A rapid increase in coverage of COVID-19 vaccination, Central African Republic.

Problem: In 2021, Central African Republic was facing multiple challenges in vaccinating its population against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), including inadequate infrastructure and funding, a shortage of health workers and vaccine hesitancy among the population. Approach: To increase COVID-19 vaccination coverage, the health ministry used three main approaches: (i) task shifting to train and equip existing community health workers (CHWs) to deliver COVID-19 vaccination; (ii) evidence gathering to understand people's reluctance to be vaccinated; and (iii) bundling of COVID-19 vaccination with the polio vaccination programme. Local setting: Central African Republic is a fragile country with almost two thirds of its population in need of humanitarian assistance. Despite conducting two major COVID-19 vaccination campaigns, by January 2022 only 9% (503 000 people) of the 5 570 659 general population were fully vaccinated. Relevant changes: In the 6 months from February to July 2022, Central African Republic tripled its coverage of COVID-19 vaccination to 29% (1 615 492 out of 5 570 659 people) by August 2022. The integrated polio-COVID-19 campaign enabled an additional 136 040 and 218 978 people to be vaccinated in the first and second rounds respectively, at no extra cost. Evidence obtained through surveys and focus group discussions enabled the health ministry to develop communication strategies to dispel vaccine hesitancy and misconceptions. Lessons learnt: Task shifting COVID-19 vaccination to CHWs can be an efficient solution for rapid scaling-up of vaccination campaigns. Building trust with the community is also important for addressing complex health issues such as vaccine hesitancy. Collaborative efforts are necessary to provide access to COVID-19 vaccines for high-risk and vulnerable populations.

Coordination and Management of COVID-19 in Africa through Health Operations and Technical Expertise Pillar: A Case Study from WHO AFRO One Year into Response.

Background: following the importation of the first Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case into Africa on 14 February 2020 in Egypt, the World Health Organisation (WHO) regional office for Africa (AFRO) activated a three-level incident management support team (IMST), with technical pillars, to coordinate planning, implementing, supervision, and monitoring of the situation and progress of implementation as well as response to the pandemic in the region. At WHO AFRO, one of the pillars was the health operations and technical expertise (HOTE) pillar with five sub-pillars: case management, infection prevention and control, risk communication and community engagement, laboratory, and emergency medical team (EMT). This paper documents the learnings (both positive and negative for consideration of change) from the activities of the HOTE pillar and recommends future actions for improving its coordination for future emergencies, especially for multi-country outbreaks or pandemic emergency responses. Method: we conducted a document review of the HOTE pillar coordination meetings' minutes, reports, policy and strategy documents of the activities, and outcomes and feedback on updates on the HOTE pillar given at regular intervals to the Regional IMST. In addition, key informant interviews were conducted with 14 members of the HOTE sub pillar. Key Learnings: the pandemic response revealed that shared decision making, collaborative coordination, and planning have been significant in the COVID-19 response in Africa. The HOTE pillar's response structure contributed to attaining the IMST objectives in the African region and translated to timely support for the WHO AFRO and the member states. However, while the coordination mechanism appeared robust, some challenges included duplication of coordination efforts, communication, documentation, and information management. Recommendations: we recommend streamlining the flow of information to better understand the challenges that countries face. There is a need to define the role and responsibilities of sub-pillar team members and provide new team members with information briefs to guide them on where and how to access internal information and work under the pillar. A unified documentation system is important and could help to strengthen intra-pillar collaboration and communication. Various indicators should be developed to constantly monitor the HOTE team's deliverables, performance and its members.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis of standardised seroprevalence studies, from January 2020 to December 2021.

INTRODUCTION: Estimating COVID-19 cumulative incidence in Africa remains problematic due to challenges in contact tracing, routine surveillance systems and laboratory testing capacities and strategies. We undertook a meta-analysis of population-based seroprevalence studies to estimate SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in Africa to inform evidence-based decision making on public health and social measures (PHSM) and vaccine strategy. METHODS: We searched for seroprevalence studies conducted in Africa published 1 January 2020-30 December 2021 in Medline, Embase, Web of Science and Europe PMC (preprints), grey literature, media releases and early results from WHO Unity studies. All studies were screened, extracted, assessed for risk of bias and evaluated for alignment with the WHO Unity seroprevalence protocol. We conducted descriptive analyses of seroprevalence and meta-analysed seroprevalence differences by demographic groups, place and time. We estimated the extent of undetected infections by comparing seroprevalence and cumulative incidence of confirmed cases reported to WHO. PROSPERO: CRD42020183634. RESULTS: We identified 56 full texts or early results, reporting 153 distinct seroprevalence studies in Africa. Of these, 97 (63%) were low/moderate risk of bias studies. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence rose from 3.0% (95% CI 1.0% to 9.2%) in April-June 2020 to 65.1% (95% CI 56.3% to 73.0%) in July-September 2021. The ratios of seroprevalence from infection to cumulative incidence of confirmed cases was large (overall: 100:1, ranging from 18:1 to 954:1) and steady over time. Seroprevalence was highly heterogeneous both within countries-urban versus rural (lower seroprevalence for rural geographic areas), children versus adults (children aged 0-9 years had the lowest seroprevalence)-and between countries and African subregions. CONCLUSION: We report high seroprevalence in Africa suggesting greater population exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and potential protection against COVID-19 severe disease than indicated by surveillance data. As seroprevalence was heterogeneous, targeted PHSM and vaccination strategies need to be tailored to local epidemiological situations.

Coordination mechanisms for COVID-19 in the WHO Regional office for Africa.

AIM: This study describes the coordination mechanisms that have been used for management of the COVID 19 pandemic in the WHO AFRO region; relate the patterns of the disease (length of time between onset of coordination and first case; length of the wave of the disease and peak attack rate) to coordination mechanisms established at the national level, and document best practices and lessons learned. METHOD: We did a retrospective policy tracing of the COVID-19 coordination mechanisms from March 2020 (when first cases of COVID-19 in the AFRO region were reported) to the end of the third wave in September 2021. Data sources were from document and Literature review of COVID-19 response strategies, plans, regulations, press releases, government websites, grey and peer-reviewed literature. The data was extracted to Excel file database and coded then analysed using Stata (version 15). Analysis was done through descriptive statistical analysis (using measures of central tendencies (mean, SD, and median) and measures of central dispersion (range)), multiple linear regression, and thematic analysis of qualitative data. RESULTS: There are three distinct layered coordination mechanisms (strategic, operational, and tactical) that were either implemented singularly or in tandem with another coordination mechanism. 87.23% (n = 41) of the countries initiated strategic coordination, and 59.57% (n = 28) initiated some form of operational coordination. Some of countries (n = 26,55.32%) provided operational coordination using functional Public Health Emergency Operation Centres (PHEOCs) which were activated for the response. 31.91% (n = 15) of the countries initiated some form of tactical coordination which involved the decentralisation of the operations at the local/grassroot level/district/ county levels. Decentralisation strategies played a key role in coordination, as was the innovative strategies by the countries; some coordination mechanisms built on already existing coordination systems and the heads of states were effective in the success of the coordination process. Financing posed challenge to majority of the countries in initiating coordination. CONCLUSION: Coordinating an emergency is a multidimensional process that includes having decision-makers and institutional agents define and prioritise policies and norms that contain the spread of the disease, regulate activities and behaviour and citizens, and respond to personnel who coordinate prevention.

Assessment of COVID-19 pandemic responses in African countries: thematic synthesis of WHO intra-action review reports.

OBJECTIVES: We conducted a review of intra-action review (IAR) reports of the national response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Africa. We highlight best practices and challenges and offer perspectives for the future. DESIGN: A thematic analysis across 10 preparedness and response domains, namely, governance, leadership, and coordination; planning and monitoring; risk communication and community engagement; surveillance, rapid response, and case investigation; infection prevention and control; case management; screening and monitoring at points of entry; national laboratory system; logistics and supply chain management; and maintaining essential health services during the COVID-19 pandemic. SETTING: All countries in the WHO African Region were eligible for inclusion in the study. National IAR reports submitted by March 2021 were analysed. RESULTS: We retrieved IAR reports from 18 African countries. The COVID-19 pandemic response in African countries has relied on many existing response systems such as laboratory systems, surveillance systems for previous outbreaks of highly infectious diseases and a logistics management information system. These best practices were backed by strong political will. The key challenges included low public confidence in governments, inadequate adherence to infection prevention and control measures, shortages of personal protective equipment, inadequate laboratory capacity, inadequate contact tracing, poor supply chain and logistics management systems, and lack of training of key personnel at national and subnational levels. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that African countries' response to the COVID-19 pandemic was prompt and may have contributed to the lower cases and deaths in the region compared with countries in other regions. The IARs demonstrate that many technical areas still require immediate improvement to guide decisions in subsequent waves or future outbreaks.

The toll of COVID-19 on African children: A descriptive analysis on COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality among the pediatric population in Sub-Saharan Africa.

INTRODUCTION: Few data on the COVID-19 epidemiological characteristics among the pediatric population in Africa exists. This paper examines the age and sex distribution of the morbidity and mortality rate in children with COVID-19 and compares it to the adult population in 15 Sub-Saharan African countries. METHODS: A merge line listing dataset shared by countries within the Regional Office for Africa was analyzed. Patients diagnosed within 1 March and 1 September 2020 with a confirmed positive RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 were analyzed. Children's data were stratified into three age groups: 0-4 years, 5-11 years, and 12-17 years, while adults were combined. The cumulative incidence of cases, its medians, and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: 9% of the total confirmed cases and 2.4% of the reported deaths were pediatric cases. The 12-17 age group in all 15 countries showed the highest cumulative incidence proportion in children. Adults had a higher case incidence per 100,000 people than children. CONCLUSION: The cases and deaths within the children's population were smaller than the adult population. These differences may reflect biases in COVID-19 testing protocols and reporting implemented by countries, highlighting the need for more extensive investigation and focus on the effects of COVID-19 in children.