Financing pandemic prevention, preparedness and response: lessons learned and perspectives for future.

BACKGROUND: The attainment of global health security goals and universal health coverage will remain a mirage unless African health systems are adequately funded to improve resilience to public health emergencies. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the global inequity in accessing medical countermeasures, leaving African countries far behind. As we anticipate the next pandemic, improving investments in health systems to adequately finance pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response (PPPR) promptly, ensuring equity and access to medical countermeasures, is crucial. In this article, we analyze the African and global pandemic financing initiatives and put ways forward for policymakers and the global health community to consider. METHODS: This article is based on a rapid literature review and desk review of various PPPR financing mechanisms in Africa and globally. Consultation of leaders and experts in the area and scrutinization of various related meeting reports and decisions have been carried out. MAIN TEXT: The African Union (AU) has demonstrated various innovative financing mechanisms to mitigate the impacts of public health emergencies in the continent. To improve equal access to the COVID-19 medical countermeasures, the AU launched Africa Medical Supplies Platform (AMSP) and Africa Vaccine Acquisition Trust (AVAT). These financing initiatives were instrumental in mitigating the impacts of COVID-19 and their lessons can be capitalized as we make efforts for PPPR. The COVID-19 Response Fund, subsequently converted into the African Epidemics Fund (AEF), is another innovative financing mechanism to ensure sustainable and self-reliant PPPR efforts. The global initiatives for financing PPPR include the Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility (PEF) and the Pandemic Fund. The PEF was criticized for its inadequacy in building resilient health systems, primarily because the fund ignored the prevention and preparedness items. The Pandemic Fund is also being criticized for its suboptimal emphasis on the response aspect of the pandemic and non-inclusive governance structure. CONCLUSIONS: To ensure optimal financing for PPPR, we call upon the global health community and decision-makers to focus on the harmonization of financing efforts for PPPR, make regional financing mechanisms central to global PPPR financing efforts, and ensure the inclusivity of international finance governance systems.

Urgent support mechanism: saving millions of COVID-19 vaccines from expiry in Africa.

Delivering COVID-19 vaccines with 4-6 weeks shelf life remains one of Africa's most pressing challenges. The Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) leadership recognised that COVID-19 vaccines donated to many African countries were at risk of expiry considering the short shelf life on delivery in the Member States and slow vaccine uptake rates. Thus, a streamlined rapid response system, the urgent support mechanism, was developed to assist countries accelerate COVID-19 vaccine uptake. We describe the achievements and lessons learnt during implementation of the urgent support mechanism in eight African countries. An Africa CDC team was rapidly deployed to meet with the Ministry of Health of each country alerted for COVID-19 vaccine expiry and identified national implementing partners to quickly develop operational work plans and strategies to scale up the urgent use of the vaccines. The time between the initiation of alerts to the start of the implementation was typically within 2 weeks. A total of approximately 2.5 million doses of vaccines, costing $900 000, were prevented from expiration. The urgent support has also contributed to the increased COVID-19 vaccination coverage in the Member States from 16.1% at the initiation to 25.3% at the end of the urgent support. Some of the effective strategies used by the urgent support mechanism included coordination between Africa CDC and country vaccine task forces, establishment of vaccination centres, building the capacity of routine and surge health workforce, procurement and distribution of vaccine ancillaries, staff training, advocacy and sensitisation events, and use of trusted religious scriptures and community influencers to support public health messages. The urgent support mechanism demonstrated a highly optimised process and serves as a successful example for acceleration and integration of vaccination into different healthcare delivery points.

Efficacy and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in Africa: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Data on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness to support regional vaccine policy and practice are limited in Africa. Thus, this review aimed to evaluate the efficacy and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines administered in Africa. METHODS: We systematically searched peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective cohort studies, and case-control studies that reported on VE in Africa. We carried out a risk of bias assessment, and the findings of this review were synthesized and presented in a narrative form, including tables and figures. The synthesis was focused on COVID-19 VE against various levels of the disease condition and outcomes (infection, hospitalization or critical, and death), time points, and variants of concern. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies, with a total sample size of 913,285 participants, were included in this review. The majority (8/13) of studies were from South Africa and 38.5% (5/13) were randomized clinical trials. The studies reported that a full dose of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine had a VE of 100% against COVID-19 infection by Beta (B.1.351) and Delta variants and 96.7% against hospitalization by Delta variant. The Johnson and Johnson vaccine had VE ranging from 38.1%-62.0% against hospitalization and 51.9%- 86% against critical disease by Beta (B 1.351) variant. The Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine had a VE of 89.4% against hospitalization by the Omicron variant but was not effective against the B.1.351 variant (10.4%). The Sinopharm vaccine had a VE of 67% against infection and 46% against hospitalization by Delta variant. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccines administered in Africa were effective in preventing infections, hospitalization, and death. These review findings underscore the need for concerted efforts of all stakeholders to enhance the access and availability of COVID-19 vaccines and reinforce public awareness to reach the high-risk, unvaccinated group of the African population.

The future of public health doctoral education in Africa: transforming higher education institutions to enhance research and practice.

The African Union and the Africa Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued a Call to Action in 2022 for Africa's New Public Health Order that underscored the need for increased capacity in the public health workforce. Additional domestic and global investments in public health workforce development are central to achieving the aspirations of Agenda 2063 of the African Union, which aims to build and accelerate the implementation of continental frameworks for equitable, people-centred growth and development. Recognising the crucial role of higher education and research, we assessed the capabilities of public health doctoral training in schools and programmes of public health in Africa across three conceptual components: instructional, institutional, and external. Six inter-related and actionable recommendations were derived to advance doctoral training, research, and practice capacity within and between universities. These can be achieved through equitable partnerships between universities, research centres, and national, regional, and global public health institutions.

Prioritization of zoonoses for multisectoral, One Health collaboration in Somalia, 2023.

Background: The human population of Somalia is vulnerable to zoonoses due to a high reliance on animal husbandry. This disease risk is exacerbated by relatively low income (poverty) and weak state capacity for health service delivery in the country as well as climate extremes and geopolitical instability in the region. To address this threat to public health efficiently and effectively, it is essential that all sectors have a common understanding of the priority zoonotic diseases of greatest concern to the country. Methods: Representatives from human, animal (domestic and wildlife), agriculture, and environmental health sectors undertook a multisectoral prioritization exercise using the One Health Zoonotic Disease Prioritization (OHZDP) tool developed by the United States CDC. The process involved: reviewing available literature and creating a longlist of zoonotic diseases for potential inclusion; developing and weighting criteria for establishing the importance of each zoonoses; formulating categorical questions (indicators) for each criteria; scoring each disease according to the criteria; and finally ranking the diseases based on the final score. Participants then brainstormed and suggested strategic action plans to prevent, and control prioritized zoonotic diseases. Results: Thirty-three zoonoses were initially considered for prioritization. Final criteria for ranking included: 1) socioeconomic impact (including sensitivity) in Somalia; 2) burden of disease in humans in Somalia); 3) availability of intervention in Somalia; 4) environmental factors/determinants; and 5) burden of disease in animals in Somalia. Following scoring of each zoonotic disease against these criteria, and further discussion of the OHZDP tool outputs, seven priority zoonoses were identified for Somalia: Rift Valley fever, Middle East respiratory syndrome, anthrax, trypanosomiasis, brucellosis, zoonotic enteric parasites (including Giardia and Cryptosporidium), and zoonotic influenza viruses. Conclusions: The final list of seven priority zoonotic diseases will serve as a foundation for strengthening One Health approaches for disease prevention and control in Somalia. It will be used to: shape improved multisectoral linkages for integrated surveillance systems and laboratory networks for improved human, animal, and environmental health; establish multisectoral public health emergency preparedness and response plans using One Health approaches; and enhance workforce capacity to prevent, control and respond to priority zoonotic diseases.

A continent-wide effort and solidarity at curbing COVID-19 pandemic: the Africa task force for novel coronavirus (AFTCOR) infection prevention and control technical working group's experience.

A continent-wide Africa Task Force for Coronavirus with its six technical working groups was formed to prepare adequately and respond to the novel Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak in Africa. This research in practice article aimed to describe how the infection prevention and control (IPC) technical working group (TWG) supported Africa Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) in preparedness and response to COVID-19 on the continent. To effectively address the multifaceted IPC TWG mandate of organizing training and implementing rigorous IPC measures at healthcare service delivery points, the working group was sub-divided into four sub-groups-Guidelines, Training, Research, and Logistics. The action framework was used to describe the experiences of each subgroup. The guidelines subgroup developed 14 guidance documents and two advisories; all of which were published in English. In addition, five of these documents were translated and published in Arabic, while three others were translated and published in French and Portuguese. Challenges faced in the guidelines subgroup included the primary development of the Africa CDC website in English, and the need to revise previously issued guidelines. The training subgroup engaged the Infection Control Africa Network as technical experts to carry out in-person training of IPC focal persons and port health personnel across the African continent. Challenges faced included the difficulty in conducting face-to-face IPC training and onsite technical support due to the lockdown. The research subgroup developed an interactive COVID-19 Research Tracker on the Africa CDC website and conducted a context-based operation and implementation research. The lack of understanding of Africa CDC's capacity to lead her own research was the major challenge faced by the research subgroup. The logistics subgroup assisted African Union (AU) member states to identify their IPC supply needs through capacity building for IPC quantification. A notable challenge faced by the logistics subgroup was the initial lack of experts on IPC logistics and quantifications, which was later addressed by the recruitment of professionals. In conclusion, IPC cannot be built overnight nor can it be promoted abruptly during outbreaks of diseases. Thus, the Africa CDC should build strong national IPC programmes and support such programmes with trained and competent professionals.

Training a Continent: A Process Evaluation of Virtual Training on Infection Prevention and Control in Africa During COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Strengthening infection prevention and control (IPC) capacity was identified as a key intervention to prepare African Union member states to curb the COVID-19 pandemic. As part of the Africa Taskforce for Coronavirus, which helped implement the Africa Joint Continental Strategy for COVID-19 Outbreak response, the IPC Technical Working Group (IPC TWG) was convened to coordinate the development of IPC core components for preparedness, response, and recovery from COVID-19. As part of the IPC TWG's work, the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, in collaboration with the Infection Control Africa Network, delivered virtual IPC training sessions targeted to African Union member states. We aimed to undertake a process evaluation of this training to inform and improve both ongoing and future programming. METHODS: The scope of the evaluation was agreed upon through discussion with the training organizers and advisory members and a design workshop. A mixed-methods approach was used; data collection was partly prospective and partly retrospective due to the rapid start of some of the training activities. Existing available data included: usage analytics, the content of questions posed during the webinar and community of practice, and participant feedback survey results. In addition, in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with a sample of webinar participants. RESULTS: The rapid development of this training was efficient and responsive. The training reached more than 3,000 participants across the 2 rounds, but the numbers varied substantially by location. Participants engaged well during the question period during each webinar, but the asynchronous community of practice was less utilized during the evaluation time frame. Many participants appreciated the African focus of the webinars and gave positive feedback on the practical and context-specific content. CONCLUSIONS: The move toward online training provides an important opportunity to improve IPC across the African continent.

Global and regional governance of One Health and implications for global health security.

The apparent failure of global health security to prevent or prepare for the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for closer cooperation between human, animal (domestic and wildlife), and environmental health sectors. However, the many institutions, processes, regulatory frameworks, and legal instruments with direct and indirect roles in the global governance of One Health have led to a fragmented, global, multilateral health security architecture. We explore four challenges: first, the sectoral, professional, and institutional silos and tensions existing between human, animal, and environmental health; second, the challenge that the international legal system, state sovereignty, and existing legal instruments pose for the governance of One Health; third, the power dynamics and asymmetry in power between countries represented in multilateral institutions and their impact on priority setting; and finally, the current financing mechanisms that predominantly focus on response to crises, and the chronic underinvestment for epidemic and emergency prevention, mitigation, and preparedness activities. We illustrate the global and regional dimensions to these four challenges and how they relate to national needs and priorities through three case studies on compulsory licensing, the governance of water resources in the Lake Chad Basin, and the desert locust infestation in east Africa. Finally, we propose 12 recommendations for the global community to address these challenges. Despite its broad and holistic agenda, One Health continues to be dominated by human and domestic animal health experts. Substantial efforts should be made to address the social-ecological drivers of health emergencies including outbreaks of emerging, re-emerging, and endemic infectious diseases. These drivers include climate change, biodiversity loss, and land-use change, and therefore require effective and enforceable legislation, investment, capacity building, and integration of other sectors and professionals beyond health.