Health workforce incentives and dis-incentives during the COVID-19 pandemic: experiences from Democratic Republic of Congo, Nigeria, Senegal, and Uganda.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic presented a myriad of challenges for the health workforce around the world due to its escalating demand on service delivery. A motivated health workforce is critical to effectual emergency response and in some settings, incentivizing health workers motivates them and ensures continuity in the provision of health services. We describe health workforce experiences with incentives and dis-incentives during the COVID-19 response in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Senegal, Nigeria, and Uganda. METHODS: This is a multi-country qualitative research study involving four African countries namely: DRC, Nigeria, Senegal, and Uganda which assessed the workplace incentives instituted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Key informant interviews (n = 60) were conducted with staff at ministries of health, policy makers and health workers. Interviews were virtual using the telephone or Zoom. They were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed thematically. Themes were identified and quotes were used to support findings. RESULTS: Health worker incentives included (i) financial rewards in the form of allowances and salary increments. These motivated health workers, sustaining the health system and the health workers' efforts during the COVID-19 response across the four countries. (ii) Non-financial incentives related to COVID-19 management such as provision of medicines/supplies, on the job trainings, medical care for health workers, social welfare including meals, transportation and housing, recognition, health insurance, psychosocial support, and supervision. Improvised determination and distribution of both financial and non-financial incentives were common across the countries. Dis-incentives included the lack of personal protective equipment, lack of transportation to health facilities during lockdown, long working hours, harassment by security forces and perceived unfairness in access to and inadequacy of financial incentives. CONCLUSION: Although important for worker motivation, financial and non-financial incentives generated some dis-incentives because of the perceived unfairness in their provision. Financial and non-financial incentives deployed during health emergencies should preferably be pre-determined, equitably and transparently provided because when arbitrarily applied, these same financial and non-financial incentives can potentially become dis-incentives. Moreover, financial incentives are useful only as far as they are administered together with non-financial incentives such as supportive and well-resourced work environments. The potential negative impacts of interventions such as service delivery re-organization and lockdown within already weakened systems need to be anticipated and due precautions exercised to reduce dis-incentives during emergencies.

Unintended consequences of implementing non-pharmaceutical interventions for the COVID-19 response in Africa: experiences from DRC, Nigeria, Senegal, and Uganda.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus (COVID 19) pandemic is one of the most terrifying disasters of the twenty-first century. The non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) implemented to control the spread of the disease had numerous positive consequences. However, there were also unintended consequences-positively or negatively related to the nature of the interventions, the target, the level and duration of implementation. This article describes the unintended economic, Psychosocial and environmental consequences of NPIs in four African countries. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Nigeria, Senegal and Uganda. A comprehensive conceptual framework, supported by a clear theory of change was adopted to encompass both systemic and non-systemic interventions. The data collection approaches included: (i) review of literature; (ii) analysis of secondary data for selected indicators; and (ii) key informant interviews with policy makers, civil society, local leaders, and law enforcement staff. The results were synthesized around thematic areas. RESULTS: Over the first six to nine months of the pandemic, NPIs especially lockdowns, travel restrictions, curfews, school closures, and prohibition of mass gathering resulted into both positive and negative unintended consequences cutting across economic, psychological, and environmental platforms. DRC, Nigeria, and Uganda observed reduced crime rates and road traffic accidents, while Uganda also reported reduced air pollution. In addition, hygiene practices have improved through health promotion measures that have been promoted for the response to the pandemic. All countries experienced economic slowdown, job losses heavily impacting women and poor households, increased sexual and gender-based violence, teenage pregnancies, and early marriages, increased poor mental health conditions, increased waste generation with poor disposal, among others. CONCLUSION: Despite achieving pandemic control, the stringent NPIs had several negative and few positive unintended consequences. Governments need to balance the negative and positive consequences of NPIs by anticipating and instituting measures that will support and protect vulnerable groups especially the poor, the elderly, women, and children. Noticeable efforts, including measures to avoid forced into marriage, increasing inequities, economic support to urban poor; those living with disabilities, migrant workers, and refugees, had been conducted to mitigate the negative effects of the NIPs.

Consequences of school closures due to COVID-19 in DRC, Nigeria, Senegal, and Uganda.

In 2020 and 2021, Governments across the globe instituted school closures to reduce social interaction and interrupt COVID-19 transmission. We examined the consequences of school closures due to COVID-19 across four sub-Saharan African countries: the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Nigeria, Senegal, and Uganda. We conducted a qualitative study among key informants including policymakers, school heads, students, parents, civil society representatives, and local leaders. The assessment of the consequences of school closures was informed by the Diffusion of Innovations theory which informed the interview guide and analysis. Interview transcripts were thematically analysed. Across the four countries, schools were totally closed for 120 weeks and partially closed for 48 weeks. School closures led to: i) Desirable and anticipated consequences: enhanced adoption of online platforms and mass media for learning and increased involvement of parents in their children's education. ii) Desirable and unanticipated consequences: improvement in information, communication, and technology (ICT) infrastructure in schools, development and improvement of computer skills, and created an opportunity to take leave from hectic schedules. iii) Undesirable anticipated consequences: inadequate education continuity among students, an adjustment in academic schedules and programmes, and disrupted student progress and grades. iv) Undesirable unanticipated: increase in sexual violence including engaging in transactional sex, a rise in teenage pregnancy, and school dropouts, demotivation of teachers due to reduced incomes, and reduced school revenues. v) Neutral consequences: engagement in revenue-generating activities, increased access to phones and computers among learners, and promoted less structured learning. The consequences of school closures for COVID-19 control were largely negative with the potential for both short-term and far-reaching longer-term consequences. In future pandemics, careful consideration of the type and duration of education closure measures and examination of their potential consequences in the short and long term is important before deploying them.