Feasibility of digital contact tracing in low-income settings - pilot trial for a location-based DCT app.

BACKGROUND: Data about the effectiveness of digital contact tracing are based on studies conducted in countries with predominantly high- or middle-income settings. Up to now, little research is done to identify specific problems for the implementation of such technique in low-income countries. METHODS: A Bluetooth-assisted GPS location-based digital contact tracing (DCT) app was tested by 141 participants during 14 days in a hospital in Monrovia, Liberia in February 2020. The DCT app was compared to a paper-based reference system. Hits between participants and 10 designated infected participants were recorded simultaneously by both methods. Additional data about GPS and Bluetooth adherence were gathered and surveys to estimate battery consumption and app adherence were conducted. DCT apps accuracy was evaluated in different settings. RESULTS: GPS coordinates from 101/141 (71.6%) participants were received. The number of hours recorded by the participants during the study period, true Hours Recorded (tHR), was 496.3 h (1.1% of maximum Hours recordable) during the study period. With the paper-based method 1075 hits and with the DCT app five hits of designated infected participants with other participants have been listed. Differences between true and maximum recording times were due to failed permission settings (45%), data transmission issues (11.3%), of the participants 10.1% switched off GPS and 32.5% experienced other technical or compliance problems. In buildings, use of Bluetooth increased the accuracy of the DCT app (GPS + BT 22.9 m ± 21.6 SD vs. GPS 60.9 m ± 34.7 SD; p = 0.004). GPS accuracy in public transportation was 10.3 m ± 10.05 SD with a significant (p = 0.007) correlation between precision and phone brand. GPS resolution outdoors was 10.4 m ± 4.2 SD. CONCLUSION: In our study several limitations of the DCT together with the impairment of GPS accuracy in urban settings impede the solely use of a DCT app. It could be feasible as a supplement to traditional manual contact tracing. DKRS, DRKS00029327 . Registered 20 June 2020 - Retrospectively registered.

A review of the John F. Kennedy Medical Center's response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Liberia.

Objective: Over the past decades, the world has experienced a series of emerging and re-emerging infectious disease pandemics with dire consequences for economies and healthcare delivery. Hospitals are expected to have the ability to detect and respond appropriately to epidemics with minimal disruptions to routine services. We sought to review the John F. Kennedy Medical Center's readiness to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We used the pretest-posttest design in June 2021 and May 2023 to assess the hospital's improvements in its COVID-19 readiness capacity by collecting data on the hospital's characteristics and using the WHO COVID-19 Rapid hospital readiness checklist. We scored each readiness indicator according to the WHO criteria and the hospital's overall readiness score, performed the chi-square test for the change in readiness (change, 95% CI, p-value) between 2021 and 2023, and classified the center's readiness (poor: < 50%, fair: 50-79%, or satisfactory: ≥80%). The overall hospital readiness for COVID-19 response was poor in 2021 (mean score = 49%, 95% CI: 39-57%) and fair in 2023 (mean score = 69%, 95% CI: 56-81%). The mean change in hospital readiness was 20% (95% CI: 5.7-35%, p-value = 0.009). Between 2021 and 2023, the hospital made satisfactory improvements in leadership and incident management system [from 57% in 2021 to 86% in 2023 (change = 29%, 95% CI: 17-41%, p < 0.001)]; risk communication and community engagement [38-88% (change = 50%, 95% CI: 39-61%, p < 0.001)]; patient management [63-88% (change = 25%, 95% CI: 14-36%, p < 0.001)]; and rapid identification and diagnosis [67-83% (change = 16%, 95% CI: 4.2-28%, p = 0.009)]. The hospital made fair but significant improvements in terms of coordination and communication [42-75% (change = 33%, 95% CI: 20-46%, p < 0.001)], human resources capacity [33-75% (change = 42%, 95% CI: 29-55%, p < 0.001)], continuation of critical support services [50-75% (PD = 25%, 95% CI: 12-38%, p < 0.001)], and IPC [38-63% (change = 25%, 12-38%, p < 0.001)]. However, there was no or unsatisfactory improvement in terms of surveillance and information management; administration, finance, and business continuity; surge capacity; and occupational and mental health psychosocial support. Conclusion: Substantial gaps still remain in the hospital's readiness to respond to the COVID-19 outbreak. The study highlights the urgent need for investment in resilient strategies to boost readiness to respond to future outbreaks at the hospital.

Pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and infant growth and development after recovery from Ebola virus disease in Liberia: an observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Minimal data exist on pregnancy following recovery from Ebola in people of child-bearing potential (females aged roughly 18-45 years). The aim of this study was to assess viral persistence or reactivation in pregnancy, the frequency of placental transfer of anti-Ebola IgG antibodies, and pregnancy outcomes in this population. METHODS: In this observational cohort study, we studied self-reported pregnancies in two groups: seropositive people who had recovered from Ebola virus disease (seropositive group) and seronegative people who had close contact with people with Ebola (seronegative group). Participants had enrolled in the PREVAIL III longitudinal study and were exposed during the 2014-2016 Liberian Ebola outbreak. The primary outcome was pregnancy result. We assessed rates of livebirths and other pregnancy results in both study groups, and presence of Ebola RNA by PCR in samples of placenta, maternal and cord blood, breastmilk, and vaginal secretions from people who had recovered from Ebola who conceived a median of 14 months after acute Ebola virus disease. Mixed-model logistic regression evaluated associations between first-reported pregnancy outcome, age, and study group. Growth and neurodevelopment in the infants born to people in the seropositive group were assessed at 6-month intervals for 2 years. Data were accrued by PREVAIL III study staff. FINDINGS: 1566 participants were enrolled between June 17, 2015, and Dec 14, 2017, of whom 639 became pregnant (215 seropositive, 424 seronegative) and 589 reported pregnancy outcomes (206 seropositive, 383 seronegative). 105 infants born to 98 mothers in the seropositive group were enrolled in the birth cohort. Ebola RNA was not detected in 205 samples of placenta, cord blood, or maternal blood taken at birth from 54 mothers in the seropositive group, nor in 367 vaginal swabs. Viral RNA was found in two of 354 longitudinal breastmilk samples. All but one of 57 infants born during these 54 births were seropositive for anti-Ebola antibodies. Neonates showed high concentrations of anti-Ebola IgG, which declined after 6 months. Odds of adverse pregnancy outcome among the two groups were indistinguishable (OR 1·13, 95% CI 0·71-1·79). Compared with WHO standards, infants born to those in the seropositive group had lower median weight and length, and larger median head circumference over 2 years. Compared with a cohort from the USA accrual of gross motor developmental milestones was similar, whereas attainment of pincer grasp and early vocalisation were mildly delayed. INTERPRETATION: The risks of Ebola virus reactivation in the peripartum and postpartum period and of adverse birth outcomes are low in those who have recovered from Ebola virus disease and become pregnant approximately 1 year after acute Ebola virus disease. The implication for clinical practice is that care of people who are pregnant and who have recovered from Ebola can be offered without risks to health-care providers or stigmatisation of the mothers and their offspring. The implication for prospective mothers is that safe pregnancies are entirely possible after recovery from Ebola. FUNDING: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and Liberia Ministry of Health.