Worldwide, bacterial antimicrobial resistance is estimated to cause more deaths than HIV or malaria and is recognized as a leading global public health threat (1). In Ukraine, the confluence of high prewar rates of antimicrobial resistance, an increase in the prevalence of traumatic wounds, and the war-related strain on health care facilities is leading to increased detection of multidrug-resistant organisms with spread into Europe (2,3). Evidence of increased rates of antimicrobial resistance in other conflict settings such as Iraq (4), and the long-term consequences for civilian, military, and other populations, argue that the spread of antimicrobial resistance in Ukraine is an urgent crisis that must be addressed, even during an ongoing war. | | In mid-2022, a collaboration was established between CDC, the Center for Public Health of Ukraine (UPHC), local clinical and public health authorities, and international partners, including the World Health Organization regional office for Europe, ICAP at Columbia University, and the European Society for Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. The purpose of this collaboration was to improve laboratory detection, clinical treatment, and infection control response for antimicrobial resistance in the Ternopil, Khmelnytskyi, and Vinnytsia regions supported by U.S. Ukraine supplemental appropriations emergency funding.*

During 2020, an estimated 150,000 persons aged 0-14 years acquired HIV globally (1). Case identification is the first step to ensure children living with HIV are linked to life-saving treatment, achieve viral suppression, and live long, healthy lives. Successful interventions to optimize pediatric HIV testing during the COVID-19 pandemic are needed to sustain progress toward achieving Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) 95-95-95 targets.* Changes in HIV testing and diagnoses among persons aged 1-14 years (children) were assessed in 22 U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR)-supported countries during October 1, 2019-September 30, 2020. This period corresponds to the two fiscal quarters before the COVID-19 pandemic (i.e., Q1 and Q2) and the two quarters after the pandemic began (i.e., Q3 and Q4). Testing was disaggregated by age group, testing strategy, and fiscal year quarter. During October 2019-September 2020, PEPFAR supported 4,312,343 HIV tests and identified 74,658 children living with HIV (CLHIV). The number of HIV tests performed was similar during Q1 and Q2, decreased 40.1% from Q2 to Q3, and increased 19.7% from Q3 to Q4. The number of HIV cases identified among children aged 1-14 years (cases identified) increased 7.4% from Q1 to Q2, decreased 29.4% from Q2 to Q3, and increased 3.3% from Q3 to Q4. Although testing in outpatient departments decreased 21% from Q1 to Q4, testing from other strategies increased during the same period, including mobile testing by 38%, facility-based index testing (offering an HIV test to partners and biological children of persons living with HIV) by 8%, and testing children with signs or symptoms of malnutrition within health facilities by 7%. In addition, most tests (61.3%) and cases identified (60.9%) were among children aged 5-14 years (school-aged children), highlighting the need to continue offering HIV testing to older children. These findings provide important information on the most effective strategies for identifying CLHIV during the COVID-19 pandemic. HIV testing programs should continue to use programmatic, surveillance, and financial data at both national and subnational levels to determine the optimal mix of testing strategies to minimize disruptions in pediatric case identification during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Providing more convenient and patient-centred options for service delivery is a priority within global HIV programmes. These efforts improve patient satisfaction and retention and free up time for providers to focus on new HIV diagnoses or severe illness. Recently, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic precipitated expanded eligibility criteria for these differentiated service delivery (DSD) models to decongest clinics and protect patients and healthcare workers. This has resulted in dramatic scale-up of DSD for antiretroviral therapy, cotrimoxazole and tuberculosis (TB) preventive treatment. While TB treatment among people living with HIV (PLHIV) has traditionally involved frequent, facility-based management, TB treatment can also be adapted within DSD models. Such adaptations could include electronic tools to ensure appropriate clinical management, treatment support, adherence counselling and adverse event (AE) monitoring. In this commentary, we outline considerations for DSD of TB treatment among PLHIV, building on best practices from global DSD model implementation for HIV service delivery. DISCUSSION: In operationalizing TB treatment in DSD models, we consider the following: what activity is being done, when or how often it takes place, where it takes place, by whom and for whom. We discuss considerations for various programme elements including TB screening and diagnosis; medication dispensing; patient education, counselling and support; clinical management and monitoring; and reporting and recording. General approaches include multi-month dispensing for TB medications during intensive and continuation phases of treatment and standardized virtual adherence and AE monitoring. Lastly, we provide operational examples of TB treatment delivery through DSD models, including a conceptual model and an early implementation experience from Zambia. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 has catalysed the rapid expansion of differentiated patient-centred service delivery for PLHIV. Expanding DSD models to include TB treatment can capitalize on existing platforms, while providing high-quality, routine treatment, follow-up and patient education and empowerment.

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends providing tuberculosis preventive treatment (TPT) to all persons living with HIV and to all household contacts of persons with bacteriologically confirmed pulmonary tuberculosis disease. Regrettably, the absence of a harmonized data collection and management approach to TPT indicators has contributed to programmatic challenges at local, national, and global levels. However, in April 2020, the WHO launched the Consolidated HIV Strategic Information Guidelines, with an updated set of priority indicators. These guidelines recommend that Ministries of Health collect, report, and use data on TPT completion in addition to TPT initiation. Both indicators are reflected in the WHO's list of 15 core indicators for program management and are also required by the US President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief's Monitoring, Evaluation, and Reporting (MER) guidance. Although not perfectly harmonized, both frameworks now share essential indicator characteristics. Aligned indicators are necessary for robust strategic and operational planning, resource allocation, and data communication. "Collect once, use many times" is a best practice for strategic information management. Building harmonized and sustainable health systems will enable countries to successfully maintain essential HIV, tuberculosis, and other health services while combatting new health threats.

Tuberculosis (TB) is responsible for roughly one-third of HIV-associated deaths among people with HIV (PWH). Despite the known risk among this population, only 56% (456 385) of an estimated 815 000 people with TB/HIV globally received a TB diagnosis and were reported in 2019 [1]. To close this gap, the WHO recommends screening PWH at every clinical encounter for cough of any duration, fever, weight loss and night sweats, followed by sputum testing with a WHO-recommended rapid diagnostic test when symptoms are present. Ruling out active disease is also crucial for safely initiating TB preventive treatment (TPT), which is a critical component of care for PWH. The U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), the world's largest HIV programme that provides antiretroviral therapy (ART) to 17·4 million people (roughly 65% of all PWH receiving ART), aligns with WHO guidance regarding TB screening [1,2]. We assess TB screening among ART patients in PEPFAR-supported sites and review existing literature on TB screening among PWH.

Despite progress toward controlling the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic, testing gaps remain, particularly among men and young persons in sub-Saharan Africa (1). This observational study used routinely collected programmatic data from 20 African countries reported to the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) from October 2018 to September 2019 to assess HIV testing coverage and case finding among adults (defined as persons aged ≥15 years). Indicators included number of HIV tests conducted, number of HIV-positive test results, and percentage positivity rate. Overall, the majority of countries reported higher HIV case finding among women than among men. However, a slightly higher percentage positivity was recorded among men (4.7%) than among women (4.1%). Provider-initiated counseling and testing (PITC) in health facilities identified approximately two thirds of all new cases, but index testing had the highest percentage positivity in all countries among both sexes. Yields from voluntary counseling and testing (VCT) and mobile testing varied by sex and by country. These findings highlight the need to identify and implement the most efficient strategies for HIV case finding in these countries to close coverage gaps. Strategies might need to be tailored for men who remain underrepresented in the majority of HIV testing programs.

Global HIV program stakeholders, including the US President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), are undertaking efforts to ensure that eligible people living with HIV (PLHIV) receiving antiretroviral treatment (ART) receive a course of TB preventive treatment (TPT). In PEPFAR programming, this effort may require providing TPT not only to newly diagnosed PLHIV as part of HIV care initiation, but also to treatment-experienced PLHIV stable on ART who may not have been previously offered TPT. TPT scale-up is occurring at the same time as a trend to provide more person-centered HIV care through differentiated service delivery (DSD). In DSD, PLHIV stable on ART may receive less frequent clinical follow-up or receive care outside the traditional clinic-based model. The misalignment between traditional delivery of TPT and care delivery in innovative DSD may require adaptations to TPT delivery practices for PLHIV. Adaptations include components of planning and operationalization of TPT in DSD, such as determination of TPT eligibility and TPT initiation, and clinical management of PLHIV while on TPT. A key adaptation is alignment of timing and location for TPT and ART prescribing, monitoring, and dispensing. Conceptual examples of TPT delivery in DSD may help program managers operationalize TPT in HIV care.

CDC designed its Health Systems Integration Program to prepare leaders to function-at the interface of public health and health care. Specific Health Systems Integration Program competencies in the areas of communication, analysis and assessment, and health systems were developed to nurture evidence-based decision-making and leadership skills crucial for future public health leaders. The program therefore designed an innovative journal club as part of its competency-based curriculum not only to meet the standard goals for a journal club critical reading, interpretation, and acquiring content knowledge but also to foster leadership development. This report describes the Health Systems Integration Program journal club format, its implementation, challenges, and key elements of success. Other programs using a journal club model as a learning format might consider using the Health Systems Integration Program's innovative approach that focuses on leadership development.

CONTEXT: During the onset of 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) (pH1N1), the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene implemented a pilot respiratory virus surveillance system. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the performance of this pilot system, which linked electronic health record (EHR) clinical, epidemiologic, and diagnostic data to monitor influenza-like illness (ILI) in the community. DESIGN: Surveillance was conducted at 9 community health centers with EHRs. Clinical decision support system alerts encouraged diagnostic testing of patients. Rapid influenza diagnostic testing (RIDT) and multiplex polymerase chain reaction assay (MassTag PCR) were performed sequentially. SETTING: Nine Institute for Family Health (IFH) clinics in Manhattan and the Bronx during May 26 to June 30, 2009, the pH1N1 outbreak peak. PARTICIPANTS: Adult and pediatric patients presenting to IFH clinics during May 26 to June 30, 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: By using Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines, we evaluated the system's completeness, sensitivity, timeliness, and epidemiologic usefulness. RESULTS: Of 537 ILI visits (5.7% of all visits), 17% underwent diagnostic testing. Of the 132 specimens with both a RIDT and MassTag PCR result, 90 (68%) had a MassTag PCR-identified respiratory virus, most commonly pH1N1 (n = 69; 77%). Of the 81 specimens that met the ILI case definition, 58 (72%) were positive for a respiratory virus tested for by MassTag PCR; 48 (59%) were positive for pH1N1. Ninety-four percent of ILI patients positive for pH1N1 were 45 years or younger. Sensitivity and specificity of RIDT (29% and 94%) and ILI case definition (70% and 48%) for pH1N1 were calculated using MassTag PCR as the standard. Results of RIDT took a median of 6 days. CONCLUSIONS: Despite low RIDT sensitivity for pH1N1 and limited timeliness, integration of EHR and diagnostic data has potential to provide valuable epidemiologic information, guide public health response, and represents a new model for community surveillance for influenza and respiratory viruses.

A recent transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) from a living donor to a kidney recipient revealed a possible limitation in existing screening protocols for HIV infection in living donors. We surveyed kidney and liver transplant centers (N=18) in New York State to assess HIV screening protocols for living donors. While most transplant centers evaluated HIV risk behaviors in living donors, evaluation practices varied widely, as did the extent of HIV testing and prevention counseling. All centers screened living donors for serologic evidence of HIV infection, either during initial evaluation or ≥ 1 month before surgery; however, only 50% of transplant centers repeated HIV testing within 14 days before surgery for all donors or donors with specific risk behaviors. Forty-four percent of transplant centers used HIV nucleic acid testing (NAT) to screen either all donors or donors with recognized risk behaviors, and 55% never performed HIV NAT. Results suggest the need to standardize evaluation of HIV risk behaviors and prevention counseling in NY State to prevent acquisition of HIV by prospective living organ donors, and to conduct HIV antibody testing and NAT as close to the time of donation as possible to prevent HIV transmission to recipients.

In their analysis of undetected human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections among potential organ donors, Ellingson et al. conclude that nucleic acid testing (NAT), in addition to enzyme immunoassays (EIA) as is currently required by Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) policy (1) would significantly reduce undetected HCV infection, but due to limitations of the data, are equivocal regarding a similar addition of NAT screening for HIV. However, their data are derived from deceased potential donors only and the risk estimates may require separate modeling for living donors. Although the OPTN has oversight of living and deceased organ donors, there are few policies specifically for living donation, and none that specify the type and timing of HIV screening prior to transplant (2). | Our recent investigation of HIV transmission attributable to living donor kidney transplantation demonstrated the need for more effective pretransplant screening of living donors and risk behavior counseling (3). The donor screened HIV negative by EIA 79 days pretransplant and acquired HIV after screening but prior to transplantation; repeat screening was not performed prior to transplantation. With increasing numbers of living donors, establishment of best practices specifically for living organ donation is long overdue. OPTN policies should be revised to clearly distinguish deceased donors, necessitating immediate pretransplant screening, from living donors who may acquire HIV and other infections after screening.

OBJECTIVE: To examine 2009 H1N1 influenza illness severity and the effect of antiviral treatment on the severity of illness among pregnant women. METHODS: We abstracted medical records from hospitalized pregnant (n=62) and nonpregnant (n=74) women with laboratory-confirmed 2009 H1N1 influenza in New York City, May through June 2009. We compared characteristics of pregnant and nonpregnant women and of severe and moderate influenza illness among pregnant women, with severe defined as illness resulting in intensive care admission or death. RESULTS: The 2009 H1N1 hospitalization rate was significantly higher among pregnant than nonpregnant women (55.3 compared with 7.7 per 100,000 population). Eight pregnant (including two deaths) and 16 nonpregnant (including four deaths) cases were severe. Pregnant women represented 6.4% of hospitalized cases and 4.3% of deaths caused by 2009 H1N1 influenza. Only 1 in 30 (3.3%) pregnant women who received oseltamivir treatment within 2 days of symptom onset had severe illness compared with 3 of 14 (21.4%) and four of nine (44.4%) pregnant women who started treatment 3-4 days and 5 days or more after symptom onset, respectively (P=.002 for trend). Severe and moderate 2009 H1N1 influenza illness occurred in all pregnancy trimesters, but most women (54.8%) were in the third trimester. Twenty-two women delivered during their influenza hospitalization, and severe neonatal outcomes (neonatal intensive care unit admission or death) occurred among five of six (83.3%) women with severe illness compared with 2 of 16 (12.5%) women with moderate illness (P=.004). CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the potential for severe illness and adverse neonatal outcomes among pregnant 2009 H1N1 influenza-infected women and suggest the benefit of early oseltamivir treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.