12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Consequences of COVID-19 crisis for persons with HIV: the impact of social determinants of health

      letter

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          With the indiscriminate spread of COVID-19 globally, many populations are experiencing negative consequences such as job loss, food insecurity, and inability to manage existing medical conditions and maintain preventive measures such as social distancing and personal preventative equipment. Some of the most disadvantaged in the COVID-19 era are people living with HIV/AIDS and other autoimmune diseases.

          Discussion

          As the number of new HIV infections decrease globally, many subpopulations remain at high risk of infection due to lack of or limited access to prevention services, as well as clinical care and treatment. For persons living with HIV or at higher risk of contracting HIV, including persons who inject drugs or men that have sex with men, the risk of COVID-19 infection increases if they have certain comorbidities, are older than 60 years of age, and are homeless, orphaned, or vulnerable children. The risk of COVID-19 is also more significant for those that live in Low- and Middle-Income Countries, rural, and/or poverty-stricken areas. An additional concern for those living the HIV is the double stigma that may arise if they also test positive for COVID-19. As public health and health care workers try to tackle the needs of the populations that they serve, they are beginning to realize the need for a change in the infrastructure that will include more efficient partnerships between public health, health care, and HIV programs.

          Conclusion

          Persons living with HIV that also have other underlying comorbidities are a great disadvantage from the negative consequences of COVID-19. For those that may test positive for both HIV and COVID-19, the increased psychosocial burdens stemming from stress and isolation, as well as, experiencing additional barriers that inhibit access to care, may cause them to become more disenfranchised. Thus, it becomes very important during the current pandemic for these challenges and barriers to be addressed so that these persons living with HIV can maintain continuity of care, as well as, their social and mental support systems.

          Related collections

          Most cited references5

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The COVID-19 pandemic and health inequalities

          This essay examines the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic for health inequalities. It outlines historical and contemporary evidence of inequalities in pandemics—drawing on international research into the Spanish influenza pandemic of 1918, the H1N1 outbreak of 2009 and the emerging international estimates of socio-economic, ethnic and geographical inequalities in COVID-19 infection and mortality rates. It then examines how these inequalities in COVID-19 are related to existing inequalities in chronic diseases and the social determinants of health, arguing that we are experiencing a syndemic pandemic. It then explores the potential consequences for health inequalities of the lockdown measures implemented internationally as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on the likely unequal impacts of the economic crisis. The essay concludes by reflecting on the longer-term public health policy responses needed to ensure that the COVID-19 pandemic does not increase health inequalities for future generations.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Prevalence in Homeless Shelters — Four U.S. Cities, March 27–April 15, 2020

            In the United States, approximately 1.4 million persons access emergency shelter or transitional housing each year ( 1 ). These settings can pose risks for communicable disease spread. In late March and early April 2020, public health teams responded to clusters (two or more cases in the preceding 2 weeks) of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in residents and staff members from five homeless shelters in Boston, Massachusetts (one shelter); San Francisco, California (one); and Seattle, Washington (three). The investigations were performed in coordination with academic partners, health care providers, and homeless service providers. Investigations included reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction testing at commercial and public health laboratories for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, over approximately 1–2 weeks for residents and staff members at the five shelters. During the same period, the team in Seattle, Washington, also tested residents and staff members at 12 shelters where a single case in each had been identified. In Atlanta, Georgia, a team proactively tested residents and staff members at two shelters with no known COVID-19 cases in the preceding 2 weeks. In each city, the objective was to test all shelter residents and staff members at each assessed facility, irrespective of symptoms. Persons who tested positive were transported to hospitals or predesignated community isolation areas. Overall, 1,192 residents and 313 staff members were tested in 19 homeless shelters (Table). When testing followed identification of a cluster, high proportions of residents and staff members had positive test results for SARS-CoV-2 in Seattle (17% of residents; 17% of staff members), Boston (36%; 30%), and San Francisco (66%; 16%). Testing in Seattle shelters where only one previous case had been identified in each shelter found a low prevalence of infection (5% of residents; 1% of staff members). Among shelters in Atlanta where no cases had been reported, a low prevalence of infection was also identified (4% of residents; 2% of staff members). Community incidence in the four cities (the average number of reported cases in the county per 100,000 persons per day during the testing period) varied, with the highest (14.4) in Boston and the lowest (5.7) in San Francisco ( 2 ). TABLE SARS-CoV-2 testing among residents and staff members at 19 homeless shelters in four U.S. cities with community transmission of COVID-19, March 27–April 15, 2020 City No. of shelters assessed Date of testing Residents Staff members No. tested No. (%) positive No. tested No. (%) positive Shelters reporting ≥2 cases in 2 weeks preceding testing Seattle 3 Mar 30–Apr 8 179 31 (17) 35 6 (17) Boston 1 Apr 2–3 408 147 (36) 50 15 (30) San Francisco 1 Apr 4–15 143 95 (66) 63 10 (16) Subtotal 5 March 30–Apr 15 730 273 (37) 148 31 (21) Shelters reporting 1 case in 2 weeks preceding testing Seattle 12 Mar 27–Apr 15 213 10 (5) 106 1 (1) Shelters reporting no cases in 2 weeks preceding testing Atlanta 2 Apr 8–9 249 10 (4) 59 1 (2) Total 19 Mar 27–Apr 15 1,192 293 (25) 313 33 (11) Abbreviation: COVID-19 = coronavirus disease 2019. The findings in this report are subject to at least three limitations. First, testing represented a single time point. Second, although testing all residents and staff members at each shelter was the objective, some were not available or declined (e.g., in San Francisco 143 of an estimated 255 residents at risk were tested). Finally, symptom information for persons tested was not consistently available and thus not included, although symptom information from Boston is available elsewhere.* Homelessness poses multiple challenges that can exacerbate and amplify the spread of COVID-19. Homeless shelters are often crowded, making social distancing difficult. Many persons experiencing homelessness are older or have underlying medical conditions ( 1 , 3 ), placing them at higher risk for severe COVID-19–associated illness ( 4 ). To protect homeless shelter residents and staff members, CDC recommends that homeless service providers implement recommended infection control practices, apply social distancing measures including ensuring residents’ heads are at least 6 feet (2 meters) apart while sleeping, and promote use of cloth face coverings among all residents. † These measures become especially important once ongoing COVID-19 transmission is identified within communities where shelters are located. Given the high proportion of positive tests in the shelters with identified clusters and evidence for presymptomatic and asymptomatic transmission of SARS-CoV-2 ( 5 ), testing of all residents and staff members regardless of symptoms at shelters where clusters have been detected should be considered. If testing is easily accessible, regular testing in shelters before identifying clusters should also be considered. Testing all persons can facilitate isolation of those who are infected to minimize ongoing transmission in these settings.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Global resource shortages during COVID-19: Bad news for low-income countries

              The world’s wealthiest countries have been gripped by resource shortages, including shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) and ventilators, during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic [1, 2]. In order to guarantee these resources for their own nation’s health workers, governments around the world are bargaining for their share in a strangled global supply chain. For example, countries such as Taiwan, Thailand, Russia, Germany, the Czech Republic, and Kenya have blocked the export of all face masks [3]. There have additionally been reports of PPE and ventilator exports being intercepted and delivered to the country with the highest bid, aptly referred to as acts of “modern piracy” [3]. Undeniably, securing PPE for health workers and respiratory devices for patients is a critical part of overcoming the COVID-19 pandemic. However, we must not forget that for many hospitals, these resources have never been in abundant supply. Instead, PPE and respiratory devices are scarce commodities for many hospitals in low-income countries (gross national income per capita ≤US$1,025) under the best of circumstances, with health crises such as the 2014–2016 West African Ebola epidemic highlighting gaps in the global PPE supply [4]. Indeed, deaths from Ebola were concentrated among healthcare providers, with 8.1% of the total health workforce in Liberia and 6.9% in Sierra Leone dying from Ebola [5]. Hospitals in low-income countries rely on the same supply chains as hospitals in wealthy countries to import medical supplies but have significantly less bargaining power to secure resources [6]. Therefore, resource grabs by high-income countries will likely have devastating effects on low-income countries as COVID-19 continues to spread globally [6, 7]. Already, UNICEF reports that the organization has only been able to acquire one-tenth of the 240 million masks requested by low-income countries [6]. To better elucidate COVID preparedness in low-income countries, we combined data from all service provision assessments (SPAs) conducted in nationally representative surveys of hospitals within the past 5 years in low-income countries, which included Afghanistan, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Haiti, Nepal, and Tanzania [8]. Our analysis of hospital general clinics confirms limited quantities of PPE, with only 24% to 51% of hospitals reporting any type of face mask, 22% to 92% medical gowns, and 3% to 22% eye protection (Fig 1). Sanitation supplies were also scarce, with 52% to 87% of hospitals recording soap plus running water and 38% to 56% alcohol-based hand sanitizer. We found further gaps in ability to provide care for respiratory conditions, again demonstrating under-investment in hospital-based services [9]. The hospitals analyzed lacked pulse oximeters (12%–48% available), oxygen tanks (10%–82%), and bag-masks necessary for basic resuscitation (28%–45%). As has been noted by prior studies, more advanced respiratory support such as intensive care unit (ICU) care and ventilators are even scarcer [10]. 10.1371/journal.pntd.0008412.g001 Fig 1 Availability of hospital clinic PPE, sanitation, and functional diagnostics and therapeutics across nationally representative samples of hospitals in 5 low-income countries. PPE, personal protective equipment. An important part of addressing the COVID-19 pandemic is adequate testing at the community level. In addition to current shortages of COVID-19 testing globally [2, 11], the ability to offer COVID-19 testing will likely be further constrained in low-income countries due to already limited diagnostic capacity. For example, SPA data show that fewer than 20% of hospitals, besides those in Tanzania, were able to measure CD4 count for HIV monitoring. Additionally, there is limited ability to provide routine childhood vaccination in hospitals in Afghanistan (35%), DRC (14%), Haiti (57%), and Nepal (60%), underscoring the potential for gaps in the ability to transport, store, and deliver vaccines if eventually available for COVID-19. With COVID-19 causing unprecedented resource shortages in the world’s wealthiest countries, already limited healthcare commodities will likely become even scarcer in low-income countries. There have been some rapid adjustments in the global supply chain, with China increasing its output of medical masks to 12 times previous levels [3]. But with prices for PPE and respiratory devices soaring, which hospitals will be able to afford them? In the West African Ebola epidemic, investment in high-quality PPE and infection control training were important components of halting the spread of disease [12], and where this was lacking, nosocomial spread was clearly worse [13]. In response to the current COVID-19 challenge, countries such as Afghanistan and Nepal have started manufacturing their own supplies of PPE and basic life support equipment, but this is not likely to be a feasible approach for all countries [14, 15]. Continued local as well as international action is needed to ensure access to PPE for all health workers and respiratory support for all patients, not just for those living in resource-abundant countries. As COVID-19 therapeutics and vaccines emerge, additional international commitment will be necessary to ensure global access. Equity requires no less.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                gshah@georgiasouthern.edu
                Journal
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2458
                5 February 2021
                5 February 2021
                2021
                : 21
                : 299
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.256302.0, ISNI 0000 0001 0657 525X, Department of Health Policy and Community Health, Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health, , Georgia Southern University, ; Statesboro, GA USA
                [2 ]GRID grid.256302.0, ISNI 0000 0001 0657 525X, Department Chair and Professor of Health Policy and Community Health, Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health, , Georgia Southern University, ; PO Box 8015, Statesboro, GA 30460 USA
                [3 ]FHI 360, Washington, DC, USA
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0954-3418
                Article
                10296
                10.1186/s12889-021-10296-9
                7863613
                33546659
                c3ee5193-5cae-43cc-bf7c-c2e8fdaf7e4e
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 2 July 2020
                : 20 January 2021
                Categories
                Commentary
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Public health
                hiv,covid-19,public health,comorbidities,consequences
                Public health
                hiv, covid-19, public health, comorbidities, consequences

                Comments

                Comment on this article