Main challenges of the detection in the context of global health security: systematic review of Joint External Evaluation (JEE) reports.

Introduction: since 2016, Joint External Evaluation (JEE) missions have been organized in various countries. This systematic review of the JEE reports is intended to identify the main challenges (MC) of detection in WHO regions. Methods: we accessed JEE reports on the WHO website. Challenge was defined as a variable of the indicators of detection where there was a need of improvement. MC was a challenge common to at least one-third of countries in each region and globally. For consistency, we assessed challenges reported under "Areas which need strengthening/challenges" in reports. Results: we analyzed 96 JEE reports. African Region (91.7%), Eastern Mediterranean Region (80.9%) and South East Asia Region (72.7%) had the highest rates of JEE completion. The MC were 24 in European Region, 26 in Mediterranean Region, 30 in Western Pacific Region, 33 in South East Asia Region and 34 in African Region. 24 MCs were identified at global level. National laboratory system and Real time surveillance had the highest number of MC. Eleven MCs were common to all WHO regions and global level. These include insufficient capacity for core test confirmation, insufficient specimen referral system, weak quality management system, issues in laboratories licensing and accreditation, weak data management, weak electronic reporting system, absence /weak mechanism of information exchange between International Health Regulation and animal health focal points, insufficient health professional specialists, the need of workforce strategy, the need of field epidemiology and insufficient workforce retention capacity. Conclusion: the MCs identified should be addressed through a global approach.

Assessment of the Biosafety and Biosecurity in the Reference Veterinary Laboratory of Parakou in Benin.

Optimal biosafety and biosecurity are major requirements of global health security. This study assessed the biorisk management in the reference veterinary laboratory of Parakou (Benin). The study was cross-sectional, descriptive, and evaluative. The non-probability sampling method with the reasoned choice was used. The Food and Agriculture Organization laboratory mapping tool-safety was used to collect information from the laboratory team. Group discussion, working environment observation, and document exploitation were the data collection techniques. The biorisk management was rated good if the average indicator of the laboratory reached at least 80%. Otherwise, the biorisk management was rated insufficient. The overall laboratory biosafety and biosecurity score was insufficient (42.4%). Per area, the scores were 26.7% for engineering, 33.3% for administration, 53.8% for personal protective equipment, and 62.3% for the operational. There was no area or category score that reached 80%. Containment, waste disposal, and personal protective equipment disposal were the best performing categories with a score above 60%. The laboratory has no biosafety and accident prevention program. Its premises require renovation. The standard operating procedures for biosafety are not yet finalized, and the training mechanism is not optimal. Therefore, strong advocacy and implementation of a biorisk management improvement plan appear as urgent corrective actions which are required to help the reference veterinary laboratory of Parakou in its task to protect the livestock and, ultimately, the people of Benin from dangerous diseases and emerging pathogens.