Introduction There is no known safe level of secondhand smoke exposure; yet, less than 30% of the global population is covered by comprehensive smoke-free policies as of 2016 and there are few smoke-free policies in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). This study examines the support for smoke-free public places in SSA and delineates their correlates. Methods Data collected through the Global Adult Tobacco Survey (2012–2017) were analyzed using SAS for descriptive and multivariable analyses, with a significance level set at p < .05. Results No SSA country had comprehensive smoke-free policies, defined as a prohibition of smoking in eight public places. In the four countries whose Global Adult Tobacco Survey data were analyzed (Nigeria, Cameroon, Kenya, and Uganda), support for the prohibition of smoking in public places was over 90% in all eight public places except bars. Support for smoking prohibition in bars was 65.8%, 81.1%, 81.4%, and 91.0% in Nigeria, Cameroon, Kenya, and Uganda, respectively. Factors associated with support for smoke-free bars differed across the four countries, but in all countries, current smokers had decreased odds of support for smoke-free bars. Knowledge of secondhand smoke harm and living in smoke-free homes were associated with increased odds of support for smoke-free bars in all countries except Kenya. Conclusion The high support for smoke-free public places should inform the efforts of the public health community and policymakers in these four SSA countries toward meeting their obligations of Article 8 of the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC). Implications Much of the population in SSA is not protected by comprehensive smoke-free policies. It was found that the overwhelming majority of adults in four large countries in SSA support the prohibition of smoking in public places and that knowledge of the health dangers of smoking and exposure to secondhand smoke and home smoking rules increased support for the prohibition. High support for the prohibition of smoking in these four SSA countries suggests tobacco control proponents should advocate for comprehensive smoke-free policies.

Artesunate-amodiaquine is among the most widely available artemisinin combination therapy used as treatment regimen for uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria. Our aim was to evaluate clinical routine markers of liver and renal functions, lipid profile levels and lipid peroxidation status in a female mammalian rat model. This was an attempt to simulate a scenario where the drugs are taken without malarial parasite infection, which is a common practice in settings where drug misuse is a common practice. Twenty female Wistar rats were randomly divided into four study groups of five animals each. Group 1 (control) received distilled water, group 2 was exposed to artesunate [2 mg/kg body weight (b.w.)], group 3 was administered with amodiaquine (6.12 mg/kg b.w.) and group 4 was co-administered with artesunate (2 mg/kg b.w.) and amodiaquine (6.12 mg/kg b.w.) for 3 days. At the end of the treatment period, animals were fasted overnight and sacrificed. Markers of liver and renal functions and lipid profile indices were evaluated in the plasma, whereas lipid peroxidation status, GSH concentration and G6PD activity were assessed in the erythrocytes. The results showed that the co-administration of artesunate and amodiaquine altered liver function markers and lipid profile indices. The drugs also induced lipid peroxidation as evidenced by the elevated level of oxidative stress marker malondialdehyde (p < 0.05). We recommend therefore that the drugs should be taken with prescription only with clinical evidence of malarial parasite infection.

Bottom-up processes, starting at the local government level, are valuable for more-stringent tobacco control measures. The existence of industry-backed state-level tobacco control preemption in states has impeded policy progress within the state and localities/communities. A national public health goal under Healthy People 2020 is to eliminate state-level preemption across the United States. This study explored individual-level perceptions of the impact of state-level preemption in Appalachian Tennessee—a high-smoking, low-income region. During 2015–2016, a community-engagement project to develop a Population Health Improvement Plan (PHIP) involving over 200 stakeholders and 90 organizations was conducted in Appalachian Tennessee to identify policies/programs to address tobacco use. Using a multifaceted framework approach that focused on prevention, protection, and cessation, interviews and meeting discussions were audio-recorded and transcribed. Content analysis using NVivo 11 was conducted to generate themes. Although the central focus of the PHIP was not preemption, the issue emerged naturally in the discussions as a major concern among participants. Cultural and normative factors in Appalachian Tennessee were identified as key rationales for participants’ aversion to state preemption. Thus, repealing preemption would facilitate culturally tailored and region-specific policies/programs to the high tobacco use among Appalachian Tennessee communities where statewide/nationwide policies/programs have not had the intended impacts.

No abstract

The disproportionate burden of cardiovascular diseases (CVD) and associated risk factors continues to exist in the Central Appalachian Region (CAR) of the United States. Previous studies to gather data about patient-centered care for CVD in the region were conducted through focus group discussions. There have not been any studies that used a collaborative framework where patients, providers, and community stakeholders were engaged as panelists. The objective of this study was to identify patient-centered research priorities for CVD in the CAR. We used a modified Delphi approach to administer questionnaires to forty-two stakeholder experts in six states representing the CAR between the fall of 2018 and the summer of 2019. Their responses were analyzed for rankings and derived priorities by research gaps. Six of the fifteen research priorities identified were patient-centered. These patient-centered priorities included shorter wait times for appointments; educating patients at their level; empowering patients to take responsibility for their health; access to quality providers; heart disease specialists for rural areas; and lifestyle changes. The participants’ commitments to identify patient-centered research priorities indicate the potential to engage in community-based collaboration to address the burden of CVD in the CAR.