Strengthening Health Systems While Responding to a Health Crisis: Lessons Learned by a Nongovernmental Organization During the Ebola Virus Disease Epidemic in Sierra Leone.

An epidemic of Ebola virus disease (EVD) beginning in 2013 has claimed an estimated 11 310 lives in West Africa. As the EVD epidemic subsides, it is important for all who participated in the emergency Ebola response to reflect on strengths and weaknesses of the response. Such reflections should take into account perspectives not usually included in peer-reviewed publications and after-action reports, including those from the public sector, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), survivors of Ebola, and Ebola-affected households and communities. In this article, we first describe how the international NGO Partners In Health (PIH) partnered with the Government of Sierra Leone and Wellbody Alliance (a local NGO) to respond to the EVD epidemic in 4 of the country's most Ebola-affected districts. We then describe how, in the aftermath of the epidemic, PIH is partnering with the public sector to strengthen the health system and resume delivery of regular health services. PIH's experience in Sierra Leone is one of multiple partnerships with different stakeholders. It is also one of rapid deployment of expatriate clinicians and logistics personnel in health facilities largely deprived of health professionals, medical supplies, and physical infrastructure required to deliver health services effectively and safely. Lessons learned by PIH and its partners in Sierra Leone can contribute to the ongoing discussion within the international community on how to ensure emergency preparedness and build resilient health systems in settings without either.

Infection prevention and control studies for care of patients with suspected or confirmed filovirus disease in healthcare settings, with focus on Ebola and Marburg: an integrative review.

Objective: To review evidence pertaining to methods for preventing healthcare-associated filovirus infections (including the survivability of filoviruses in clinical environments and the chlorine concentration required for effective disinfection), and to assess protocols for determining the risk of health worker (HW) exposures to filoviruses. Design: Integrative review. Data sources: PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, internet-based sources of international health organisations (eg, WHO, CDC), references of the included literature and grey literature. Study selection: Laboratory science, clinical research and real-world observational studies identified through comprehensive search strings that pertained to Ebola disease and Marburg disease and the three research objectives. Methods: Using the framework of population, intervention or exposure, outcomes, study types and report characteristics, reviewers extracted data and critically appraised the evidence using predefined data extraction forms and summary tables. The extraction forms, summary tables and critical appraisals varied based on the included literature; we used both the QUIPS Risk-of-Bias tool when possible and an internally developed instrument to systematically extract and review the evidence from observational and experimental studies. Evidence was then synthesised and summarised to create summary recommendations. Results: Thirty-six studies (including duplicates across research questions) were included in our reviews. All studies that related to the review questions were either (1) descriptive, real-world studies (ie, environmental audits of various surfaces in operational Ebola Treatment Units) or (2) controlled, laboratory studies (ie, experimental studies on the survivability of ebolaviruses in controlled conditions), presenting a range of concerns pertaining to bias and external validity. Our reviews of viral survivability evidence revealed significant disconnections between laboratory-based and real-world findings. However, there is greater viral persistence in liquid than dried body fluids, with the possible exception of blood, and ebolaviruses can survive for significant periods of time in dried substrate. Evidence suggests that 0.5% hypochlorite solution should be used for disinfection activity. Spills should be cleaned with covering and soaking for 15 min. Existing literature suggests that within a well-resourced clinical environment with trained, foreign HWs and established protocols, transmission of ebolaviruses as an occupational risk is a rare event. Despite the high rates of HW infections within public African healthcare settings, no evidence with low risk of bias exists to assess the risk of various occupational exposures given that all high-quality studies were conducted on foreign Ebola clinicians who had low overall rates of infection. This review underscores the critical need for better-quality evidence to inform best practices to ensure HW safety during filovirus disease epidemics.

Association of Lower Exposure Risk With Paucisymptomatic/Asymptomatic Infection, Less Severe Disease, and Unrecognized Ebola Virus Disease: A Seroepidemiological Study.

Background: It remains unclear if there is a dose-dependent relationship between exposure risk to Ebola virus (EBOV) and severity of illness. Methods: From September 2016 to July 2017, we conducted a cross-sectional, community-based study of Ebola virus disease (EVD) cases and household contacts of several transmission chains in Kono District, Sierra Leone. We analyzed 154 quarantined households, comprising both reported EVD cases and their close contacts. We used epidemiological surveys and blood samples to define severity of illness as no infection, pauci-/asymptomatic infection, unrecognized EVD, reported EVD cases who survived, or reported EVD decedents. We determine seropositivity with the Filovirus Animal Nonclinical Group EBOV glycoprotein immunoglobulin G antibody test. We defined levels of exposure risk from 8 questions and considered contact with body fluid as maximum exposure risk. Results: Our analysis included 76 reported EVD cases (both decedents and survivors) and 421 close contacts. Among these contacts, 40 were seropositive (22 paucisymptomatic and 18 unrecognized EVD), accounting for 34% of the total 116 EBOV infections. Higher exposure risks were associated with having had EBOV infection (maximum risk: adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 12.1 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 5.8-25.4; trend test: P < .001) and more severe illness (maximum risk: AOR, 25.2 [95% CI, 6.2-102.4]; trend test: P < .001). Conclusions: This community-based study of EVD cases and contacts provides epidemiological evidence of a dose-dependent relationship between exposure risk and severity of illness, which may partially explain why pauci-/asymptomatic EBOV infection, less severe disease, and unrecognized EVD occurs.