. However, little was known about such relationship and its effect in clinical practice among specialists in respiratory medicine. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Based on the retrospective analysis of payment data made available by all 92 pharmaceutical companies in Japan, this study evaluated the magnitude and trend of financial relationships between all board-certified Japanese respiratory specialists and pharmaceutical companies between 2016 and 2019. Magnitude and prevalence of payments for specialists were analyzed descriptively. The payment trends were assessed using the generalized estimating equations for the payment per specialist and the number of specialists with payments. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Among all 7,114 respiratory specialists certified as of August 2021, 4,413 (62.0%) received a total of USD 53,547,391 and 74,195 counts from 72 (78.3%) pharmaceutical companies between 2016 and 2019. The median (interquartile range) 4-year combined payment values per specialist were USD 2,210 (USD 715–8,178). At maximum, one specialist received USD 495,332 personal payments over the 4 years. Both payments per specialist and number of specialists with payments significantly increased during the 4-year period, with 7.8% (95% CI: 5.5–9.8; <i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.001) in payments and 1.5% (95% CI: 0.61–2.4; <i>p</i> = 0.001) in number of specialists with payments, respectively. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> The majority of respiratory specialists had increasingly received more personal payments from pharmaceutical companies for the reimbursement of lecturing, consulting, and writing between 2016 and 2019. These increasing financial relationships with pharmaceutical companies might cause conflicts of interest among respiratory physicians.