Despite notable scientific and medical advances, broader political, socioeconomic and behavioural factors continue to undercut the response to the COVID-19 pandemic1,2. Here we convened, as part of this Delphi study, a diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 academic, health, non-governmental organization, government and other experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries and territories to recommend specific actions to end this persistent global threat to public health. The panel developed a set of 41 consensus statements and 57 recommendations to governments, health systems, industry and other key stakeholders across six domains: communication; health systems; vaccination; prevention; treatment and care; and inequities. In the wake of nearly three years of fragmented global and national responses, it is instructive to note that three of the highest-ranked recommendations call for the adoption of whole-of-society and whole-of-government approaches1, while maintaining proven prevention measures using a vaccines-plus approach2 that employs a range of public health and financial support measures to complement vaccination. Other recommendations with at least 99% combined agreement advise governments and other stakeholders to improve communication, rebuild public trust and engage communities3 in the management of pandemic responses. The findings of the study, which have been further endorsed by 184 organizations globally, include points of unanimous agreement, as well as six recommendations with >5% disagreement, that provide health and social policy actions to address inadequacies in the pandemic response and help to bring this public health threat to an end.

No abstract

IntroductionIn remote Aboriginal communities in Australia, scabies affects 7 out of 10 children before their first birthday. This is more than six times the rate seen in the rest of the developed world. Scabies infestation is frequently complicated by bacterial infection, leading to the development of skin sores and other more serious consequences, such as septicaemia and chronic heart and kidney diseases. Tea tree oil (TTO) has been used as an antimicrobial agent for several decades with proven clinical efficacy. Preclinical investigations have demonstrated superior scabicidal properties of TTO compared with widely used scabicidal agents, such as permethrin 5% cream and ivermectin. However, current data are insufficient to warrant a broad recommendation for its use for the management of scabies because previous studies were small or limited to in vitro observations.Methods and analysisA pragmatic first trial will examine the clinical efficacy of a simple and low-cost TTO treatment against paediatric scabies and the prevention of associated secondary bacterial infections, with 1:1 randomisation of 200 participants (Aboriginal children, aged 5–16 years and living in remote Australia) into active control (permethrin 5% cream) and treatment (5% TTO gel) groups. The primary outcome for the study is clinical cure (complete resolution). Secondary outcome measures will include relief of symptoms, recurrence rate, adverse effects, adherence to treatment regimen and patient acceptability.Ethics and disseminationThe project has received approvals from the University of Canberra Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC 16-133), Wurli-Wurlinjang Health Service Indigenous subcommittee and the Aboriginal Medical Services Alliance Northern Territory reference group. The results of this study will be published in core scientific publications, with extensive knowledge exchange activities with non-academic audiences throughout the duration of the project.Trial registrationACTRN12617000902392; Pre-results.

We acknowledge the importance of the individual language and naming conventions of different Indigenous nations. This statement has used the term Indigenous peoples as defined by the United Nations. However, we respect the right of nations to determine, define and name their cultural identity as and when they choose.

AimTo systematically review the literature to investigate the role of the hospital pharmacist and the services provided for Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people.MethodsA systematic literature review was performed following a search from inception to present of MEDLINE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA), EMBASE, Scopus and Pubmed, in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. All forms of published literature were included. Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people and hospital pharmacists/pharmacy department services in Australia were the populations included.Results1592 studies were identified. After removal of duplicates and application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, 16 papers underwent full text review, with 7 papers included in the final review. No high‐level evidence articles were found. Joanna Briggs Institute Levels of Evidence for meaningfulness were low. Settings were varied and included rural, remote and urban sites. Five articles were allocated a Donabedian Model level where the structure was described. Two papers described structure and process. None described outcomes. Hospital pharmacy services included development of models for patient care, partnerships and resource sharing in rural and remote areas and ensuring continuity of care. ConclusionSystematic review of the literature to determine the role of hospital pharmacy services for Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people produced limited publications for review. From these, roles identified included: development of models for patient care, partnerships and resource sharing in rural and remote areas and ensuring continuity of care. Future research and publication of work by hospital pharmacists nurturing and developing relationships in partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities is encouraged.