[Management from Primary Care of monkeypox infection (MPOX) in humans]

Monkeypox (MPOX) is a viral zoonosis endemic in West or Central African countries that is sporadically exported to another area. In May 2022, a global outbreak of MPOX smallpox began to occur in several countries in Europe and North America. Most of the reported cases are identified at the outpatient level and mainly affect men who have sex with men (MSM). Transmission is by close contact with lesions, body fluids, respiratory secretions or contaminated material from an infected person or animal. The clinical picture is similar to human smallpox, with less severity. Mild, self-limiting skin involvement predominates after 2-4 weeks. In MSM, atypical skin lesions appear due to the mode of infection. Severe forms or complications may appear in certain risk groups. The case fatality rate is 3%-6% depending on the clade responsible. The diagnosis of suspicion is confirmed by detection of the virus from exudates of lesions or scabs, with nucleic acid amplification techniques by conventional or real-time PCR. Clinical management in most cases is performed in primary care (PC), by monitoring the main symptoms. Between 5-10% require hospital management and there are some specific antiviral treatment options. Human smallpox vaccines protect against MPOX and are used as pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis for persons at risk. Measures to reduce exposure to the virus are the main MPOX prevention strategy. In addition, the role of the family physician is key to controlling the spread of MPOX through active surveillance and early diagnosis of the disease.

Oportunistic diagnosis based on age and hepatitis C virus clearance: an essential step to improve the overall health of the liver

Back in January 2022, an EASL-Lancet Commission on the impact of liver disorders in the European region commissioned by the WHO demonstrated that this condition is, actually, the second leading cause of loss of labor years in Europe after ischemic heart disease (1). This is a very relevant piece of information since this is something that is going to impact the new generations of Europeans unless a significant change is made in public health policies. Despite the advances made over the last few years in hepatitis C virus clearance-understood as a significant reduction of morbidity and mortality associated with Hepatitis B and C viruses-there are still challenges ahead to improve liver health due to the high use of alcohol, and the inseparable triad obesity / diabetes mellitus / metabolic associated fatty liver disease. Also, access to healthcare for several population groups at risk of presenting higher rates of liver disease has become a problem.

Principles for implementing a population screening strategy for hepatitis C in Spain

BACKGROUND

hepatitis C, besides health impairment, results in significant loss of productivity and diminished quality of life, and noticeably contributes to health expenditure increases. Because of all this, the Spanish Ministry of Health (Ministerio de Sanidad, Consumo y Bienestar Social - MSCBS) implemented in 2015 a strategic plan for managing hepatitis C (Plan Estratégico para el Abordaje de la Hepatitis C - PEAHC) within the National Health System. However, the PEAHC includes no screening plan. The MSCBS developed a framework document on population screening (Documento Marco sobre Cribado Poblacional) that defines the criteria a disease must meet in order to consider implementing a screening program. Specifically, it defines 4 criteria related to the health issue, 4 related to the screening test, and 3 criteria dealing with diagnosis confirmation and treatment.

OBJECTIVE

to identify whether there is scientific evidence to support hepatitis C meeting the criteria to be considered a disease qualifying for a population screening strategy in Spain.

METHODS

a literature search for scientific evidence concerning each required criterion for implementing a population screening plan for hepatitis C in Spain.

RESULTS

sufficient scientific evidence was found to support hepatitis C meeting the criteria required by the MSCBS for the implementation of a population screening program.

CONCLUSIONS

according to the available scientific evidence, hepatitis C in Spain meets the required criteria to qualify for consideration of population screening plan.

Short-course versus long-course therapy of the same antibiotic for community-acquired pneumonia in adolescent and adult outpatients

BACKGROUND

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a lung infection that can be acquired during day-to-day activities in the community (not while receiving care in a hospital). Community-acquired pneumonia poses a significant public health burden in terms of mortality, morbidity, and costs. Shorter antibiotic courses for CAP may limit treatment costs and adverse effects, but the optimal duration of antibiotic treatment is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of short-course versus longer-course treatment with the same antibiotic at the same daily dosage for CAP in non-hospitalised adolescents and adults (outpatients). We planned to investigate non-inferiority of short-course versus longer-term course treatment for efficacy outcomes, and superiority of short-course treatment for safety outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, which contains the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases, and three trials registers on 28 September 2017 together with conference proceedings, reference checking, and contact with experts and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing short- and long-courses of the same antibiotic for CAP in adolescent and adult outpatients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We planned to use standard Cochrane methods.

MAIN RESULTS

Our searches identified 5260 records. We did not identify any RCTs that compared short- and longer-courses of the same antibiotic for the treatment of adolescents and adult outpatients with CAP.We excluded two RCTs that compared short courses (five compared to seven days) of the same antibiotic at the same daily dose because they evaluated antibiotics (gemifloxacin and telithromycin) not commonly used in practice for the treatment of CAP. In particular, gemifloxacin is no longer approved for the treatment of mild-to-moderate CAP due to its questionable risk-benefit balance, and reported adverse effects. Moreover, the safety profile of telithromycin is also cause for concern.We found one ongoing study that we will assess for inclusion in future updates of the review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no eligible RCTs that studied a short-course of antibiotic compared to a longer-course (with the same antibiotic at the same daily dosage) for CAP in adolescent and adult outpatients. The effects of antibiotic therapy duration for CAP in adolescent and adult outpatients remains unclear.