Indirect implications of COVID-19 prevention strategies on non-communicable diseases

Abstract

Background: After its outbreak in China, the novel COronaVIrus Disease 19 is spreading across the globe. It is an emergency the world has never seen before. Main text: The attention of health systems is mainly focused on COronaVIrus Disease 19 patients and on the risk that intensive care units might be overwhelmed by the serious pulmonary complications. Different countries are also attempting to establish infection prevention and control strategies which proved effective in China where the outbreak was initially reported. We reflect on important lessons to be learnt from different countries. The effects that infection prevention and control strategies, such as social distancing or isolation, can have on the care of millions of patients with non-communicable diseases, who may be indirectly affected, have not been taken into consideration so much. Conclusions: When dealing with COronaVIrus Disease 19, policy makers and healthcare personnel should consider the indirect effects on the treatment of non-communicable diseases.

COVID-19 response: mitigating negative impacts on other areas of health

“…Strategies across settings ranged from near complete ‘lockdowns’ to more partial interventions in daily life. 14 The specific mix of these ‘non-pharmaceutical interventions’ (NPIs), their stringency and duration has ranged widely as governments have responded to COVID-19 transmission dynamics within particular political, social and economic contexts. Such NPIs have included…”

“…Strategies across settings ranged from near complete 'lockdowns' to more partial interventions in daily life. 14 The specific mix of these 'non-pharmaceutical interventions' (NPIs), their stringency and duration has ranged widely as governments have responded to COVID- 19 closure of brick-and-mortar facilities. Whatever mix and intensity, many of these measures have been disruptive to the availability, accessibility and use of health services in LMICs, and the public health rationales for deploying them in these settings have been widely questioned.…”

Clinical and bioethical implications of health care interruption during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study in outpatients with rheumatic diseases

“…(Long) disease duration, substantial disease activity level previous HCI, need for rheumatic care, and NP with (rheumatic disease-related) treatment were associated with clinical deterioration. Hassen et al [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] surveyed 3000 rheumatic patients during the current pandemic in Saudi Arabia, with the aim to capture patients' experiences. Among the 637 respondents, patient perception of worsened disease activity was correlated to unplanned healthcare visits (which might be considered a surrogate for the need for rheumatic medical care), medication non-adherence (a surrogate for NP with treatment), and difficulty in accessing medication, which was in fact the main reason for treatment discontinuation among our patients.…”

Sample pooling strategies for SARS-CoV-2 detection

“…It is widely accepted that during the COVID-19 pandemic, the need for immediate testing and the decreased availability or the lack of commercial kits or the delay in the delivery of them, due to the increased global demand ( Carter et al, 2020 ), emerges the need for the development of “in house” protocols for RNA extraction and quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) capable of detecting and quantifying the SARS-CoV-2 viral load. During the generalized quarantine, the United States of America and Europe experienced an acute shortage of certain reagents ( Modesti et al, 2020 ). The extended shortage of supplies forced several regions around the globe to completely stop testing, resulting in a decrease of the diagnostic capacity and a potential underestimation of the epidemiological data on the disease.…”