Search

Abstract Background On September 20, 2022, Uganda declared an Sudan Virus Disease (SVD) outbreak in Mubende District. Another eight districts were infected September–November 2022. We examined how Ugandan community beliefs and practices spread Sudan Ebola Virus (SUDV) in 2022. Methods A qualitative study was conducted in Mubende, Kassanda, and Kyegegwa districts in February 2023. Nine focus group discussions and six key informant interviews were held. We investigated whether community beliefs and practices contributed to spreading Sudan Ebola Virus (SUDV). Interviews were recorded, translated, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. Results The community deaths, later found to be due to Sudan Virus Disease(SVD), were often attributed to witchcraft or poisoning. Key informants reported that SVD patients often sought traditional healers or spiritual leaders before or after formal healthcare failed. They also found that traditional healers treated SVD patients without precautions. Religious leaders praying for SVD patients and their symptomatic contacts, SVD patients hiding in friends’ homes, and exhuming SVD patients from safe and dignified burials to allow traditional burials were other themes. Conclusion Diversity in community beliefs and culture likely contributed to spreading the 2022 Ugandan SVD outbreak. Public health systems, traditional healers, and religious leaders can help Uganda control ebolavirus outbreaks by identifying socially acceptable and scientifically supported infection control methods.

Abstract Background Early detection of outbreaks requires robust surveillance and reporting at both community and health facility levels. Uganda implements Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response (IDSR) for priority diseases and uses the national District Health Information System (DHIS2) for reporting. However, investigations after the first case in the 2022 Uganda Sudan virus outbreak was confirmed on September 20, 2022 revealed many community deaths among persons with Ebola-like symptoms as far back as August. Most had sought care at private facilities. We explored possible gaps in surveillance that may have resulted in late detection of the Sudan virus disease (SVD) outbreak in Uganda. Methods Using a standardized tool, we evaluated core surveillance capacities at public and private health facilities at the hospital level and below in three sub-counties reporting the earliest SVD cases in the outbreak. Key informant interviews (KIIs) were conducted with 12 purposively-selected participants from the district local government. Focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with community members from six villages where early probable SVD cases were identified. KIIs and FGDs focused on experiences with SVD and Viral Hemorrhagic Fever (VHF) surveillance in the district. Thematic data analysis was used for qualitative data. Results Forty-six (85%) of 54 health facilities surveyed were privately-owned, among which 42 (91%) did not report to DHIS2 and 39 (85%) had no health worker trained on IDSR; both metrics were 100% in the eight public facilities. Weak community-based surveillance, poor private facility engagement, low suspicion index for VHF among health workers, inability of facilities to analyze and utilize surveillance data, lack of knowledge about to whom to report, funding constraints for surveillance activities, lack of IDSR training, and lack of all-cause mortality surveillance were identified as gaps potentially contributing to delayed outbreak detection. Conclusion Both systemic and knowledge-related gaps in IDSR surveillance in SVD-affected districts contributed to the delayed detection of the 2022 Uganda SVD outbreak. Targeted interventions to address these gaps in both public and private facilities across Uganda could help avert similar situations in the future.

Objectives: Early isolation and care for Ebola disease patients at Ebola Treatment Units (ETU) curb outbreak spread. We evaluated time to ETU entry and associated factors during the 2022 Sudan virus disease (SVD) outbreak in Uganda. Methods: We included persons with RT-PCR-confirmed SVD with onset September 20-November 30, 2022. We categorized days from symptom onset to ETU entry (“delays”) as short (≤2), moderate (3-5), and long (≥6); the latter two were “delayed isolation.” We categorized symptom onset timing as “earlier” or “later,” using October 15 as a cut-off. We assessed demographics, symptom onset timing, and awareness of contact status as predictors for delayed isolation. We explored reasons for early vs late isolation using key informant interviews. Results: Among 118 case-patients, 25 (21%) had short, 43 (36%) moderate, and 50 (43%) long delays. Seventy-five (64%) had symptom onset later in the outbreak. Earlier symptom onset increased risk of delayed isolation (crude risk ratio = 1.8, 95% confidence interval (1.2-2.8]). Awareness of contact status and SVD symptoms, and belief that early treatment-seeking was lifesaving facilitated early care-seeking. Patients with long delays reported fear of ETUs and lack of transport as contributors. Conclusion: Delayed isolation was common early in the outbreak. Strong contact tracing and community engagement could expedite presentation to ETUs.