Haemophilia is a rare inherited bleeding disorder with complex support and costly treatment. Comprehensive care for people with haemophilia (PwH) must take place in structured and continuously evaluated treatment centres. The aim of the Public Assistance for People with Haemophilia in Brazil Project (PATCH Project) is to assess the infrastructure, human resources and healthcare delivery processes of Brazilian Blood Centres (BC) involved in the provision of haemophilia care.

This is a nationwide cross-sectional study involving 98 BC across Brazil’s 26 states and the Federal District, focusing on the care provided to PwH. A self-administered structured questionnaire was prepared, based on national and international recommendations for management, treatment and outcomes assessment in PwH. The criteria of the World Federation of Haemophilia and the European Association for Haemophilia and Allied Disorders will be used to define standards of quality.

Ethical approval for this study was granted by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the Federal University of Goiás, the coordinating centre (protocol CAAE 53863221.8.0000.5078), and subsequently by all participating institutions. Written informed consent is obtained from all participants prior to enrolment. Study findings will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentation at international scientific conferences. Research data will be managed in accordance with ethical and legal standards and will be made available on reasonable request to support future investigations.

Not applicable

To identify sex-specific patterns based on determinants related to sleep quality, using a representative sample of the Spanish adult population.

Cross-sectional, age-stratified and sex-stratified study.

Community-based assessments in two Spanish provinces (Salamanca and Ávila).

Adults aged 25–65 years (n=500), equally distributed by sex and five age strata, selected from the regional health-card database.

Objective sleep metrics from wrist actigraphy (time in bed, total sleep time (TST), sleep efficiency, wake after sleep onset, number/duration of awakenings, fragmentation/movement indices) and self-reported sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index).

Standardised baseline assessments collected sociodemographic, clinical, mental-health and lifestyle variables using validated instruments. Actigraphy (ActiGraph GT3X+) recorded triaxial acceleration at 30 Hz over 5 days; data were aggregated in 60 s epochs (ActiLife). Sleep/wake was classified with Cole-Kripke and nocturnal episodes identified with Tudor-Locke before deriving sleep indices. Two-step cluster analysis was applied separately by sex.

Three clusters were identified for each sex, with age and educational level being the most influential factors. In men, the 65-year-old cluster with university education and lower anxious–depressive load showed the highest sleep efficiency (91.8±3.8%) and the lowest TST (351.7±74.8 min). In contrast, the 35-year-old cluster with middle or high school presented the lowest efficiency (88.3±10.0%) and higher TST (368.1±83.8 min). In women, the 55-year-old cluster with middle or high school and low emotional load showed the highest efficiency (93.6±2.8%), despite a reduced TST (352.0±79.7 min), while the 35-year-old cluster, with middle or high school and high levels of anxiety and depression, showed the worst efficiency metrics (89.5±3.9%) and a higher TST (394.8±67.3 min).

Sleep quality in Spanish adults is heterogeneous across sex-specific clusters shaped by age, education and mental-health burden. Cluster-based characterisation may support tailored public-health interventions.

NCT05324267.

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) has low survival rates with worse outcomes at night due to delayed emergency medical services (EMS) response, resource limitations and workforce fatigue. Since randomised trials are unfeasible, all-comers registries provide essential data to bridge evidence gaps and improve EMS protocols.

Retrospective observational study using propensity score matching.

National EMS registry and death registry data from Poland, cases from September to November 2022.

Of 2388 eligible patients, cases were grouped by time of cardiac arrest (on-hours: 7:00–18:59; off-hours: 7:00–18:59 AM) and matched 1:1 using propensity scores, yielding 1194 pairs.

Primary: return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and 30-day survival.

Secondary: EMS response time.

Our findings revealed significant disparities in OHCA outcomes between day and night shifts. ROSC rates were notably lower at night (20.9% vs 34.8%; p=0.01); however, no difference in 30-day survival was observed (8.3% vs 8.1%; p=0.94). Furthermore, EMS response times were significantly longer during nighttime hours (median and IQR): 12.4 (7.4–14.6) versus 11.2 (6.2–13.5) (minutes); p=0.01.

Patients with OHCA during off-hours experienced longer EMS response times and significantly lower rates of ROSC as compared with daytime hours. No difference in 30-day survival was observed between groups. Potential contributors include reduced staffing, fatigue and logistical delays. System-level changes in EMS scheduling and workforce planning might help to reduce time-of-day-related disparities in OHCA outcomes.

Clinical Trials ID: NCT03130088; Post results

The objective of the scoping review was to systematise the existing knowledge about skill mix changes among the healthcare workforce during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Scoping review according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Review.

Five databases including CINAHL Ultimate, Web of Science, Medline, Embase and Scopus were searched in August 2024.

The review encompassed original research studies published from January 2020 to August 2024, on the skill mix of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Quantitative and qualitative studies were included without geographical or linguistic restrictions.

Data were independently extracted by two researchers, capturing details such as publication year, study title, country, target population, study purpose and methodology, sample size, analysed variables, results and recommendations.

A total of 13 563 records were identified in the databases of which 3962 remained for abstract review. 32 articles were included in the final analysis. 17 of the 32 papers were from Western and Southern Europe. The healthcare professions which were described in the studies were physicians, nurses, midwives, paramedics, pharmacists, physiotherapists, occupational therapists and medical assistants, of which the majority of the studies were conducted among nurses (n=16), pharmacists (n=11) and physicians (n=6). Most studies (n=9) concerned the adding of new tasks/roles and reallocating tasks in combination with teamwork (n=8). Research covered a range of topics, including psychological aspects of work, patient safety, work reorganisation, training and collaboration. Many studies focused on the challenges related to skill mix, such as the blurring of responsibilities and role ambiguity.

The research summarised in this review demonstrates the impact of implementing skill mix changes on healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in the area of mental health. The research highlights the importance of adaptation in response to pressures among healthcare professions and the entire system. Further research is needed to examine the long-term impact of skill mix on healthcare workers across regions and professions in crisis situations.

Nipah virus (NiV) is a bat-transmitted paramyxovirus causing recurrent, high-mortality outbreaks in South and South-East Asia. As a WHO priority pathogen, efforts are underway to develop therapies like monoclonal antibodies and small-molecule antivirals, which require evaluation in clinical trials. However, trial design is challenging due to limited understanding of NiV’s clinical characteristics. Given the rarity of NiV infections, strategies targeting improved outcomes for the broader acute encephalitis syndrome (AES) patient population, including those with NiV, are essential for advancing therapeutic research. To address these gaps, we designed the Bangladesh AES cohort study to characterise the patient population, clinical features, treatment practices, common aetiologies and outcomes in patients presenting with AES, including NiV infection, as a clinical characterisation study to inform the design of clinical trials for NiV and AES more broadly.

This prospective cohort study will be conducted in Bangladesh, a NiV endemic country with annual outbreaks. In collaboration with the ongoing NiV surveillance programme in Bangladesh, we aim to enrol up to 2000 patients of all ages presenting with AES at three tertiary care hospitals within the Nipah belt. Patients who provide informed consent to participate will be monitored throughout their hospital stay until 90 days post enrolment. Data will be systematically collected through interviews and medical record reviews at several time points: on the day of enrolment, day 3, day 7, the day of critical care admission (if applicable), discharge day and 90 days post enrollment. Additionally, a portion of the cerebrospinal fluid collected under the concurrent NiV surveillance protocol will be tested for an array of viral and bacterial pathogens responsible for encephalitis at the International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research Bangladesh (icddr,b) laboratory.

The study received ethical approval from the Oxford Tropical Research Ethics Committee, University of Oxford, UK (OxTREC Ref: 576–23) and the institutional review board of icddr,b, Bangladesh (icddr,b protocol number: 24016). By characterising the AES patient population, this study will generate essential evidence on key clinical parameters, which will be pivotal in optimising the design of clinical trials for potential interventions aimed at improving outcomes in patients with AES, including those with NiV disease. Findings will be shared with participating hospitals, patients and relevant government stakeholders. Results will also be disseminated through conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications.

Not applicable (this is an observational study).

The COVID-19 pandemic’s unprecedented nature has exposed significant vulnerabilities in most public health systems and highlighted the importance of coordinated responses across various levels of government. A global debate emerged on the types of health measures necessary to curb the rapid spread of contagious and/or lethal diseases. However, some of these measures involved restricting individual rights, raising significant ethical, legal and public health questions. The protocol of this systematic review aims to address a critical gap in the literature by analysing how Public Health Surveillance services worldwide implemented compulsory right-restricting measures during the COVID-19 pandemic, and what impacts these measures had on public health outcomes and individual rights.

This protocol focuses on studies about right-restricting measures enacted by Public Health Surveillance services during the COVID-19 pandemic. It will be unrestrictive as to period (starting in 2019, when the outbreak was identified), language or publication status in a preliminary stage. It will include only peer-reviewed publications, discarding opinion articles, editorials, conference papers and non-peer-reviewed publications. Considering the PICo strategy, the research question of this systematic review can be formulated as follows: Problem—right-restricting measures enacted by Public Health Surveillance services; Interest—implementation modalities and impacts on individual rights and public health outcomes; Context—COVID-19 pandemic. This protocol will use the following databases: Pubmed, Cochrane/CENTRAL, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science. Considering the various measures that may have been adopted, the following categories of analysis will be used: (i) Public Health Surveillance as a field, (ii) the various specific areas of Health Surveillance, (iii) law enforcement, (iv) right-restricting measures and consent, (v) interactions between right-restricting measures and routine Public Health Surveillance functions, (vi) differences between countries and (vii) Health Surveillance lessons learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic. These categories are not strictly mutually exclusive; however, each study will be assigned to the category most aligned with its primary focus. To ensure the validity and reliability of findings, each study will have its risk of bias assessed at both the study and outcome levels.

Patients and the public were not involved in the design, conduct, reporting or dissemination plans of this systematic review. The results will be presented in one or more articles to be submitted to scientific journals and may also be presented at scientific conferences and to public policy makers.

This systematic review protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on 20 November 2024 (registration number CRD42024613039).