Search

BackgroundConflict is known to impact maternal and neonatal health in Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), an area of longstanding insecurity. We conducted a systematic review on pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in this region to provide a comprehensive overview of maternal and neonatal outcomes over a 20-year period.MethodsWe systematically searched databases, such as Medline, EMBASE, Global Health, ClinicalTrials.gov and the Cochrane Library, along with grey literature, for articles published between 2001 and 2021. These articles provided quantitative data on selected pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in the provinces of Ituri, Maniema and North and South Kivu, Eastern DRC. We conducted a descriptive analysis, combining results from different data sources and comparing incidence of outcomes in North Kivu with those in other provinces in Eastern DRC.ResultsA total of 1,065 abstracts from peer-reviewed publications and 196 articles from the grey literature were screened, resulting in the inclusion of 14 scientific articles in the review. The most frequently reported pregnancy complications were caesarean sections (11.6%–48.3% of deliveries) and miscarriage (1.2%–30.0% of deliveries). The most common neonatal outcomes were low birth weight (3.8%–21.9% of live births), preterm birth (0.9%–74.0%) and neonatal death (0.2%–43.3%).ConclusionOur review provides data on pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in Eastern DRC, which will be valuable for future studies. Despite the area's ongoing armed conflict, the percentages of complications we noted in Eastern DRC are comparable with those observed in other countries in the region.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=262553, PROSPERO (CRD42021262553).

During the 2018–2020 Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak, residents in Goma, Democratic Republic of the Congo, were offered a two-dose prophylactic EVD vaccine. This was the first study to evaluate the safety of this vaccine in pregnant women. Adults, including pregnant women, and children aged ≥1 year old were offered the Ad26.ZEBOV (day 0; dose 1), MVA-BN-Filo (day 56; dose 2) EVD vaccine through an open-label clinical trial. In total, 20,408 participants, including 6635 (32.5%) children, received dose 1. Fewer than 1% of non-pregnant participants experienced a serious adverse event (SAE) following dose 1; one SAE was possibly related to the Ad26.ZEBOV vaccine. Of the 1221 pregnant women, 371 (30.4%) experienced an SAE, with caesarean section being the most common event. No SAEs in pregnant women were considered related to vaccination. Of 1169 pregnancies with a known outcome, 55 (4.7%) ended in a miscarriage, and 30 (2.6%) in a stillbirth. Eleven (1.0%) live births ended in early neonatal death, and five (0.4%) had a congenital abnormality. Overall, 188/891 (21.1%) were preterm births and 79/1032 (7.6%) had low birth weight. The uptake of the two-dose regimen was high: 15,328/20,408 (75.1%). The vaccine regimen was well-tolerated among the study participants, including pregnant women, although further data, ideally from controlled trials, are needed in this crucial group.

During the 2018–2020 Ebola virus disease outbreak in Democratic Republic of the Congo, a phase 3 trial of the Ad26.ZEBOV, MVA-BN-Filo Ebola vaccine (DRC-EB-001) commenced in Goma, with participants being offered the two-dose regimen given 56 days apart. Suspension of trial activities in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic led to some participants receiving a late dose 2 outside the planned interval. Blood samples were collected from adults, adolescents, and children prior to their delayed dose 2 vaccination and 21 days after, and tested for IgG binding antibodies against Ebola virus glycoprotein using the Filovirus Animal Nonclinical Group (FANG) ELISA. Results from 133 participants showed a median two-dose interval of 9.3 months. The pre-dose 2 antibody geometric mean concentration (GMC) was 217 ELISA Units (EU)/mL (95% CI 157; 301) in adults, 378 EU/mL (281; 510) in adolescents, and 558 EU/mL (471; 661) in children. At 21 days post-dose 2, the GMC increased to 22,194 EU/mL (16,726; 29,449) in adults, 37,896 EU/mL (29,985; 47,893) in adolescents, and 34,652 EU/mL (27,906; 43,028) in children. Participants receiving a delayed dose 2 had a higher GMC at 21 days post-dose 2 than those who received a standard 56-day regimen in other African trials, but similar to those who received the regimen with an extended interval.

Abstract Introduction Widespread armed conflict has affected Yemen since 2014. To date, the mortality toll of seven years of crisis, and any excess due to the COVID-19 pandemic, are not well quantified. We attempted to estimate population mortality during the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods in nine purposively selected urban and rural communities of southern and central Yemen (Aden and Ta’iz governorates), totalling > 100,000 people. Methods Within each study site, we collected lists of decedents between January 2014–March 2021 by interviewing different categories of key community informants, including community leaders, imams, healthcare workers, senior citizens and others. After linking records across lists based on key variables, we applied two-, three- or four-list capture-recapture analysis to estimate total death tolls. We also computed death rates by combining these estimates with population denominators, themselves subject to estimation. Results After interviewing 138 disproportionately (74.6%) male informants, we identified 2445 unique decedents. While informants recalled deaths throughout the study period, reported deaths among children were sparse: we thus restricted analysis to persons aged ≥ 15 years old. We noted a peak in reported deaths during May–July 2020, plausibly coinciding with the first COVID-19 wave. Death rate estimates featured uninformatively large confidence intervals, but appeared elevated compared to the non-crisis baseline, particularly in two sites where a large proportion of deaths were attributed to war injuries. There was no clear-cut evidence of excess mortality during the pandemic period. Conclusions We found some evidence of a peak in mortality during the early phase of the pandemic, but death rate estimates were otherwise too imprecise to enable strong inference on trends. Estimates suggested substantial mortality elevations from baseline during the crisis period, but are subject to serious potential biases. The study highlighted challenges of data collection in this insecure, politically contested environment.

Background Globally, since 1 January 2020 and as of 24 January 2023, there have been over 664 million cases of COVID-19 and over 6.7 million deaths reported to WHO. WHO developed an evidence-based alert system, assessing public health risk on a weekly basis in 237 countries, territories and areas from May 2021 to June 2022. This aimed to facilitate the early identification of situations where healthcare capacity may become overstretched.Methods The process involved a three-stage mixed methods approach. In the first stage, future deaths were predicted from the time series of reported cases and deaths to produce an initial alert level. In the second stage, this alert level was adjusted by incorporating a range of contextual indicators and accounting for the quality of information available using a Bayes classifier. In the third stage, countries with an alert level of ‘High’ or above were added to an operational watchlist and assistance was deployed as needed.Results Since June 2021, the system has supported the release of more than US$27 million from WHO emergency funding, over 450 000 rapid antigen diagnostic testing kits and over 6000 oxygen concentrators. Retrospective evaluation indicated that the first two stages were needed to maximise sensitivity, where 44% (IQR 29%–67%) of weekly watchlist alerts would not have been identified using only reported cases and deaths. The alerts were timely and valid in most cases; however, this could only be assessed on a non-representative sample of countries with hospitalisation data available.Conclusions The system provided a standardised approach to monitor the pandemic at the country level by incorporating all available data on epidemiological analytics and contextual assessments. While this system was developed for COVID-19, a similar system could be used for future outbreaks and emergencies, with necessary adjustments to parameters and indicators.

BackgroundCross-border movements between districts bordering Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) are common due to the interdependence between populations on either side, though this increases the risk of the international spread of infectious diseases. Due to the nature of their work, boda boda drivers (motorcycle taxis), taxis and truck drivers continue to cross the border during epidemics. However, perceived risk of contracting and spreading communicable diseases may be influenced by several factors such as the level of education, packaging and perception of health care messages, limited interaction with local socio-cultural dynamics or personal experiences. This study aims to explore differences in movement patterns and risk perceptions as factors for transmission among transport drivers in Ugandan border districts during the 2018–2020 Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) epidemic and the current COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsBetween May and June 2021, in-depth interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with transport drivers in three Ugandan districts bordering DRC (Kasese, Kisoro and Hoima). Participants were asked about their knowledge and beliefs about EVD and COVID-19, perceived risk during epidemics, reasons for, and travel patterns during the EVD epidemic and COVID- 19 pandemic. A thematic content analysis was applied.ResultsParticipants’ awareness of EVD was higher than that of COVID-19 however, the risk of transmission of Ebola virus was perceived as a remote threat. Measures restricting mobility during the COVID-19 pandemic had a greater impact on transport drivers compared to those implemented during the EVD epidemic, and were perceived as prohibitive rather than protective, largely due to fear of reprisals by security officers. Despite this, drivers were unlikely to be able to comply with the restrictions as they relied on their work as a source of income.ConclusionThe vulnerabilities of transport drivers should be considered in the context of epidemics such EVD and COVID-19 in Uganda. Policy makers should address these particularities and assess the impact of public health measures on transport drivers’ mobility and involve them in designing of mobility-relatedpolicies.

Abstract Background Timely but accurate data collection is needed during health emergencies to inform public health responses. Often, an abundance of data is collected but not used. When outbreaks and other health events occur in remote and complex settings, operatives on the ground are often required to cover multiple tasks whilst working with limited resources. Tools that facilitate the collection of essential data during the early investigations of a potential public health event can support effective public health decision-making. We proposed to define the minimum set of quantitative information to collect whilst using electronic device or not. Here we present the process used to select the minimum information required to describe an outbreak of any cause during its initial stages and occurring in remote settings. Methods A working group of epidemiologists took part in two rounds of a Delphi process to categorise the variables to be included in an initial outbreak investigation form. This took place between January–June 2019 using an online survey. Results At a threshold of 75 %, consensus was reached for nineteen (23.2%) variables which were all classified as ‘essential’. This increased to twenty-six (31.7%) variables when the threshold was reduced to 60% with all but one variable classified as ‘essential’. Twenty-five of these variables were included in the ‘Time zero initial case investigation’ ‘(T0)’ form which was shared with the members of the Rapid Response Team Knowledge Network for field testing and feedback. The form has been readily available online by WHO since September 2019. Conclusion This is the first known Delphi process used to determine the minimum variables needed for an outbreak investigation. The subsequent development of the T0 form should help to improve the efficiency and standardisation of data collection during emergencies and ultimately the quality of the data collected during field investigation.

Background: ODK provides software and standards that are popular solutions for off-grid electronic data collection and has substantial code overlap and interoperability with a number of related software products including CommCare, Enketo, Ona, SurveyCTO, and KoBoToolbox. These tools provide open-source options for off-grid use in public health data collection, management, analysis, and reporting. During the 2018–2020 Ebola epidemic in the North Kivu and Ituri regions of Democratic Republic of Congo, we used these tools to support the DRC Ministère de la Santé RDC and World Health Organization in their efforts to administer an experimental vaccine (VSV-Zebov-GP) as part of their strategy to control the transmission of infection.Method: New functions were developed to facilitate the use of ODK, Enketo and R in large scale data collection, aggregation, monitoring, and near-real-time analysis during clinical research in health emergencies. We present enhancements to ODK that include a built-in audit-trail, a framework and companion app for biometric registration of ISO/IEC 19794-2 fingerprint templates, enhanced performance features, better scalability for studies featuring millions of data form submissions, increased options for parallelization of research projects, and pipelines for automated management and analysis of data. We also developed novel encryption protocols for enhanced web-form security in Enketo.Results: Against the backdrop of a complex and challenging epidemic response, our enhanced platform of open tools was used to collect and manage data from more than 280,000 eligible study participants who received VSV-Zebov-GP under informed consent. These data were used to determine whether the VSV-Zebov-GP was safe and effective and to guide daily field operations.Conclusions: We present open-source developments that make electronic data management during clinical research and health emergencies more viable and robust. These developments will also enhance and expand the functionality of a diverse range of data collection platforms that are based on the ODK software and standards.

Background: Approval for the use of COVID-19 vaccines has been granted in a number of countries but there are concerns that vaccine uptake may be low amongst certain groups.Methods: This study used a mixed methods approach based on online survey and an embedded quantitative/qualitative design to explore perceptions and attitudes that were associated with intention to either accept or refuse offers of vaccination in different demographic groups during the early stages of the UK's mass COVID-19 vaccination programme (December 2020). Analysis used multivariate logistic regression, structural text modeling and anthropological assessments.Results: Of 4,535 respondents, 85% (n = 3,859) were willing to have a COVID-19 vaccine. The rapidity of vaccine development and uncertainties about safety were common reasons for COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. There was no evidence for the widespread influence of mis-information, although broader vaccine hesitancy was associated with intentions to refuse COVID-19 vaccines (OR 20.60, 95% CI 14.20–30.30, p < 0.001). Low levels of trust in the decision-making (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.08, 2.48, p = 0.021) and truthfulness (OR 8.76, 95% CI 4.15–19.90, p < 0.001) of the UK government were independently associated with higher odds of refusing COVID-19 vaccines. Compared to political centrists, conservatives and liberals were, respectively, more (OR 2.05, 95%CI 1.51–2.80, p < 0.001) and less (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.22–0.41, p < 0.001) likely to refuse offered vaccines. Those who were willing to be vaccinated cited both personal and public protection as reasons, with some alluding to having a sense of collective responsibility.Conclusion: Dominant narratives of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy are misconceived as primarily being driven by misinformation. Key indicators of UK vaccine acceptance include prior behaviors, transparency of the scientific process of vaccine development, mistrust in science and leadership and individual political views. Vaccine programmes should leverage the sense of altruism, citizenship and collective responsibility that motivated many participants to get vaccinated.

BackgroundThe success of a government's COVID-19 control strategy relies on public trust and broad acceptance of response measures. We investigated public perceptions of the UK government's COVID-19 response, focusing on the relationship between trust and perceived transparency, during the first wave (April 2020) of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom.MethodsAnonymous survey data were collected (2020-04-06 to 2020-04-22) from 9,322 respondents, aged 20+ using an online questionnaire shared primarily through Facebook. We took an embedded-mixed-methods approach to data analysis. Missing data were imputed via multiple imputation. Binomial & multinomial logistic regression were used to detect associations between demographic characteristics and perceptions or opinions of the UK government's response to COVID-19. Structural topic modelling (STM), qualitative thematic coding of sub-sets of responses were then used to perform a thematic analysis of topics that were of interest to key demographic groups.ResultsMost respondents (95.1%) supported government enforcement of behaviour change. While 52.1% of respondents thought the government was making good decisions, differences were apparent across demographic groups, for example respondents from Scotland had lower odds of responding positively than respondents in London. Higher educational levels saw decreasing odds of having a positive opinion of the government response and decreasing household income associated with decreasing positive opinion. Of respondents who thought the government was not making good decisions 60% believed the economy was being prioritised over people and their health. Positive views on government decision-making were associated with positive views on government transparency about the COVID-19 response. Qualitative analysis about perceptions of government transparency highlighted five key themes: (1) the justification of opacity due to the condition of crisis, (2) generalised mistrust of politics, (3) concerns about the role of scientific evidence, (4) quality of government communication and (5) questions about political decision-making processes.ConclusionOur study suggests that trust is not homogenous across communities, and that generalised mistrust, concerns about the transparent use and communication of evidence and insights into decision-making processes can affect perceptions of the government's pandemic response. We recommend targeted community engagement, tailored to the experiences of different groups and a new focus on accountability and openness around how decisions are made in the response to the UK COVID-19 pandemic.

Objectives: We assessed whether lockdown had a disproportionate impact on physical activity behavior in groups who were, or who perceived themselves to be, at heightened risk from COVID-19.Methods: Physical activity intensity (none, mild, moderate, or vigorous) before and during the UK COVID-19 lockdown was self-reported by 9,190 adults between 2020-04-06 and 2020-04-22. Physician-diagnosed health conditions and topic composition of open-ended text on participants' coping strategies were tested for associations with changes in physical activity.Results: Most (63.9%) participants maintained their normal physical activity intensity during lockdown, 25.0% changed toward less intensive activity and 11.1% were doing more. Doing less intensive physical activity was associated with obesity (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.08–1.42), hypertension (OR 1.25, 1.10–1.40), lung disease (OR 1.23, 1.08–1.38), depression (OR 2.05, 1.89–2.21), and disability (OR 2.13, 1.87–2.39). Being female (OR 1.25, 1.12–1.38), living alone (OR 1.20, 1.05–1.34), or without access to a garden (OR 1.74, 1.56–1.91) were also associated with doing less intensive physical activity, but being in the highest income group (OR 1.73, 1.37–2.09) or having school-age children (OR 1.29, 1.10–1.49) were associated with doing more. Younger adults were more likely to change their PA behavior compared to older adults. Structural topic modeling of narratives on coping strategies revealed associations between changes in physical activity and perceptions of personal or familial risks at work or at home.Conclusions: Policies on maintaining or improving physical activity intensity during lockdowns should consider (1) vulnerable groups of adults including those with chronic diseases or self-perceptions of being at risk and (2) the importance of access to green or open spaces in which to exercise.