Search

Abstract Background Since the declaration of the 10th Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreak in DRC on 1st Aug 2018, several neighboring countries have been developing and implementing preparedness efforts to prevent EVD cross-border transmission to enable timely detection, investigation, and response in the event of a confirmed EVD outbreak in the country. We describe Uganda’s experience in EVD preparedness. Results On 4 August 2018, the Uganda Ministry of Health (MoH) activated the Public Health Emergency Operations Centre (PHEOC) and the National Task Force (NTF) for public health emergencies to plan, guide, and coordinate EVD preparedness in the country. The NTF selected an Incident Management Team (IMT), constituting a National Rapid Response Team (NRRT) that supported activation of the District Task Forces (DTFs) and District Rapid Response Teams (DRRTs) that jointly assessed levels of preparedness in 30 designated high-risk districts representing category 1 (20 districts) and category 2 (10 districts). The MoH, with technical guidance from the World Health Organisation (WHO), led EVD preparedness activities and worked together with other ministries and partner organisations to enhance community-based surveillance systems, develop and disseminate risk communication messages, engage communities, reinforce EVD screening and infection prevention measures at Points of Entry (PoEs) and in high-risk health facilities, construct and equip EVD isolation and treatment units, and establish coordination and procurement mechanisms. Conclusion As of 31 May 2019, there was no confirmed case of EVD as Uganda has continued to make significant and verifiable progress in EVD preparedness. There is a need to sustain these efforts, not only in EVD preparedness but also across the entire spectrum of a multi-hazard framework. These efforts strengthen country capacity and compel the country to avail resources for preparedness and management of incidents at the source while effectively cutting costs of using a “fire-fighting” approach during public health emergencies.

Background: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) can provide high protection against HIV infection and is a recommended intervention for HIV-negative persons with substantial HIV risk. Demonstration projects conducted in diverse settings worldwide illustrate practical examples of how PrEP can be delivered. This manuscript presents estimates of effectiveness and patterns of PrEP use within a two-year demonstration project of PrEP for HIV-negative members of heterosexual HIV serodiscordant couples in East Africa. Methods: The PrEP delivery model integrated PrEP into HIV treatment services, prioritizing PrEP use for HIV-negative partners within serodiscordant couples before and during the first 6 months after the partner living with HIV initiated antiretroviral therapy (ART). We measured PrEP uptake through pharmacy records and adherence to PrEP through medication event monitoring system (MEMS) bottle caps and quantification of tenofovir in plasma among a random sample of participants. We estimated HIV infections prevented using a counterfactual cohort simulated from the placebo arm of a previous PrEP clinical trial. Results: We enrolled 1,010 HIV serodiscordant couples that were naïve to ART and PrEP. Ninety-seven percent of HIV-negative partners initiated PrEP. Objective measures suggest high adherence: 71% of HIV-negative participants took ≥80% of expected doses, as recorded via MEMS, and 81% of plasma samples had tenofovir detected. Four incident HIV infections were observed (incidence rate=0.24 per 100 person-years), a 95% reduction (95% CI 86-98%, p

Introduction: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) can provide high protection against HIV infection and is a recommended intervention for HIV-negative persons with substantial HIV risk, such as individuals with a partner living with HIV. Demonstration projects of PrEP have been conducted in diverse settings worldwide to illustrate practical examples of how PrEP can be delivered. Methods: We evaluated delivery of PrEP for HIV-negative partners within heterosexual HIV serodiscordant couples in an open-label demonstration project in East Africa. The delivery model integrated PrEP into HIV treatment services, prioritizing PrEP for HIV-negative partners within serodiscordant couples prior to and during the first 6 months after the partner living with HIV initiated antiretroviral therapy (ART). We measured adherence to PrEP through medication event monitoring system (MEMS) bottle caps and quantification of tenofovir in plasma among a random sample of participants. We estimated HIV infections prevented using a counterfactual cohort simulated from the placebo arm of a previous PrEP clinical trial. Results: We enrolled 1,010 HIV serodiscordant couples that were naïve to ART and PrEP. Ninety-seven percent (97%) of HIV-negative partners initiated PrEP, and when PrEP was dispensed, objective measures suggest high adherence: 71% of HIV-negative participants took ≥80% of expected doses, as recorded via MEMS, and 81% of plasma samples had tenofovir detected. A total of 4 incident HIV infections were observed (incidence rate=0.24 per 100 person-years), a 95% reduction (95% CI 86-98%, p

Antiretroviral-based interventions for HIV-1 prevention, including antiretroviral therapy (ART) to reduce the infectiousness of HIV-1 infected persons and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to reduce the susceptibility of HIV-1 uninfected persons, showed high efficacy for HIV-1 protection in randomized clinical trials. We conducted a prospective implementation study to understand the feasibility and effectiveness of these interventions in delivery settings.Between November 5, 2012, and January 5, 2015, we enrolled and followed 1,013 heterosexual HIV-1-serodiscordant couples in Kenya and Uganda in a prospective implementation study. ART and PrEP were offered through a pragmatic strategy, with ART promoted for all couples and PrEP offered until 6 mo after ART initiation by the HIV-1 infected partner, permitting time to achieve virologic suppression. One thousand thirteen couples were enrolled, 78% of partnerships initiated ART, and 97% used PrEP, during a median follow-up of 0.9 years. Objective measures of adherence to both prevention strategies demonstrated high use (≥85%). Given the low HIV-1 incidence observed in the study, an additional analysis was added to compare observed incidence to incidence estimated under a simulated counterfactual model constructed using data from a prior prospective study of HIV-1-serodiscordant couples. Counterfactual simulations predicted 39.7 HIV-1 infections would be expected in the population at an incidence of 5.2 per 100 person-years (95% CI 3.7-6.9). However, only two incident HIV-1 infections were observed, at an incidence of 0.2 per 100 person-years (95% CI 0.0-0.9, p < 0.0001 versus predicted). The use of a non-concurrent comparison of HIV-1 incidence is a potential limitation of this approach; however, it would not have been ethical to enroll a contemporaneous population not provided access to ART and PrEP.Integrated delivery of time-limited PrEP until sustained ART use in African HIV-1-serodiscordant couples was feasible, demonstrated high uptake and adherence, and resulted in near elimination of HIV-1 transmission, with an observed HIV incidence of 5% per year.

During an HIV-1 prevention clinical trial in East Africa, we observed 16 cases of primary HIV-1 infection in women coincident with pregnancy or breastfeeding. Nine of eleven pregnant women initiated rapid combination antiretroviral therapy (ART), despite having CD4 counts exceeding national criteria for ART initiation; breastfeeding women initiated ART or replacement feeding. Rapid ART initiation during primary HIV-1 infection during pregnancy and breastfeeding is feasible in this setting.