Photographic grading for trachoma diagnosis within trachoma impact surveys in Amhara region, Ethiopia.

BACKGROUND: As countries reach the trachoma elimination threshold and cases of trachomatous inflammation follicular (TF) become rare, it becomes difficult to train survey graders to recognize clinical signs. We assess the use of photography as a grading tool, the efficiency of an in-country grading center and the comparability of field and photographic grading. METHODS: During January-February 2017 surveys in Amhara, Ethiopia, field graders assessed TF, trachomatous inflammation intense (TI) and trachomatous scarring (TS). Photographs were taken from each conjunctiva and later graded at the Gondar Grading Center (GGC) at the University of Gondar in Amhara. Two trained ophthalmology residents graded each set of photographs and a third grader provided an adjudicating grade when needed. RESULTS: A total of 4953 photographs of 2477 conjunctivae from 1241 participants in 10 communities were graded over 5 d at the GGC. Six examined participants were not photographed. Agreement between field and photographic grades were for TF: percent agreement (PA) 96.7%, κ=0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64 to 0.77; for TI: PA 94.7%, κ=0.32 (95% CI 0.20 to 0.43); and for TS: PA 83.5%, κ=0.22 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Conjunctival photography may be a solution for programs near the elimination threshold where there are few available community cases for training field graders.

Global Health Security Preparedness and Response: An Analysis of the Relationship between Joint External Evaluation Scores and COVID-19 Response Performance.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance and complexity of a country's ability to effectively respond. The Joint External Evaluation (JEE) assessment was launched in 2016 to assess a country's ability to prevent, detect and respond to public health emergencies. We examined whether JEE indicators could be used to predict a country's COVID-19 response performance to tailor a country's support more effectively. DESIGN: From April to August 2020, we conducted interviews with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention country offices that requested COVID-19 support and previously completed the JEE (version 1.0). We used an assessment tool, the 'Emergency Response Capacity Tool' (ERCT), to assess COVID-19 response performance. We analysed 28 ERCT indicators aligned with eight JEE indicators to assess concordance and discordance using strict agreement and weighted kappa statistics. Generalised estimating equation (GEE) models were used to generate predicted probabilities for ERCT scores using JEE scores as the independent model variable. RESULTS: Twenty-three countries met inclusion criteria. Of the 163 indicators analysed, 42.3% of JEE and ERCT scores were in agreement (p value=0.02). The JEE indicator with the highest agreement (62%) was 'Emergency Operations Center (EOC) operating procedures and plans', while the lowest (16%) was 'capacity to activate emergency operations'. Findings were consistent with weighted kappa statistics. In the GEE model, EOC operating procedures and plans had the highest predicted probability (0.86), while indicators concerning response strategy and coordination had the lowest (≤0.5). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there was low agreement between JEE scores and COVID-19 response performance, with JEE scores often trending higher. JEE indicators concerning coordination and operations were least predictive of COVID-19 response performance, underscoring the importance of not inferring country response readiness from JEE scores alone. More in-depth country-specific investigations are likely needed to accurately estimate response capacity and tailor countries' global health security activities.