Search

Declaration of the novel coronavirus disease as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern necessitated countries to get ready to respond. Here, we describe key achievements, challenges and lessons learnt during the readiness and early response to COVID-19 in Ethiopia. Readiness activities commenced as early as January 2020 with the activation of a national Public Health Emergency Operations Centre and COVID-19 Incident Management System (IMS) by the Ethiopian Public Health Institute. The COVID-19 IMS conducted rapid risk assessments, developed scenario-based contingency plans, national COVID-19 guidelines and facilitated the enhancement of early warning and monitoring mechanisms. Early activation of a coordination mechanism and strengthening of detection and response capacities contributed to getting the country ready on time and mounting an effective early response. High-level political leadership and commitment led to focused efforts in coordination of response interventions. Health screening, mandatory 14-day quarantine and testing established for all international travellers arriving into the country slowed down the influx of travellers. The International Health Regulations (IHR) capacities in the country served as a good foundation for timely readiness and response. Leveraging on existing IHR capacities in the country built prior to COVID-19 helped slow down the importation and mitigated uncontrolled spread of the disease in the country. Challenges experienced included late operationalisation of a multisectoral coordination platform, shortage of personal protective equipment resulting from global disruption of importation and the huge influx of over 10 000 returnees from different COVID-19-affected countries over a short period of time with resultant constrain on response resources.

ObjectivesWe conducted a review of intra-action review (IAR) reports of the national response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Africa. We highlight best practices and challenges and offer perspectives for the future.DesignA thematic analysis across 10 preparedness and response domains, namely, governance, leadership, and coordination; planning and monitoring; risk communication and community engagement; surveillance, rapid response, and case investigation; infection prevention and control; case management; screening and monitoring at points of entry; national laboratory system; logistics and supply chain management; and maintaining essential health services during the COVID-19 pandemic.SettingAll countries in the WHO African Region were eligible for inclusion in the study. National IAR reports submitted by March 2021 were analysed.ResultsWe retrieved IAR reports from 18 African countries. The COVID-19 pandemic response in African countries has relied on many existing response systems such as laboratory systems, surveillance systems for previous outbreaks of highly infectious diseases and a logistics management information system. These best practices were backed by strong political will. The key challenges included low public confidence in governments, inadequate adherence to infection prevention and control measures, shortages of personal protective equipment, inadequate laboratory capacity, inadequate contact tracing, poor supply chain and logistics management systems, and lack of training of key personnel at national and subnational levels.ConclusionThese findings suggest that African countries’ response to the COVID-19 pandemic was prompt and may have contributed to the lower cases and deaths in the region compared with countries in other regions. The IARs demonstrate that many technical areas still require immediate improvement to guide decisions in subsequent waves or future outbreaks.

BackgroundThe Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was originated from Wuhan city, China and spread to almost all countries and territories in the world. Ethiopia reported its first COVID-19 confirmed case on 13 March, 2020. This study aims to show the epidemiological characteristics of the pandemic in Ethiopia in the first hundred days, which would help to guide the ongoing national response efforts to control and prevent the spread of the disease through generating scientific evidence.MethodWe conducted secondary data analysis of COVID-19 data extracted from a national database at Ethiopian Public Health Institute from 13 March to 21 June, 2020. We anonymized personal information for privacy protection. Data was cleaned and descriptive analyses was employed. We used Arc GIS to illustrate the geographical distribution of COVID-19 cases.ResultsOf the 216,328 examined individuals, 4,534 (2.1%) tested positive for COVID-19 of which 74(CFR: 1.6%) have died. People aged between 20–49 years attributed for 76.3% of the total cases. Majority, 2,851 (62.9%) of the cases were male, 3,222 (71.3%) reported from Addis Ababa, 982 (21.7%) of the cases were imported, 413(9.1%) had contact with confirmed cases, 3,139 (69.2%) had no travel history nor contact with confirmed case, and 4,180 (92.2%) of the cases reported were asymptomatic. Health Care Workers contributed for 3.7% of the total cases reported.ConclusionThe magnitude and distribution of COVID-19 cases and deaths and Health Care Workers infection has increased throughout the country over-time. Due emphasis needs to be given by the government, all stakeholders, and partners to scale-up and expand laboratory diagnosis capacities, strengthen surveillance and contact tracing, implement proper Infection Prevention and Control measures, improve case management services and the community should strictly follow social distancing measures. There should be an appropriate health care workers risk factors assessment and intervention to adequately protect the health care workers exposure and infection. Further study shall be conducted to describe the knowledge gaps on the asymptomatic transmission of the virus.

The 2014–2016 Ebola virus (EBOV) disease outbreak affected over 29000 people and left behind the biggest cohort (over 17000 individuals) of Ebola survivors in history. Although the persistence of EBOV in body fluids of survivors was reported before the recent outbreak, new evidence revealed that the virus can be detected up to 18 months in the semen, which represents the biggest risk of Ebola resurgence in affected communities. In this study, we review the knowledge on the Ebola flare-ups that occurred after the peak of the 2014–2016 Ebola epidemic in West Africa.

Background Emerging and re-emerging diseases with pandemic potential continue to challenge fragile health systems in Africa, creating enormous human and economic toll. To provide evidence for the investment case for public health emergency preparedness, we analysed the spatial and temporal distribution of epidemics, disasters and other potential public health emergencies in the WHO African region between 2016 and 2018. Methods We abstracted data from several sources, including: the WHO African Region’s weekly bulletins on epidemics and emergencies, the WHO-Disease Outbreak News (DON) and the Emergency Events Database (EM-DAT) of the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED). Other sources were: the Program for Monitoring Emerging Diseases (ProMED) and the Global Infectious Disease and Epidemiology Network (GIDEON). We included information on the time and location of the event, the number of cases and deaths and counter-checked the different data sources. Data analysis We used bubble plots for temporal analysis and generated graphs and maps showing the frequency and distribution of each event. Based on the frequency of events, we categorised countries into three: Tier 1, 10 or more events, Tier 2, 5–9 events, and Tier 3, less than 5 or no event. Finally, we compared the event frequencies to a summary International Health Regulations (IHR) index generated from the IHR technical area scores of the 2018 annual reports. Results Over 260 events were identified between 2016 and 2018. Forty-one countries (87%) had at least one epidemic between 2016 and 2018, and 21 of them (45%) had at least one epidemic annually. Twenty-two countries (47%) had disasters/humanitarian crises. Seven countries (the epicentres) experienced over 10 events and all of them had limited or developing IHR capacities. The top five causes of epidemics were: Cholera, Measles, Viral Haemorrhagic Diseases, Malaria and Meningitis. Conclusions The frequent and widespread occurrence of epidemics and disasters in Africa is a clarion call for investing in preparedness. While strengthening preparedness should be guided by global frameworks, it is the responsibility of each government to finance country specific needs. We call upon all African countries to establish governance and predictable financing mechanisms for IHR implementation and to build resilient health systems everywhere.

Introduction Suspected cholera cases were reported to the city administration health bureau in Addis-Ababa, Ethiopia on June 5, 2016 and it was laboratory confirmed by culture on 7 June 2016. The outbreak was declared by the government on June 8, 2016. The aim of this study was to rapidly investigate the outbreak epidemiologically and guide response activities in the affected Sub cities of Addis Ababa city administration. Methods An unmatched 1:2 case-control study was conducted in six selected sub-cities of the city administration. Different laboratory tests were also done from suspected possible risk factors identified to support the epidemiological findings. A case was a patient greater than 5 years old, who developed acute watery diarrhea with or without Vomiting. Control was an individual greater than 5 years' old who stayed in the same township and did not suffer from cholera. A structured questionnaire was used to select cases and controls. Epi InfoTM statistical software was used to analyze the data. Results were presented in narratives, figures and tables. Results The present study found that, the study participants who used street-vended water (Odds Ratio (OR)=10.4; 95% CI: 1.20-90.9), those who reported holy water sources use (OR=2.7, 95% CI: 1.45-5.04), eating raw meat (OR=7.75; 95% CI: 3.86-15.54) or roasted meat (OR=2.16; 95% CI: 1.19-3.93) and vegetable salad (OR=2.07; 95% CI: 1.14-3.76) were associated with contracting cholera infection. The likelihood of contracting cholera was significantly higher among those who ate food from street vendor sources (OR=5.32; 95% CI: 1.82-15.56) and those who practiced open defecation (OR=8.12; 95% CI (2.20-29.81). Having a latrine (OR=0.29; 95% CI: 0.12-0.69) and proper hand hygiene practice (OR=0.22; 95% CI: 0.14-0.38) were found to be protective against cholera infection. Conclusion Improving awareness of the community by intensifying social mobilization activities through community participation in proper hygienic practice, proper waste disposal and latrine facility construction and utilization. Provision of safe water for the community by strictly conducting end-point assessment of water points and conducting a KAP assessment among food handlers to explore their knowledge and practices regarding safe food/drink handling and water treatment as well as initiate appropriate PH actions based on the findings which will be necessary for prevention of similar cholera outbreaks in the future.

The International Health Regulations (IHR, 2005) are an essential vehicle for addressing global health security. Here, we report the IHR capacities in the WHO African from independent joint external evaluation (JEE). The JEE is a voluntary component of the IHR monitoring and evaluation framework. It evaluates IHR capacities in 19 technical areas in four broad themes: ‘Prevent’ (7 technical areas, 15 indicators); ‘Detect’ (4 technical areas, 13 indicators); ‘Respond’ (5 technical areas, 14 indicators), points of entry (PoE) and other IHR hazards (chemical and radiation) (3 technical areas, 6 indicators). The IHR capacity scores are graded from level 1 (no capacity) to level 5 (sustainable capacity). From February 2016 to March 2019, 40 of 47 WHO African region countries (81% coverage) evaluated their IHR capacities using the JEE tool. No country had the required IHR capacities. Under the theme ‘Prevent’, no country scored level 5 for 12 of 15 indicators. Over 80% of them scored level 1 or 2 for most indicators. For ‘Detect’, none scored level 5 for 12 of 13 indicators. However, many scored level 3 or 4 for several indicators. For ‘Respond’, none scored level 5 for 13 of 14 indicators, and less than 10% had a national multihazard public health emergency preparedness and response plan. For PoE and other IHR hazards, most countries scored level 1 or 2 and none scored level 5. Countries in the WHO African region are commended for embracing the JEE to assess their IHR capacities. However, major gaps have been identified. Urgent collective action is needed now to protect the WHO African region from health security threats.