The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has caused tremendous pressure on hospital infrastructures such as emergency rooms (ER) and outpatient departments. To avoid malfunctioning of critical services because of large numbers of potentially infected patients seeking consultation, we established a COVID-19 rapid response infrastructure (CRRI), which instantly restored ER functionality. The CRRI was also used for testing of hospital personnel, provided epidemiological data and was a highly effective response to increasing numbers of suspected COVID-19 cases.

Objective To quantify the potential impact of engaging religious leaders in promoting safe burial practices during the 2014–2016 Ebola virus disease outbreak in Sierra Leone. Methods We analysed population-based household survey data from 3540 respondents collected around the peak of the outbreak in Sierra Leone, December 2014. Respondents were asked if in the past month they had heard an imam or pastor say that people should not touch or wash a dead body. We used multilevel logistic regression modelling to examine if exposure to religious leaders’ messages was associated with protective burial intentions if a family member died at home and other Ebola protective behaviours. Findings Of the respondents, 3148 (89%) had been exposed to faith-based messages from religious leaders on safe Ebola burials and 369 (10%) were unexposed. Exposure to religious leaders’ messages was associated with a nearly twofold increase in the intention to accept safe alternatives to traditional burials and the intention to wait ≥ 2 days for burial teams (adjusted odds ratio, aOR: 1.69; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.23–2.31 and aOR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.38–2.44, respectively). Exposure to messages from religious leaders was also associated with avoidance of traditional burials and of contact with suspected Ebola patients (aOR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.14–1.89 and aOR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.27–2.13, respectively). Conclusion Public health messages promoted by religious leaders may have influenced safe burial behaviours during the Ebola outbreak in Sierra Leone. Engagement of religious leaders in risk communication should be prioritized during health emergencies in similar settings.

Background The objective of this study was to identify clinical risk factors for COVID-19 in a German outpatient fever clinic that allow distinction of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients from other patients with flu-like symptoms. Methods This is a retrospective, single-centre cohort study. Patients were included visiting the fever clinic from 4th of April 2020 to 15th of May 2020. Symptoms, comorbidities, and socio-demographic factors were recorded in a standardized fashion. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify risk factors of COVID-19, on the bases of those a model discrimination was assessed using area under the receiver operation curves (AUROC). Results The final analysis included 930 patients, of which 74 (8%) had COVID-19. Anosmia (OR 10.71; CI 6.07–18.9) and ageusia (OR 9.3; CI 5.36–16.12) were strongly associated with COVID-19. High-risk exposure (OR 12.20; CI 6.80–21.90), especially in the same household (OR 4.14; CI 1.28–13.33), was also correlated; the more household members, especially with flu-like symptoms, the higher the risk of COVID-19. Working in an essential workplace was also associated with COVID-19 (OR 2.35; CI 1.40–3.96), whereas smoking was inversely correlated (OR 0.19; CI 0.08–0.44). A model that considered risk factors like anosmia, ageusia, concomitant of symptomatic household members and smoking well discriminated COVID-19 patients from other patients with flu-like symptoms (AUROC 0.84). Conclusions We report a set of four readily available clinical parameters that allow the identification of high-risk individuals of COVID-19. Our study will not replace molecular testing but will help guide containment efforts while waiting for test results.

IntroductionCaring for an Ebola patient is a known risk factor for disease transmission. In Sierra Leone during the outbreak in 2014/2015, isolation of patients in specialised facilities was not always immediately available and caring for a relative at home was sometimes the only alternative. This study sought to assess population-level protective caregiving intentions, to understand how families cared for their sick and to explore perceived barriers and facilitators influencing caregiving behaviours.MethodsData from a nationwide household survey conducted in December 2014 were used to assess intended protective behaviours if caring for a family member with suspected Ebola. Their association with socio-demographic variables, Ebola-specific knowledge and risk perception was analysed using multilevel logistic regression. To put the results into context, semi-structured interviews with caregivers were conducted in Freetown.ResultsEbola-specific knowledge was positively associated with the intention to avoid touching a sick person and their bodily fluids (adjusted OR (AOR) 1.29; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.54) and the intention to take multiple protective measures (AOR 1.38; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.63). Compared with residing in the mostly urban Western Area, respondents from the initial epicentre of the outbreak (Eastern Province) had increased odds to avoid touching a sick person or their body fluids (AOR 4.74; 95% CI 2.55 to 8.81) and to take more than one protective measure (AOR 2.94; 95% CI 1.37 to 6.34). However, interviews revealed that caregivers, who were mostly aware of the risk of transmission and general protective measures, felt constrained by different contextual factors. Withholding care was not seen as an option and there was a perceived lack of practical advice.ConclusionsEbola outbreak responses need to take the sociocultural reality of caregiving and the availability of resources into account, offering adapted and acceptable practical advice. The necessity to care for a loved one when no alternatives exist should not be underestimated.

Purpose The incidence of bone and joint infections is increasing while their treatment remains a challenge. Although guidelines and recommendations exist, evidence is often lacking and treatment complicated by complex clinical presentations and therapeutic options. Interdisciplinary boards shown to improve management of other diseases, seem potentially helpful. We describe the establishment of an osteomyelitis board to show the existing demand for such a platform. Methods All patients discussed in the board for bone and joint infections between October 2014 and September 2020 were included in this retrospective study. Data were extracted from patient records and analyzed descriptively. Results A total of 851 requests related to 563 patients were discussed in the board during the study period. After a run-in period of 3 years, a stable number of cases (> 170/year) were discussed, submitted by nearly all hospital departments (22 of 25). Recommendations were mainly related to antibiotic treatment (43%) and to diagnostics (24%). Periprosthetic joint infections were the most frequent entity (33%), followed by native vertebral osteomyelitis and other osteomyelitis. In 3% of requests, suspected infection could be excluded, in 7% further diagnostics were recommended to confirm or rule out infection. Conclusions A multidisciplinary board for bone and joint infections was successfully established, potentially serving as a template for further boards. Recommendations were mainly related to antibiotic treatment and further diagnostics, highlighting the need for interdisciplinary discussion to individualize and optimize treatment plans based on guidelines. Further research in needed to evaluate impact on morbidity, mortality and costs.