Analysing the implementation of infection prevention and control measures in health care facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic in the African Region.

BACKGROUND: The declaration of SARS-CoV-2 as a public health emergency of international concern in January 2020 prompted the need to strengthen infection prevention and control (IPC) capacities within health care facilities (HCF). IPC guidelines, with standard and transmission-based precautions to be put in place to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2 at these HCFs were developed. Based on these IPC guidelines, a rapid assessment scorecard tool, with 14 components, to enhance assessment and improvement of IPC measures at HCFs was developed. This study assessed the level of implementation of the IPC measures in HCFs across the African Region during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: An observational study was conducted from April 2020 to November 2022 in 17 countries in the African Region to monitor the progress made in implementing IPC standard and transmission-based precautions in primary-, secondary- and tertiary-level HCFs. A total of 5168 primary, secondary and tertiary HCFs were assessed. The HCFs were assessed and scored each component of the tool. Statistical analyses were done using R (version 4.2.0). RESULTS: A total of 11 564 assessments were conducted in 5153 HCFs, giving an average of 2.2 assessments per HCF. The baseline median score for the facility assessments was 60.2%. Tertiary HCFs and those dedicated to COVID-19 patients had the highest IPC scores. Tertiary-level HCFs had a median score of 70%, secondary-level HCFs 62.3% and primary-level HCFs 56.8%. HCFs dedicated to COVID-19 patients had the highest scores, with a median of 68.2%, followed by the mixed facilities that attended to both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients, with 64.84%. On the components, there was a strong correlation between high IPC assessment scores and the presence of IPC focal points in HCFs, the availability of IPC guidelines in HCFs and HCFs that had all their health workers trained in basic IPC. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, a functional IPC programme with a dedicated focal person is a prerequisite for implementing improved IPC measures at the HCF level. In the absence of an epidemic, the general IPC standards in HCFs are low, as evidenced by the low scores in the non-COVID-19 treatment centres.

What are the research priorities for strengthening public health emergency preparedness and response in Africa?

BACKGROUND: Research evidence is needed to strengthen capacities in emergency preparedness and response (EPR). However, the absence of a clear research agenda limits the optimal use of research evidence. This paper reports on the prioritization of research questions and topics that could contribute to evidence-informed strengthening of EPR capacities in the African region. METHODS: The priority-setting consisted of desk review and stakeholder consultation workshop. Twenty-nine people participated in the workshop, including representatives from WHO regional office and EPR focal points in Africa, representatives of research institutions, and partners from Science for Africa Foundation, United Nations Children's Fund and Africa Center for Disease Control. Modified Delphi technique was used to systematically arrive at specific and cross-cutting research priorities in the three broad areas of the EPR, which are program Implementation, Clinical and Epidemiology. The research questions/topics were ranked on five-point Likert scale (1 = very low to 5 = very high) based on seven agreed-on criteria. Research priority score was calculated for each question as the mean of the criteria scores. RESULTS: A total of 123 research questions comprising, 29 on Epidemiology, 22 on Clinical, 23 on program Implementation, and 49 on cross-cutting issues were ranked. The top ten research priorities were: knowledge and skills of healthcare workers in detecting and responding effectively to disease outbreaks; quality of data (accuracy, timeliness, completeness) for epidemic prone diseases; determinants of vaccine hesitancy; determinants of infection transmission among health care workers during PHE; effective measures for protecting health workers from highly infectious pathogens in PHE; strategies to improve the effectiveness of contact tracing for epidemic prone diseases; effectiveness of current case definitions as screening tools for epidemic and pandemic prone diseases; measures to strengthen national and sub-national laboratory capacity for timely disease confirmation within the Integrated Diseases Surveillance and Response framework; factors affecting prompt data sharing on epidemic-prone diseases; and effective strategies for appropriate community participation in EPR. CONCLUSIONS: The collaborative multi-stakeholder workshop produced a starting list of priority research questions and topics for strengthening EPR capacities in Africa. Action needs to be taken to continuously update the research agenda and support member States to contextualize the research priorities and commission research for timely generation and uptake of evidence.

The role of supportive supervision using mobile technology in monitoring and guiding program performance: a case study in Nigeria, 2015-2016.

BACKGROUND: Supportive supervision is one of the interventions that fosters program improvement by way of imparting knowledge and skills to health workers. The basic challenge in supportive supervision is the availability of data in real time for timely and effective feedback. Thus, the main objective of this study was to determine the contribution of real-time data collection during supportive supervision for timely feedback and generation of evidence for health intervention planning. METHODS: We analyzed supportive supervision records collected through handheld devices employing the open data kit (ODK) platform from July 2015 to June 2016. Supervision was conducted across the country by 592 World Health Organization (WHO) officers. The availability of real-time data and the distance of health facilities to the community were analyzed. RESULTS: During the study period, 90,396 health facilities were supervised. The average time spent during supervision varied from 1.53 to 3.78 h across the six geopolitical zones of the country. The average interval between completion of the supervisory checklist and synchronization with the server varied from 3.9 h to 7.5 h. The average distance between the health facility and a ward varied from 5 to 24 km. CONCLUSION: The use of handheld devices for supportive supervision provided real-time data from health facilities to state and zonal levels for analysis and feedback. Program officers used the findings to rectify process indicators in time for a better outcome.

Willingness of WHO staff to work in health emergencies in the African Region: opportunity for phased deployment of staff and ensure continuity of health services.

A human resource base that ensures appropriate deployment of staff to emergencies, addressing different shock events in emergencies, without disrupting continuity of service is germane to a successful response. Consequently, the WHO Health Emergencies programme in the African Region, in collaboration with Africa Centre for Disease Control (ACDC) launched the African Volunteer Health Corps (AVoHC) and Strengthening and Utilization of Response Group for Emergencies (SURGE), an initiative aimed at ensuring a pool of timely responders. We explored the willingness of WHO staff to work in emergencies. A call for expression of interest to be part of the Elite Emergency Experts (Triple E) was published on 5th July 2022 via email and was open for 5 weeks. The responses were analyzed using simple descriptive statistics and presented with graphic illustrations. A total of 1253 WHO staff, from all the six WHO regions, cutting across all cadre, applied to the call. The applicants had various trainings and experiences in emergency and have responded to mostly disease outbreaks. Two-third of the applicants were males. This paper did not explore reasons for the willingness to work in emergencies. However, contrary to fears expressed in literature that health workers would not want to work in emergencies with potential for infections, the applicants have worked mostly in infectious emergencies. Literature identified some themes on factors that could impact on willingness of health workers to work in emergencies. These include concerns for the safety of the responders and impact of partners, child and elderly care, as well as other family obligations, which emergency planners must consider in planning emergency response.

The cost of implementing measles campaign in Nigeria: comparing the stand-alone and the integrated strategy.

BACKGROUND: Effective integration, one of the seven strategic priorities of the Immunization Agenda 2030, can contribute to increasing vaccination coverage and efficiency. The objective of the study is to measure and compare input costs of "non-selective" measles vaccination campaign as a stand-alone strategy and when integrated with another vaccination campaign. METHODS: We conducted a cost-minimization study using a matched design and data from five states of Nigeria. We carried-out our analysis in 3 states that integrated measles vaccination with Meningitis A and the 2 states that implemented a stand-alone measles campaign. The operational costs (e.g., costs of personnel, training, supervision etc.) were extracted from the budgeted costs, the financial and technical reports. We further used the results of the coverage surveys to demonstrate that the strategies have similar health outputs. RESULTS: The analysis of the impact on campaign budget (currency year: 2019) estimated that savings were up to 420,000 United States Dollar (USD) with the integrated strategies; Over 200 USD per 1,000 children in the target population for measles vaccination (0.2 USD per children) was saved in the studied states. The savings on the coverage survey components were accrued by lower costs in the integration of trainings, and through reduced field work and quality assurance measures costs. CONCLUSIONS: Integration translated to greater value in improving access and efficiency, as through sharing of costs, more life-saving interventions are made accessible to the communities. Important considerations for integration are resource needs, micro-planning adjustments, and health systems delivery platforms.

Framing the future of the COVID-19 response operations in 2022 in the WHO African region.

BACKGROUND: With the evolving epidemiological parameters of COVID-19 in Africa, the response actions and lessons learnt during the pandemic's past two years, SARS-COV 2 will certainly continue to circulate in African countries in 2022 and beyond. As countries in the African continent need to be more prepared and plan to 'live with the virus' for the upcoming two years and after and at the same time mitigate risks by protecting the future most vulnerable and those responsible for maintaining essential services, WHO AFRO is anticipating four interim scenarios of the evolution of the pandemic in 2022 and beyond in the region. OBJECTIVE: In preparation for the rollout of response actions given the predicted scenarios, WHO AFRO has identified ten strategic orientations and areas of focus for supporting member states and partners in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic in Africa in 2022 and beyond. METHODS: WHO analysed trends of the transmissions since the first case in the African continent and reviewed lessons learnt over the past months. RESULTS: Establishing a core and agile team solely dedicated to the COVID-19 response at the WHO AFRO, the emergency hubs, and WCOs will improve the effectiveness of the response and address identified challenges. The team will collaborate with the various clusters of the regional office, and other units and subunits in the WCOs supported with good epidemics intelligence. COVID-19 pandemic has afflicted global humanity at unprecedented levels. CONCLUSION: Two years later and while starting the third year of the COVID-19 response, we now need to change and adapt our strategies, tools and approaches in responding timely and effectively to the pandemic in Africa and save more lives.

Transitioning the COVID-19 response in the WHO African region: a proposed framework for rethinking and rebuilding health systems.

The onset of the pandemic revealed the health system inequities and inadequate preparedness, especially in the African continent. Over the past months, African countries have ensured optimum pandemic response. However, there is still a need to build further resilient health systems that enhance response and transition from the acute phase of the pandemic to the recovery interpandemic/preparedness phase. Guided by the lessons learnt in the response and plausible pandemic scenarios, the WHO Regional Office for Africa has envisioned a transition framework that will optimise the response and enhance preparedness for future public health emergencies. The framework encompasses maintaining and consolidating the current response capacity but with a view to learning and reshaping them by harnessing the power of science, data and digital technologies, and research innovations. In addition, the framework reorients the health system towards primary healthcare and integrates response into routine care based on best practices/health system interventions. These elements are significant in building a resilient health system capable of addressing more effectively and more effectively future public health crises, all while maintaining an optimal level of essential public health functions. The key elements of the framework are possible with countries following three principles: equity (the protection of all vulnerable populations with no one left behind), inclusiveness (full engagement, equal participation, leadership, decision-making and ownership of all stakeholders using a multisectoral and transdisciplinary, One Health approach), and coherence (to reduce the fragmentation, competition and duplication and promote logical, consistent programmes aligned with international instruments).

The challenges of insecurity on implementing vaccination campaign and its effect on measles elimination and control efforts: A case study of 2017/18 measles campaign in Borno state, Nigeria.

Conflict has a negative effect on immunization outcomes leading to epidemics of measles and other vaccine preventable diseases. Borno state, located in the North-Eastern parts of the country, started experiencing insurgency since 2009 by a militant group commonly referred to as "Boko Haram", leading to displacement of numerous persons from their homes. The state government created internally displaced persons (IDPs) camps with an estimated 600,000 persons and over 100,000 children aged 9 - 59 months. We explored the challenges in implementing the measles campaign in 2017 and its effect on measles elimination and control efforts in Borno State. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of the measles surveillance data from the Integrated disease surveillance and response (IDSR), the early warning alert and response system (EWARS), Measles SIA implementation strategy reports and the Post campaign evaluation survey data. RESULT: Seven (26%) of the 27 LGAs had security challenges in Borno state in November 2017. Following the measles campaign, 30 EAs were surveyed as part of the post campaign evaluation with a coverage validation of 72%, the lowest reported state level coverage in the country. Reported measles cases in the age cohort <1Year increased in 2018 by 14.3% compared to 2017. CONCLUSION: Despite the security challenges in Borno state, the 2017 measles SIA was conducted with the post campaign evaluation highlighting some areas of suboptimal performance. There remains a need to review the required strategies for successful implementation in Borno and other states affected by security challenges. The reestablishment of holding camps and vaccination posts at all entry points into IDP camps and host communities to ensure new entrants are screened and vaccinated with the measles vaccines, as has been successful in the polio programme in Nigeria will promotes efforts towards Measles control in the state.

Progress Towards Measles Elimination in Nigeria: 2012 - 2016.

INTRODUCTION: Nigeria has adopted the African Regional measles elimination targets and is implementing the recommended strategies. Nigeria provides routine measles vaccination for children aged 9 months. In addition, since 2006, Nigeria has been conducting nationwide measles supplemental Immunisation activities (SIAs) or mass vaccination campaigns every 2 years, and has established measles case-based surveillance. METHODS: We reviewed routine and supplemental measles immunization coverage data, as well as measles case-based surveillance data from Nigeria for the years 2012 - 2016, in an attempt to determine the country's progress towards these elimination targets. RESULTS: The first dose measles vaccination coverage in Nigeria ranged from 42% and 54% between 2012 and 2015, according to the WHO UNICEF national coverage estimates. Nigeria achieved 84.5% coverage by survey following the 2015 nationwide measles supplemental immunisation activities (SIAs). During this period, the incidence of confirmed measles ranged from 25 - 300 confirmed cases per million population per year, with the Northern States having significantly higher incidence as compared to the Southern States. At the same time, the pattern of confirmed cases indicated a consistent shift in epidemiological susceptibility including older age children. CONCLUSIONS: In order to accelerate its progress towards the measles elimination targets, Nigeria should build population immunity on a sustainable basis by addressing systemic issues in order to scale up routine immunisation coverage, especially in the Northern half of the country; tailoring the target age for measles SIAs so as to sharply reduce measles incidence in age groups heavily affected by the disease; effectively mobilising resources and improving the quality of planning and coverage outcome of SIAs.