Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
01 December 2021 | Story André Damons | Photo Charl Devenish
Prof Felicity Burt, expert in arbovirology in the Division of Virology at the University of the Free State (UFS) and the National Health Laboratory Service (NHLS).

Even though not much is yet known about the new COVID-19 variant, Omicron, the presence of a high number of mutations – more than 30 – in the spike protein of the variant raises concern. 

This is according to Prof Felicity Burt, expert in arbovirology in the Division of Virology at the University of the Free State (UFS) and the National Health Laboratory Service (NHLS). According to her, although Omicron is highly transmissible, further epidemiological data is required to determine if it is more transmissible than the Delta variant.

On Friday 26 November, the World Health Organisation (WHO) declared the new variant, B.1.1.529, a variant of concern (VOC) and assigned it the name Omicron. This assignation was based on advice from the Technical Advisory Group on SARS-CoV-2 Virus Evolution (TAG-VE), an independent group of experts responsible for monitoring and evaluating emerging variants. The following are considered when categorising a newly identified variant – are there mutations (changes in the viral genes) that are known, or that have the potential, to affect the characteristics of the virus, such as transmissibility, disease severity, immune escape, diagnostic or therapeutic escape; is there significant community transmission or increasing prevalence in multiple countries over time; are the public health and social measures effective against the variant.

With each new variant, the public health concerns are dependent on the transmissibility of the variant, the ability of the virus to escape immunity from natural infection or from vaccination, and the severity of illness caused by the variant or any change in clinical presentation. In addition, the ability of current diagnostic assays to adequately detect the variant and effectiveness of public health and social measures, must be considered.

We know, we don’t know 

Answers are derived from existing epidemiological data, laboratory research, and theoretical considerations. Although we can make some predictions based on the mutations identified and the location of these mutations, the epidemiological data and laboratory research are essential to answer with certainty, and this can take some time. The presence of a high number of mutations – more than 30 – in the spike protein of Omicron, raises concern. What do we know and what don’t we know?

“What we don’t know is whether these mutations have changed the severity of disease caused by the virus. We do know that the diagnostic PCR tests currently used in South Africa are not compromised by the presence of these mutations, and in fact, one of the molecular assays commonly used to target three regions of the virus, can be used as a rapid biomarker to detect the variant. Although sequencing of the genome is used as confirmation, this assay provides a useful rapid biomarker that can be used to detect the presence of the variant; subsequently, PCR results have shown that the variant is likely already present in most provinces in the country,” says Prof Burt, who currently holds an NRF-DST South African Research Chair in vector-borne and zoonotic pathogens research. 

There is also preliminary epidemiological evidence that reinfections are occurring. According to her, the occurrence of reinfections suggests some degree of immune escape; however, we do not know the extent of immune escape or the contribution of waning immunity towards reinfections. “Laboratory tests, in which the live virus is tested against samples from both recovered and vaccinated people, are required to confirm whether existing antibodies can neutralise the variant. The tests for neutralising antibodies require specialised facilities and is dependent on culturing the virus. 
“These tests are already underway in the country and should provide more information in the coming weeks. 

Neutralising antibody tests, although time consuming, are relatively easy to perform compared to tests to determine the role played by other arms of the immune response.”

Vaccines still best option to fight COVID-19

Prof Burt, who has worked on viral haemorrhagic fevers and arboviruses at the National Institute for Communicable Diseases (NICD), says it is known that vaccines are highly effective in reducing the severity of disease and fatalities in individuals infected with other variants, such as Beta and Delta, despite mutations in critical regions of the spike gene in the variants. 

The epidemiological data acquired from cases and the results of laboratory tests for neutralising capability will contribute towards understanding the effectiveness of the vaccine against Omicron. The questions regarding severity of the disease and level of protection from previous infection and vaccines are priority areas to understand the impact of this variant. The early identification of the variant and the initiation of vital research and data analysis highlight the importance of genomic surveillance.

Cases of Omicron have already been confirmed in Israel, the United Kingdom, Europe, Australia, and Africa. Travel restrictions have previously been shown to be ineffective in stopping the geographical spread of new variants, merely delaying the inevitable, and at significant cost to economies. “We know with certainty that vaccination has reduced the severity of illness and death with previous variants; even in the face of reduced neutralising ability, there was sufficient protection to save lives,” says Prof Burt.  

She concluded, “Globally, the impact of vaccination is evident in countries experiencing fourth waves, with a reduced number of deaths compared to previous waves. Many decisions in life are based on a risk assessment and consideration of the pros and cons. Vaccines save lives. Vaccines definitely boost waning immune responses from natural infection.” 

“This is certainly not the time to reject the vaccine based on perceived risks from inaccurate social media spreading harmful disinformation compared to the known risks associated with contracting COVID-19 and the known protection against severe disease afforded by the vaccines.”

News Archive

UFS presents sport concussion programme for schools
2008-11-14

The Sports Medicine Clinic at the University of the Free State (UFS) will present a sports concussion programme for schools in the Free State.

“The Pharos Schools Concussion Programme makes the latest methods and technology in concussion management available to learners who play contact sport,” says Dr Louis Holtzhausen, Programme Director of Sports Medicine at the UFS.

The great risk of concussion is that there is an uncertainty about when a player can return to a sport with safety and with the minimum complications in the brain. This programme fills that gap to a large extent.

“By using this programme, no player who suffers concussion will return to play before it is medically safe to do so. The programme also educates players, parents, coaches and the medical fraternity on how to manage sports concussion,” says Dr Holtzhausen.

The programme has been designed for hockey, soccer, cricket, rugby and other contact and collision sports.

SA Rugby has used the programme for professional players for the last five years and advocates that all school rugby players should participate in the programme.

Several sports teams from schools in and around Bloemfontein as well as the University’s Shimla and Irawa rugby teams have already been tested. This will provide invaluable information in the management of possible head injuries.

“We can now give definite guidelines to players and coaches regarding the safe return of players to teams after such an injury. It takes a lot of the guesswork out of the management of concussion and provides peace of mind to coaches, parents and players regarding serious injuries,” says Dr Holtzhausen.

By enrolling in the concussion programme, learners and their parents are ensured of among others:

A baseline computer brain-function test before the start of the season.
Information on how to recognise and treat concussion, including a fieldside information card for the player’s team.
A free consultation and neurological examination by a sports physician after any suspected concussion.
As many brain-function tests and sports-physician consultations as necessary after any concussion, until complete recovery.
Referral to a network of specialists if necessary.

The Pharos Programme uses a cognitive function evaluation called Cogsport. This is a neurophysiological test that measures brain function before the season starts. In this way, a baseline standard is established and, should concussion occur during the season, the extent of it can be measured according to the baseline and rehabilitation.

“Once we have the baseline values, the concussed player’s return to those levels must be monitored. He/she can return to light exercise in the meantime and semi- and full-contact can be introduced at appropriate times,” says Dr Holtzhausen.

The cost of enrolment is R200 per learner, regardless of the number of concussions suffered or sports physician consultations received. “By enrolling in this programme, parents will ensure that their child has the best chance of avoiding the potentially serious consequences of concussion, including learning disabilities, recurrent concussions, epileptic fits and even death,” says Dr Holtzhausen.

More information on the programme can be obtained from Ms Arina Otto at 051 401 2530.

Media Release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Assistant Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za  
14 November 2008
 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept