Countries with delayed COVID-19 introduction - characteristics, drivers, gaps, and opportunities.

BACKGROUND: Three months after the first reported cases, COVID-19 had spread to nearly 90% of World Health Organization (WHO) member states and only 24 countries had not reported cases as of 30 March 2020. This analysis aimed to 1) assess characteristics, capability to detect and monitor COVID-19, and disease control measures in these 24 countries, 2) understand potential factors for the reported delayed COVID-19 introduction, and 3) identify gaps and opportunities for outbreak preparedness, particularly in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). We collected and analyzed publicly available information on country characteristics, COVID-19 testing, influenza surveillance, border measures, and preparedness activities in these countries. We also assessed the association between the temporal spread of COVID-19 in all countries with reported cases with globalization indicator and geographic location. RESULTS: Temporal spreading of COVID-19 was strongly associated with countries' globalization indicator and geographic location. Most of the 24 countries with delayed COVID-19 introduction were LMICs; 88% were small island or landlocked developing countries. As of 30 March 2020, only 38% of these countries reported in-country COVID-19 testing capability, and 71% reported conducting influenza surveillance during the past year. All had implemented two or more border measures, (e.g., travel restrictions and border closures) and multiple preparedness activities (e.g., national preparedness plans and school closing). CONCLUSIONS: Limited testing capacity suggests that most of the 24 delayed countries may have lacked the capability to detect and identify cases early through sentinel and case-based surveillance. Low global connectedness, geographic isolation, and border measures were common among these countries and may have contributed to the delayed introduction of COVID-19 into these countries. This paper contributes to identifying opportunities for pandemic preparedness, such as increasing disease detection, surveillance, and international collaborations. As the global situation continues to evolve, it is essential for countries to improve and prioritize their capacities to rapidly prevent, detect, and respond, not only for COVID-19, but also for future outbreaks.

Tracking linkage to care in an anonymous HIV testing context: A field assessment in Mozambique.

RATIONALE: Effective human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention requires a coordinated continuum of services to foster early diagnosis and treatment. Early linkage to care (LTC) is critical, yet programmes differ in strategies to monitor LTC. METHODS: In 2014, we visited 23 HIV testing and care service delivery points in Mozambique to assess programme strategies for monitoring LTC. We interviewed key informants, reviewed forms, and matched records across service points to identify successful models and challenges. RESULTS: Forms most useful for tracking LTC included individual identifiers, eg, patient name, unique identifier (ie, National Health Identification Number [NID]), sex, and date of birth. The majority (67%) of records matched occurred in the presence of a unique NID. Key informants described challenges related to processes, staffing, and communication between service delivery points to confirm LTC. CONCLUSIONS: While tracking clients from HIV testing to care is possible, programmes with insufficient tracking procedures are likely to underreport LTC. Adoption of additional patient identifiers in testing registers and standardized protocols may improve LTC programme monitoring and reduce underreporting.