LogoLogoMSF Science Portal
  • My saved items
logo

© Médecins Sans Frontières

MSF Science Portal
About MSF Science Portal
About MSF
Contact Us
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Privacy Policy
Terms of Use

v2.1.4829.produswest2

2 result(s)
Filter and sort
2 result(s)
Journal Article > ReviewFull Text

Are C-reactive protein and procalcitonin safe and useful for antimicrobial stewardship purposes in patients with COVID-19? A scoping review

Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 24 September 2024; Volume 4 (Issue 1); e129.; DOI:10.1017/ash.2024.372
Williams A, Repetto E, Lebbie I, Khalife M, Jensen TO
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 24 September 2024; Volume 4 (Issue 1); e129.; DOI:10.1017/ash.2024.372

OBJECTIVE

The primary objectives of this study were to assess the usefulness of C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) in the diagnosis of bacterial co-infections in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and if their incorporation in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs is safe and useful, stratified by severity of disease as level of care, intensive care unit (ICU) or non-ICU. Our secondary objectives were to identify cut-off values for antibiotic decision-making and identify reported results from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).


DESDIGN

A scoping review of published literature, adhering to the PRISMA statement for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. The last search was performed in January 2024.


RESULTS

Fifty-nine studies were included in this scoping review: 20 studies reporting predictive values and/or sensitivity/specificity results for PCT, 8 reporting clear objectives on AMS, and 3 studies from LMICs.


CONCLUSION

In the context of non-ICU hospitalized COVID-19 patients in high-income countries, a PCT value below 0.25 mg/L can be a useful tool to rule out bacterial co-infection. The wide range of reported negative predictive values suggests that PCT should be interpreted in the context of other clinical findings. Our results do not support the use of CRP in the same manner as PCT. There is a clear need for more studies in LMICs.


More
Journal Article > CommentaryFull Text

They call it "patient selection" in Khayelitsha: the experience of Médecins Sans Frontières-South Africa in enrolling patients to receive antiretroviral treatment for HIV/AIDS

Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2 May 2006; Volume 15 (Issue 3); 301-312.; DOI:10.1017/s0963180106060403
Fox RC, Goemaere E
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2 May 2006; Volume 15 (Issue 3); 301-312.; DOI:10.1017/s0963180106060403
This article explores some of the medical and ethical issues that surround the selection of persons to receive anti-retroviral therapy (ARV) for HIV-AIDS. It is empirically grounded in the experiences of the project to prevent and treat AIDS conducted by Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) in Khayelitsha, a densely populated, highly disadvantaged, urban township on the periphery of Cape Town, South Africa. The article describes and analyzes the so-called “selection process” that the project’s staff uses to determine which patients to start on ARV therapy; the medical, social, and adherence criteria on which they try to base their decisions; the emotional and moral strains that this entails for them; and their overall reluctance to refuse anyone for treatment. It depicts the evolution that the process has undergone as it has moved progressively toward becoming a system to prepare patients for treatment and help them to adhere to the drug regimen, rather than to select or de-select them. The article ends with brief reflections on the macro-implications of the Khayelitsha project’s experiences in grappling with these issues for dealing with them nationally, in South Africa, the country with the world’s largest number of HIV-positive persons.More