The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene - Current Issue

The first case of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in the Dominican Republic coincided with a period of political crisis. Distrust in governmental institutions shaped the critical phase of early response. Having a weak public health infrastructure and a lack of public trust, the Ministry of Health (MoH) began the fight against COVID-19 with a losing streak. Within 45 days of the first reported case, the political crisis and turmoil caused by “fake news” are limiting the capacity and success of the MoH response to the pandemic.

Two decades of growing resource availability from agencies and foundations in wealthy countries has transformed approaches to health in poorly resourced nations. This progress looks increasingly unstable as climate change, social unrest, and, now, disruptive pandemics present threats not only to health but also to the mechanisms that manage it, and to funding itself. The growth in “global health” schools, technology development laboratories, nongovernmental organizations and multilateral institutions in donor countries has delivered not only successes but also disappointment, and reflect a paradigm that is in many ways contrary to the principles of population-based ownership that they espouse. Although the COVID-19 crisis has underlined the importance of health access and health service capacity, we may have a limited window of opportunity in which to rethink the current model and improve both efficiency and effectiveness. With a dose of humility, we may all benefit from studying our own rhetoric on human-centered design and applying these principles across global health to ensure that our approach is effective, efficient, and defensible.

The 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic highlights the experience of communities in the global South that have grappled with vulnerability and scarcity for decades. In the global North, many frontline workers are now being similarly forced to provide and ration care in unprecedented ways, with minimal guidance. We outline six reflections gained as Western practitioners working in resource-denied settings which inform our current experience with COVID-19. The reflections include the following: managing trauma, remaining flexible in dynamic situations, and embracing discomfort to think bigger about context-specific solutions to collectively build back our systems. Through this contextualized reflection on resilience, we hope to motivate strength and solidarity for providers, patients, and health systems, while proposing critical questions for our response moving forward.

Novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), named a pandemic by the WHO, is the current global health crisis. National and international collaboration are indispensable for combating COVID-19 and other similar potential outbreaks. International efforts to tackle this complex problem have led to remarkable scientific advances. Yet, as a global society, we can and must take additional measures to fight this pandemic. Undoubtedly, our approach toward COVID-19 was not perfect, and testing has not been deployed fast enough to arrest the epidemic early on. It is critical that we revise our approaches to be more prepared for pandemics as a united body by promoting global cooperation and commitment.

The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 pandemic has spread to Africa, where nearly all countries have reported laboratory-confirmed cases of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Although there are ongoing clinical trials of repurposed and investigational antiviral and immune-based therapies, there are as yet no scientifically proven, clinically effective pharmacological treatments for COVID-19. Among the repurposed drugs, the commonly used antimalarials chloroquine (CQ) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have become the focus of global scientific, media, and political attention despite a lack of randomized clinical trials supporting their efficacy. Chloroquine has been used worldwide for about 75 years and is listed by the WHO as an essential medicine to treat malaria. Hydroxychloroquine is mainly used as a therapy for autoimmune diseases. However, the efficacy and safety of CQ/HCQ for the treatment of COVID-19 remains to be defined. Indiscriminate promotion and widespread use of CQ/HCQ have led to extensive shortages, self-treatment, and fatal overdoses. Shortages and increased market prices leave all countries vulnerable to substandard and falsified medical products, and safety issues are especially concerning for Africa because of its healthcare system limitations. Much needed in Africa is a cross-continental collaborative network for coordinated production, distribution, and post-marketing surveillance aligned to low-cost distribution of any approved COVID-19 drug; this would ideally be piggybacked on existing global aid efforts. Meanwhile, African countries should strongly consider implementing prescription monitoring schemes to ensure that any off-label CQ/HCQ use is appropriate and beneficial during this pandemic.

Public health measures are needed to resolve the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, although a looming economic fallout merits close attention. Early safe reintroduction of immune individuals into the workforce may be essential to protecting the economic welfare of communities. Reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction testing, our primary diagnostic tool to date, has sensitivity and timing concerns, owing to sampling/handling errors, as well as a complex virus–host interaction. Reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction assays do not establish immune status once the virus has been cleared. Targeted serosurveillance for the determination of individuals’ potential for transmissibility, particularly if paired with direct pathogen testing, may aid in “cleared for business” decision-making.

The ongoing novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is threatening the global human population, including in countries with resource-limited health facilities. Severe bilateral pneumonia is the main feature of severe COVID-19, and adequate ventilatory support is crucial for patient survival. Although our knowledge of the disease is still rapidly increasing, this review summarizes current guidance on the best provision of ventilatory support, with a focus on resource-limited settings. Key messages include that supplemental oxygen is a first essential step for the treatment of severe COVID-19 patients with hypoxemia and should be a primary focus in resource-limited settings where capacity for invasive ventilation is limited. Oxygen delivery can be increased by using a non-rebreathing mask and prone positioning. The presence of only hypoxemia should in general not trigger intubation because hypoxemia is often remarkably well tolerated. Patients with fatigue and at risk for exhaustion, because of respiratory distress, will require invasive ventilation. In these patients, lung protective ventilation is essential. Severe pneumonia in COVID-19 differs in some important aspects from other causes of severe pneumonia or acute respiratory distress syndrome, and limiting the positive end-expiratory pressure level on the ventilator may be important. This ventilation strategy might reduce the currently very high case fatality rate of more than 50% in invasively ventilated COVID-19 patients.