Introduction: HIV testing among men remains low globally and in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) in particular, when compared with their female counterparts. The aim of this study was to synthesise evidenc...

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has infected over nineteen million people globally with over 700 ​000 fatalities as of 9 August 2020. To date, Africa has recorded the least amount of COVID-19 confirmed cases. As of 9 August 2020, Africa has 1, 037, 135 cases compared to 10, 615, 855 in Americas and 3, 061, 264 in Europe. In this piece, the authors unpack the low numbers of laboratory confirmed COVID-19 cases in Africa - is it a case of limited testing capacity due to poor health systems or otherwise?

Background: Despite the many HIV testing models implemented in Africa, the level of HIV testing uptake remains relatively poor, especially among men. The HIV self-testing (HIVST) model offers an additional approach for encouraging men to get tested. This study aimed to synthesise evidence on men’s perspectives regarding HIVST in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Methods: The databases searched included PubMed/MEDLINE, American Doctoral Dissertations via EBSCO host; Union Catalogue of Theses and Dissertations; SA ePublications via SABINET Online; World Cat Dissertations; Theses via OCLC; ERIC; CINAH; PsychInfo; Embase, Sociological Abstract, Scopus; and Google Scholar. The World Health Organization (WHO) and The Joint United Nations’ Programme on HIV and AIDS (UNAIDS) websites were further searched. We only extracted qualitative information from the included studies, despite the research method used (qualitative or mixed methods). The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA), as well as the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018, were used to determine the methodological quality of the included studies. NVivo version 11 was used for thematic analysis. Results: A total of 21,184 articles were identified by the initial search criteria, but only 16 articles were included in the data extraction and quality assessment stage. The following key themes emerged: knowledge of HIVST; acceptability of HIVST; need for HIVST counselling; confidentiality of HIVST; convenience of HIVST; and accuracy of HIVST. The study shows that while HIVST provides men with an alternative, confidential and convenient testing model, the potential for psychological and physical harm remains a challenge. Conclusion: The introduction of the HIVST strategy has the potential of improving men’s uptake in HIV testing services, thereby contributing towards addressing the first cascade of the 90–90-90 strategy. While HIVST has a potential for addressing men’s barriers to attending clinic settings, such as confidentiality and convenience, it barely addresses the HIVST counselling and accuracy concerns.

Background: The global burden of chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a major concern in public health. Several CLBP epidemiological studies have been conducted in high-income-countries (HICs) with little known in low-and-middle-income-countries (LMICs) due to other competing priorities of communicable diseases. The extrapolation of results of studies from HICs for use in LMICs is difficult due to differences in social norms, healthcare systems, and legislations, yet there is urgent need to address this growing burden. It is against this backdrop that we conducted this review to map the current evidence on the distribution of CLBP in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from the following databases: PubMed, Google Scholar, Science Direct databases, World Health Organizations library databases, EMBASE, EBSCOhost by searching the following databases within the platform; academic search complete, CINAHL with full text, health sources: nursing/academic and MEDLINE. The title, abstract and the full text screening phases were performed by two independent reviewers with the third reviewer employed to adjudicate discrepancies. The reference list of all included articles was also searched for eligible articles. This scoping review was reported in accordance with the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation, as well as guided by Arksey and O’Malley’s scoping review framework. A thematic content analysis was used to give a narrative account of the review. Results: The electronic search strategy retrieved 21,189 articles. Title/abstract and full text screening only identified 11 articles, which were included in this review. The prevalence of CLBP among the general population ranged from 18.1% to 28.2% and from 22.2% to 59.1% among LBP patients. The prevalence of occupation based CLBP ranged from 30.1% to 55.5%. Identified risk factors for CLBP are multifactorial and included biomechanical, psychological, socioeconomic and lifestyle factors, with psychosocial factors playing a significant role. Hypertension, diabetes mellitus, peptic ulcer disease were the most common comorbidities identified. CLBP disability was significantly associated with psychosocial factors. The management of CLBP in primary care follows the traditional biomedical paradigm and primarily involves pain medication and inconsistent with guidelines. Conclusions: There are limited epidemiological data on CLBP in SSA, however, this study concluded that the prevalence and risk factors of CLBP in SSA are comparable to reports in HICs. Considering the projected increase in the burden of CLBP in LMICs extensive research effort is needed to close this knowledge gap.

Health care workers (HCWs) are more than ten times more likely to be infected with coronavirus infectious disease 2019 (COVID-19) than the general population, thus demonstrating the burden of COVID-19 among HCWs. Factors that expose HCWs to a differentially high-risk of COVID-19 acquisition are important to elucidate, enable appropriate public health interventions to mitigate against high risk and reduce adverse outcomes from the infection. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize and critically analyze the existing evidence on SARS-CoV-2 risk factors among HCWs. With no geographical limitation, we included studies, in any country, that reported (i) the PCR laboratory diagnosis of COVID-19 as an independent variable (ii) one or more COVID-19 risk factors among HCWs with risk estimates (relative risk, odds ratio, or hazard ratio) (iii) original, quantitative study design, and published in English or Mandarian. Our initial search resulted in 470 articles overall, however, only 10 studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. Out of the 10 studies included in the review, inadequate/lack of protective personal equipment, performing tracheal intubation, and gender were the most common risk factors of COVID-19. Based on the random effects adjusted pooled relative risk, HCWs who reported the use of protective personal equipment were 29% (95% CI: 16% to 41%) less likely to test positive for COVID-19. The study also revealed that HCWs who performed tracheal intubations were 34% (95% CI: 14% to 57%) more likely to test positive for COVID-19. Interestingly, this study showed that female HCWs are at 11% higher risk (RR 1.11 95% CI 1.01–1.21) of COVID-19 than their male counterparts. This article presents initial findings from a living systematic review and meta-analysis, therefore, did not yield many studies; however, it revealed a significant insight into better understanding COVID-19 risk factors among HCWs; insights important for devising preventive strategies that protect them from this infection. CRD42020193508 available for public comments via the link below https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020193508).

HIV testing serves as a critical gateway for linkage and retention to care services, particularly in sub-Saharan African countries with high burden of HIV infections. However, the current progress towards addressing the first cascade of the 90–90-90 programme is largely contributed by women. This study aimed to map evidence on the intervention strategies to improve HIV uptake among men in sub-Saharan Africa. We conducted a scoping review guided by Arksey and O’Malley’s (2005) framework and Levac et al. (2010) recommendation for methodological enhancement for scoping review studies. We searched for eligible articles from electronic databases such as PubMed/MEDLINE; American Doctoral Dissertations via EBSCO host; Union Catalogue of Theses and Dissertations (UCTD); SA ePublications via SABINET Online; World Cat Dissertations; Theses via OCLC; and Google Scholar. We included studies from January 1990 to August 2018. We used the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. The Mixed Method Appraisal Tool version 2018 was used to determine the methodological quality of the included studies. We further used NVivo version 11 to aid with content thematic analysis. This study revealed that teaching men about HIV; Community-Based HIV testing; Home-Based HIV testing; Antenatal Care HIV testing; HIV testing incentives and HIV Self-testing are important strategies to improving HIV testing among men in sub-Saharan Africa. The need for improving programmes aimed at giving more information to men about HIV that are specifically tailored for men, especially given their poor uptake of HIV testing services was also found. This study further revealed the need for implementing Universal Test and Treat among HIV positive men found through community-based testing strategies, while suggesting the importance of restructuring home-based HIV testing visits to address the gap posed by mobile populations. The community HIV testing, as well as, HIV self-testing strategies showed great potential to increase HIV uptake among men in sub-Saharan Africa. However, to address poor linkage to care, ART should be initiated soon after HIV diagnosis is concluded during community testing services. We also recommend more research aimed at addressing the quality of HIV self-testing kits, as well as, improving the monitoring systems of the distributed HIV self-testing kits.