Tracheostomy is a lifesaving, essential procedure performed for airway obstruction in the case of head and neck cancers, prolonged ventilator use, and for long-term pulmonary care. While successful quality improvement interventions in high-income countries such as through the Global Tracheostomy Collaborative significantly reduced length of hospital stay and decreased levels of anxiety among patients, limited literature exists regarding tracheostomy care and practices in low and middle-income countries (LMIC), where most of the world resides. Given limited literature, this scoping review aims to summarize published tracheostomy studies in LMICs and highlight areas in need of quality improvement and clinical research efforts. Based on the PRISMA guidelines, a scoping review of the literature was performed through MEDLINE/PubMed and Embase using terms related to tracheostomy, educational and quality improvement interventions, and LMICs. Publications from 2000-2022 in English were included. Eighteen publications representing 10 countries were included in the final analysis. Seven studies described baseline needs assessments, 3 development of training programs for caregivers, 6 trialed home-based or hospital-based interventions, and finally 2 articles discussed development of standardized protocols. Overall, studies highlighted the unique challenges to tracheostomy care in LMICs including language, literacy barriers, resource availability (running water and electricity in patient homes), and health system access (financial costs of travel and follow-up). There is currently limited published literature on tracheostomy quality improvement and care in LMICs. Opportunities to improve quality of care include increased efforts to measure complications and outcomes, implementing evidence-based interventions tailored to LMIC settings, and using an implementation science framework to study tracheostomy care in LMICs.

BACKGROUND: The authors investigated the durability of vaccine efficacy (VE) against human papillomavirus (HPV)16 or 18 infections and antibody response among nonrandomly assigned women who received a single dose of the bivalent HPV vaccine compared with women who received multiple doses and unvaccinated women. METHODS: HPV infections were compared between HPV16 or 18-vaccinated women aged 18 to 25 years who received one (N = 112), two (N = 62), or three (N = 1365) doses, and age- and geography-matched unvaccinated women (N = 1783) in the long-term follow-up of the Costa Rica HPV Vaccine Trial. Cervical HPV infections were measured at two study visits, approximately 9 and 11 years after initial HPV vaccination, using National Cancer Institute next-generation sequencing TypeSeq1 assay. VE and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. HPV16 or 18 antibody levels were measured in all one- and two-dose women, and a subset of three-dose women, using a virus-like particle-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (n = 448). RESULTS: Median follow-up for the HPV-vaccinated group was 11.3 years (interquartile range = 10.9-11.7 years) and did not vary by dose group. VE against prevalent HPV16 or 18 infection was 80.2% (95% CI = 70.7% to 87.0%) among three-dose, 83.8% (95% CI = 19.5% to 99.2%) among two-dose, and 82.1% (95% CI = 40.2% to 97.0%) among single-dose women. HPV16 or 18 antibody levels did not qualitatively decline between years four and 11 regardless of the number of doses given, although one-dose titers continue to be statistically significantly lower compared with two- and three-dose titers. CONCLUSION: More than a decade after HPV vaccination, single-dose VE against HPV16 or 18 infection remained high and HPV16 or 18 antibodies remained stable. A single dose of bivalent HPV vaccine may induce sufficiently durable protection that obviates the need for more doses.

Background

Human papillomaviruses (HPV) cause over 500 000 cervical cancers each year, most of which occur in low-resource settings. Human papillomavirus genotyping is important to study natural history and vaccine efficacy. We evaluated TypeSeq, a novel, next-generation, sequencing-based assay that detects 51 HPV genotypes, in 2 large international epidemiologic studies.

Methods

TypeSeq was evaluated in 2804 cervical specimens from the Study to Understand Cervical Cancer Endpoints and Early Determinants (SUCCEED) and in 2357 specimens from the Costa Rica Vaccine Trial (CVT). Positive agreement and risks of precancer for individual genotypes were calculated for TypeSeq in comparison to Linear Array (SUCCEED). In CVT, positive agreement and vaccine efficacy were calculated for TypeSeq and SPF10-LiPA.

Results

We observed high overall and positive agreement for most genotypes between TypeSeq and Linear Array in SUCCEED and SPF10-LiPA in CVT. There was no significant difference in risk of precancer between TypeSeq and Linear Array in SUCCEED or in estimates of vaccine efficacy between TypeSeq and SPF10-LiPA in CVT.

Conclusions

The agreement of TypeSeq with Linear Array and SPF10-LiPA, 2 well established standards for HPV genotyping, demonstrates its high accuracy. TypeSeq provides high-throughput, affordable HPV genotyping for world-wide studies of cervical precancer risk and of HPV vaccine efficacy.