Search

Background Despite the discovery of vaccines, the control, and prevention of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) relied on non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). This article describes the development and application of the Public Health Act to implement NPIs for COVID-19 pandemic control in Uganda. Methods This is a case study of Uganda’s experience with enacting COVID-19 Rules under the Public Health Act Cap. 281. The study assessed how and what Rules were developed, their influence on the outbreak progress, and litigation. The data sources reviewed were applicable laws and policies, Presidential speeches, Cabinet resolutions, statutory instruments, COVID-19 situation reports, and the registry of court cases that contributed to a triangulated analysis. Results Uganda applied four COVID-19 broad Rules for the period March 2020 to October 2021. The Minister of Health enacted the Rules, which response teams, enforcement agencies, and the general population followed. The Presidential speeches, their expiry period and progress of the pandemic curve led to amendment of the Rules twenty one (21) times. The Uganda Peoples Defense Forces Act No. 7 of 2005, the Public Finance Management Act No. 3 of 2015, and the National Policy for Disaster Preparedness and Management supplemented the enacted COVID-19 Rules. However, these Rules attracted specific litigation due to perceived infringement on certain human rights provisions. Conclusions Countries can enact supportive legislation within the course of an outbreak. The balance of enforcing public health interventions and human rights infringements is an important consideration in future. We recommend public sensitization about legislative provisions and reforms to guide public health responses in future outbreaks or pandemics.

Prior research suggests that fluvoxamine, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) used for the treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder and major depressive disorder, could be repurposed against COVID-19. We undertook a prospective interventional open-label cohort study to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of fluvoxamine among inpatients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in Uganda. The main outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were hospital discharge and complete symptom resolution. We included 316 patients, of whom 94 received fluvoxamine in addition to standard care [median age, 60 years (IQR = 37.0); women, 52.2%]. Fluvoxamine use was significantly associated with reduced mortality [AHR = 0.32; 95% CI = 0.19–0.53; p p p = 0.32]. There was a trend toward greater side effects with fluvoxamine (7.45% versus 3.15%; SMD = 0.21; χ2 = 3.46, p = 0.06), most of which were light or mild in severity and none of which were serious. One hundred mg of fluvoxamine prescribed twice daily for 10 days was well tolerated and significantly associated with reduced mortality and with increased complete symptom resolution, without a significant increase in time to hospital discharge, among inpatients with COVID-19. Large-scale randomized trials are urgently needed to confirm these findings, especially for low- and middle-income countries, where access to vaccines and approved treatments against COVID-19 is limited.

Background Several repurposed drugs such as hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) have been investigated for treatment of COVID-19, but none was confirmed to be efficacious. While in vitro studies have demonstrated antiviral properties of HCQ, data from clinical trials were conflicting regarding its benefit for COVID-19 treatment. Drugs that limit viral replication may be beneficial in the earlier course of the disease thus slowing progression to severe and critical illness. Design We conducted a randomized open label Phase II clinical trial from October–December 2020. Methods Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 using RT-PCR were included in the study if they were 18 years and above and had a diagnosis of COVID-19 made in the last 3 days. Patients were randomized in blocks, to receive either HCQ 400 mg twice a day for the first day followed by 200 mg twice daily for the next 4 days plus standard of care (SOC) treatment or SOC treatment alone. SARS COV-2 viral load (CT values) from RT-PCR testing of samples collected using nasal/orapharyngeal swabs was performed at baseline, day 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10. The primary outcome was median time from randomization to SARS COV-2 viral clearance by day 6. Results Of the 105 participants enrolled, 55 were assigned to the intervention group (HCQ plus SOC) and 50 to the control group (SOC only). Baseline characteristics were similar across treatment arms. Viral clearance did not differ by treatment arm, 20 and 19 participants respectively had SARS COV-2 viral load clearance by day 6 with no significant difference, median (IQR) number of days to viral load clearance between the two groups was 4(3–4) vs 4(2–4): p = 0.457. There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes (symptom resolution and adverse events) between the intervention group and the control group. There were no significant differences in specific adverse events such as elevated alkaline phosphatase, prolonged QTc interval on ECG, among patients in the intervention group as compared to the control group. Conclusion Our results show that HCQ 400 mg twice a day for the first day followed by 200 mg twice daily for the next 4 days was safe but not associated with reduction in viral clearance or symptom resolution among adults with COVID-19 in Uganda. Trial registration: NCT04860284.

Background The global need for well-trained field epidemiologists has been underscored in the last decade in multiple pandemics, the most recent being COVID-19. Field Epidemiology Training Programs (FETPs) are in-service training programs that improve country capacities to respond to public health emergencies across different levels of the health system. Best practices for FETP implementation have been described previously. The Uganda Public Health Fellowship Program (PHFP), or Advanced-FETP in Uganda, is a two-year fellowship in field epidemiology funded by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and situated in the Uganda National Institute of Public Health (UNIPH). We describe how specific attributes of the Uganda PHFP that are aligned with best practices enabled substantial contributions to the COVID-19 response in Uganda. Methods We describe the PHFP in Uganda and review examples of how specific program characteristics facilitate integration with Ministry of Health needs and foster a strong response, using COVID-19 pandemic response activities as examples. We describe PHFP activities and outputs before and during the COVID-19 response and offer expert opinions about the impact of the program set-up on these outputs. Results Unlike nearly all other Advanced FETPs in Africa, PHFP is delinked from an academic degree-granting program and enrolls only post-Master’s-degree fellows. This enables full-time, uninterrupted commitment of academically-trained fellows to public health response. Uganda’s PHFP has strong partner support in country, sufficient technical support from program staff, Ministry of Health (MoH), CDC, and partners, and full-time dedicated directorship from a well-respected MoH staff member. The PHFP is physically co-located inside the UNIPH with the emergency operations center (EOC), which provides a direct path for health alerts to be investigated by fellows. It has recognized value within the MoH, which integrates graduates into key MoH and partner positions. During February 2020-September 2021, PHFP fellows and graduates completed 67 major COVID-related projects. PHFP activities during the COVID-19 response were specifically requested by the MoH or by partners, or generated de novo by the program, and were supervised by all partners. Conclusion Specific attributes of the PHFP enable effective service to the Ministry of Health in Uganda. Among the most important is the enrollment of post-graduate fellows, which leads to a high level of utilization of the program fellows by the Ministry of Health to fulfill real-time needs. Strong leadership and sufficient technical support permitted meaningful program outputs during COVID-19 pandemic response. Ensuring the inclusion of similar characteristics when implementing FETPs elsewhere may allow them to achieve a high level of impact.

Despite the discovery of vaccines, control and prevention efforts for the novel Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) relied on non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). This article describes the development and application of the public health law in the prevention and control of the COVID-19 pandemic in Uganda. Methods: A process evaluation of Uganda’s experience with enacting COVID-19 Rules. Briefly, the Public Health Act Chap. 281 (1935) was reviewed each time there was a revision of the NPIs during the COVID-19 outbreak. The study assessed how and what rules were developed, their influence on the outbreak progress, and cases of litigation. The data sources were applicable laws and policies, Presidential speeches, cabinet resolutions, statutory instruments, the COVID-19 situation reports, and the registry of court cases that contributed to a triangulated analysis. Results: Uganda applied four of the COVID-19 broad Rules for the period March to October 2021. These Rules were amended twenty–one (21) times realigned along the pandemic curve, had an expiry period, and were preceded by Presidential pronouncements and directives. The Minister of Health enacted the Rules which were followed by response teams, enforcement agencies, and the general population. The enactment of COVID-19 Rules was necessary but not sufficient to control the pandemic, hence other laws came into play, specifically the Uganda Peoples Defense Forces Act No. 7 of 2005, the Public Finance Management Act No. 3 of 2015, and the National Policy for Disaster Preparedness and Management. Enacting COVID-19 Rules attracted specific litigation arising from perceived infringement on certain human rights provisions. Conclusions: Countries can enact supportive legislation within the course of an outbreak. The balance of enforcing public health interventions and human rights infringements would be an important consideration in future. We recommend public sensitization about legislative provisions and reforms to guide public health responses in future epidemics or pandemics.

The global need for well-trained field epidemiologists has been underscored in the last decade in multiple pandemics, the most recent being COVID-19. Field Epidemiology Training Programs (FETPs) are in-service training programs that improve country capacities to respond to public health emergencies across different levels of the health system. Best practices for FETP implementation have been described previously. The Uganda Public Health Fellowship Program (PHFP), or Advanced-FETP in Uganda, is a two-year fellowship in field epidemiology funded by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and situated in the Uganda National Institute of Public Health (UNIPH). We describe how specific attributes of the Uganda PHFP that are aligned with best practices enabled substantial contributions to the COVID-19 response in Uganda.We describe the PHFP in Uganda and review examples of how specific program characteristics facilitate integration with Ministry of Health needs and foster a strong response, using COVID-19 pandemic response activities as examples. We describe PHFP activities and outputs before and during the COVID-19 response and offer expert opinions about the impact of the program set-up on these outputs.Unlike nearly all other Advanced FETPs in Africa, PHFP is delinked from an academic degree-granting program and enrolls only post-Master's-degree fellows. This enables full-time, uninterrupted commitment of academically-trained fellows to public health response. Uganda's PHFP has strong partner support in country, sufficient technical support from program staff, Ministry of Health (MoH), CDC, and partners, and full-time dedicated directorship from a well-respected MoH staff member. The PHFP is physically co-located inside the UNIPH with the emergency operations center (EOC), which provides a direct path for health alerts to be investigated by fellows. It has recognized value within the MoH, which integrates graduates into key MoH and partner positions. During February 2020-September 2021, PHFP fellows and graduates completed 67 major COVID-related projects. PHFP activities during the COVID-19 response were specifically requested by the MoH or by partners, or generated de novo by the program, and were supervised by all partners.Specific attributes of the PHFP enable effective service to the Ministry of Health in Uganda. Among the most important is the enrollment of post-graduate fellows, which leads to a high level of utilization of the program fellows by the Ministry of Health to fulfill real-time needs. Strong leadership and sufficient technical support permitted meaningful program outputs during COVID-19 pandemic response. Ensuring the inclusion of similar characteristics when implementing FETPs elsewhere may allow them to achieve a high level of impact.

Uganda is an ecological hot spot with porous borders that lies in several infectious disease transmission belts, making it prone to disease outbreaks. To prepare and respond to these public health threats and emergencies in a coordinated manner, Uganda established the Uganda National Institute of Public Health (UNIPH) in 2013.Using a step-by-step process, Uganda's Ministry of Health (MOH) crafted a strategy with a vision, mission, goal, and strategic objectives, and identified value additions and key enablers for success. A regulatory impact assessment was then conducted to inform the drafting of principles of the bill for legislation on the Institute.Despite not yet attaining legal status, the UNIPH has already achieved faster, smarter, and more efficient and effective prevention, detection, and response to public health emergencies. Successes include a more coordinated multisectoral, disciplined, and organized response to emergencies; appropriate, timely, and complete information receipt and sharing; a functional national lab sample and results transportation network that has enabled detection and confirmation of public health events within 48 hours of alert; appropriate response to a confirmed public health event in 24-48 hours; and real-time surveillance of endemic- and epidemic-prone diseases.In this article, we document success stories, lessons learned, and challenges encountered during the unique staged process used to develop the components of the UNIPH. The creation of an integrated disease control center has proven to yield better collaboration and synergies between different arms of epidemic preparedness and response.