The role of international support programmes in global health security capacity building: A scoping review.

Large scale public health emergencies such as COVID-19 demonstrate the importance of Global Health Security (GHS) and highlight the necessity of resilient public health systems capable of preparing for, detecting, managing, and recovering from such emergencies. Many international programmes support low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to strengthen public health capabilities for compliance with the International Health Regulations (IHR). This narrative review seeks to identify key characteristics and factors necessary for effective and sustainable IHR core capacity development, establishing roles for international support and some principles of good practice. We reflect on the "what" and the "how" of international support approaches, highlighting the importance of equitable partnerships and bi-directional learning, and inviting global introspection and re-framing of what capable and developed public health systems look like.

Global and regional governance of One Health and implications for global health security.

The apparent failure of global health security to prevent or prepare for the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for closer cooperation between human, animal (domestic and wildlife), and environmental health sectors. However, the many institutions, processes, regulatory frameworks, and legal instruments with direct and indirect roles in the global governance of One Health have led to a fragmented, global, multilateral health security architecture. We explore four challenges: first, the sectoral, professional, and institutional silos and tensions existing between human, animal, and environmental health; second, the challenge that the international legal system, state sovereignty, and existing legal instruments pose for the governance of One Health; third, the power dynamics and asymmetry in power between countries represented in multilateral institutions and their impact on priority setting; and finally, the current financing mechanisms that predominantly focus on response to crises, and the chronic underinvestment for epidemic and emergency prevention, mitigation, and preparedness activities. We illustrate the global and regional dimensions to these four challenges and how they relate to national needs and priorities through three case studies on compulsory licensing, the governance of water resources in the Lake Chad Basin, and the desert locust infestation in east Africa. Finally, we propose 12 recommendations for the global community to address these challenges. Despite its broad and holistic agenda, One Health continues to be dominated by human and domestic animal health experts. Substantial efforts should be made to address the social-ecological drivers of health emergencies including outbreaks of emerging, re-emerging, and endemic infectious diseases. These drivers include climate change, biodiversity loss, and land-use change, and therefore require effective and enforceable legislation, investment, capacity building, and integration of other sectors and professionals beyond health.

Reviewing Health Security Capacities in Nigeria Using the Updated WHO Joint External Evaluation and WHO Benchmarks Tool: Experience from a Country-Led Self-Assessment Exercise.

Across the world, the level of pandemic preparedness varies and no country is fully prepared to respond to all public health events. The International Health Regulations 2005 require state parties to develop core capacities to prevent, detect, and respond to public health events of international concern. In addition to annual self-assessment, these capacities are peer reviewed once every 5 years through the voluntary Joint External Evaluation (JEE). In this article, we share Nigeria's experience of conducting a country-led midterm self-assessment using a slightly modified application of the second edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) JEE and the new WHO benchmarks tool. Despite more stringent scoring criteria in the revised JEE tool, average scoring showed modest capacity improvements in 2019 compared with 2017. Of the 19 technical areas assessed, 11 improved, 5 did not change, and 3 had lower scores. No technical area attained the highest-level scoring of 5. Understanding the level of, and gaps in, pandemic preparedness enables state parties to develop plans to improve health security; the outcome of the assessment included the development of a 12-month operational plan. Countries need to intentionally invest in preparedness by using existing frameworks (eg, JEE) to better understand the status of their preparedness. This will ensure ownership of developed plans with shared responsibilities by all key stakeholders across all levels of government.

Evaluating implementation of International Health Regulations core capacities: using the Electronic States Parties Self-Assessment Annual Reporting Tool (e-SPAR) to monitor progress with Joint External Evaluation indicators.

BACKGROUND: The International Health Regulations (IHR) are a legally binding instrument designed to improve Global Health Security by limiting the cross boarder spread of health risks. All 196 signatories to the IHR (2005) are required to report progress towards IHR core capacity implementation through an annual multi-sectoral self-assessment process known as the State Parties Self-Assessment Annual Reporting (SPAR). This mandatory process sits alongside the voluntary, external, peer-reviewed Joint External Evaluations (JEE) as two core components of the IHR monitoring and evaluation framework. JEEs are intended to occur once every 4-5 years following a voluntary request from the member state. This means that interim monitoring of IHR core capacity compliance, can be challenging and additional data sources are required. The outputs of the SPAR process represent one such source. Although the JEE and SPAR tools are intended to be complimentary, there has been no publicly available mapping of JEE indicators to SPAR indicators in order to inform progress on IHR compliance. RESULTS: This paper mapped JEE indicators to SPAR indicators and found a high level of correlation suggesting the SPAR process offers a method for countries and technical assistance programmes to monitor progress on IHR compliance and identify gaps in between JEE visits. However, coverage was not complete, and several gaps were identified most notably in antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and vaccinations. CONCLUSION: Enhancing alignment between JEE and SPAR could offer a more consistent and complete way of assessing compliance with IHR.

Evaluation of National Event-Based Surveillance, Nigeria, 2016-2018.

Nigeria Centres for Disease Control and Prevention established an event-based surveillance (EBS) system in 2016 to supplement traditional surveillance structures. The EBS system is comprised of an internet-based data mining tool and a call center. To evaluate the EBS system for usefulness, simplicity, acceptability, timeliness, and data quality, we performed a descriptive analysis of signals received during September 2017-June 2018. We used questionnaires, semistructured interviews, and direct observation to collect information from EBS staff. Amongst 43,631 raw signals detected, 138 (0.3%) were escalated; 63 (46%) of those were verified as events, including 25 Lassa fever outbreaks and 13 cholera outbreaks. Interviewees provided multiple examples of earlier outbreak detections but suggested notifications and logging could be improved to ensure action. EBS proved effective in detecting outbreaks, but we noted clear opportunities for efficiency gains. We recommend improving signal logging, standardizing processes, and revising outputs to ensure appropriate public health action.

Improving National Intelligence for Public Health Preparedness: a methodological approach to finding local multi-sector indicators for health security.

The COVID-19 epidemic is the latest evidence of critical gaps in our collective ability to monitor country-level preparedness for health emergencies. The global frameworks that exist to strengthen core public health capacities lack coverage of several preparedness domains and do not provide mechanisms to interface with local intelligence. We designed and piloted a process, in collaboration with three National Public Health Institutes (NPHIs) in Ethiopia, Nigeria and Pakistan, to identify potential preparedness indicators that exist in a myriad of frameworks and tools in varying local institutions. Following a desk-based systematic search and expert consultations, indicators were extracted from existing national and subnational health security-relevant frameworks and prioritised in a multi-stakeholder two-round Delphi process. Eighty-six indicators in Ethiopia, 87 indicators in Nigeria and 51 indicators in Pakistan were assessed to be valid, relevant and feasible. From these, 14-16 indicators were prioritised in each of the three countries for consideration in monitoring and evaluation tools. Priority indicators consistently included private sector metrics, subnational capacities, availability and capacity for electronic surveillance, measures of timeliness for routine reporting, data quality scores and data related to internally displaced persons and returnees. NPHIs play an increasingly central role in health security and must have access to data needed to identify and respond rapidly to public health threats. Collecting and collating local sources of information may prove essential to addressing gaps; it is a necessary step towards improving preparedness and strengthening international health regulations compliance.

Evaluating an institutional health partnership using the ESTHER EFFECt tool: A case study of an evaluation of the institutional health partnership between Nigeria CDC and Public Health England.

Objectives: Bilateral Institutional Health Partnerships (IHPs) are a means of strengthening health systems and are becoming increasing prevalent in global health. Nigeria Centre for Disease Control (NCDC) and Public Health England (PHE) have engaged in one such IHP as part of Public Health England's International Health Regulations Strengthening project. Presently, there have been limited evaluations of IHPs resulting in limited evidence of their effectiveness in strengthening health systems despite the concept being used across the world. Study design: Qualitative, using a validated tool. Methods: The ESTHER EFFECt tool was used to evaluate the IHP between NCDC and PHE. Senior leadership from both organisations participated in a two-day workshop where their perceptions of various elements of the partnership were evaluated. This was done through an initial quantitative survey followed by a facilitated discussion to further explore any arising issues. Results: This evaluation is the first published evaluation of a bilateral global health partnership undertaken by NCDC and PHE. NCDC scores were consistently higher than PHE scores. Key strengths and weaknesses of the partnership were identified such as having wide ranging institutional engagement, however needing to improve dissemination mechanisms following key learning activity. Conclusions: There is a dearth of evidence measuring the effectiveness of international health partnerships; of the studies that exist, many are lacking in academic rigour. We used the ESTHER EFFECt tool as it is an established method of evaluating the progress of the partnership, with multiple previous peer-reviewed publications. This will hopefully encourage more organisations to publish evaluations of their international health partnerships and build the evidence base.

Using critical information to strengthen pandemic preparedness: the role of national public health agencies.

COVID-19 has demonstrated that most countries' public health systems and capacities are insufficiently prepared to prevent a localised infectious disease outbreak from spreading. Strengthening national preparedness requires National Public Health Institutes (NPHIs), or their equivalent, to overcome practical challenges affecting timely access to, and use of, data that is critical to preparedness. Our situational analysis in collaboration with NPHIs in three countries-Ethiopia, Nigeria and Pakistan-characterises these challenges. Our findings indicate that NPHIs' role necessitates collection and analysis of data from multiple sources that do not routinely share data with public health authorities. Since initiating requests for access to new data sources can be a lengthy process, it is essential that NPHIs are routinely monitoring a broad set of priority indicators that are selected to reflect the country-specific context. NPHIs must also have the authority to be able to request rapid sharing of data from public and private sector organisations during health emergencies and to access additional human and financial resources during disease outbreaks. Finally, timely, transparent and informative communication of synthesised data from NPHIs will facilitate sustained data sharing with NPHIs from external organisations. These actions identified by our analysis will support the availability of robust information systems that allow relevant data to be collected, shared and analysed by NPHIs sufficiently rapidly to inform a timely local response to infectious disease outbreaks in the future.

The Epidemiology of Q Fever in England and Wales 2000-2015.

Between 2000 and 2015, 904 cases of acute Q fever were reported in England and Wales. The case dataset had a male to female ratio of 2.5:1, and a median age of 45 years. Two outbreaks were recognised during this time period, and the incidence of sporadic cases was highest across the southwest of England, and Wales. There are limitations in the surveillance system for Q fever, including possible geographical differences in reporting and limited epidemiological data collection. The surveillance system needs to be strengthened in order to improve the quality and completeness of the epidemiological dataset. The authors conclude with recommendations on how to achieve this.

Identifying areas and risk groups with localised Mycobacterium tuberculosis transmission in northern England from 2010 to 2012: spatiotemporal analysis incorporating highly discriminatory genotyping data.

BACKGROUND: Information on geographical variation in localised transmission of TB can inform targeting of disease control activities. The aim of this study was to estimate the proportion of TB attributable to localised transmission for the period 2010-2012 in northern England and to identify case characteristics associated with spatiotemporal-genotypical clusters. METHODS: We combined genotyping data with spatiotemporal scan statistics to define an indicator of localised TB transmission and identified factors associated with localised TB transmission thus defined in a multivariable logistics regression model. RESULTS: The estimated proportion of TB cases in northern England attributable to localised transmission was 10% (95% CI 9% to 12%). Clustered cases (cases which were spatiotemporally clustered with others of identical genotype) were on average younger than non-clustered cases (mean age 34 years vs 43 years; p value <0.05). Being UK born (adjusted OR (aOR) 3.6, 95% CI 2.9 to 6.0), presenting with pulmonary disease (aOR 2.2, 95% CI 1.3 to 3.6) and history of homelessness (aOR 2.8, 95% CI 1.2 to 6.8) or incarceration (aOR 2.6, 95% CI 1.2 to 5.9) were independently associated with being part of a spatiotemporal-genotypical cluster in a multivariable model. Belonging to an ethnic group other than white or mixed/other was also significantly associated with localised transmission. We identified localised transmission in 103/1958 middle super output areas mostly in urban areas. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating highly discriminatory genotyping data into spatiotemporal analysis of TB incidence is feasible as part of routine surveillance and can provide valuable information on groups at greater risk and areas with localised transmission of TB, which could be used to inform control measures, such as intensified contact tracing.