The impact of COVID-19 and national pandemic responses on health service utilisation in seven low- and middle-income countries

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted health services worldwide, which may have led to increased mortality and secondary disease outbreaks. Disruptions vary by patient population, geographic area, and service. While many reasons have been put forward to explain disruptions, few studies have empirically investigated their causes. OBJECTIVE: We quantify disruptions to outpatient services, facility-based deliveries, and family planning in seven low- and middle-income countries during the COVID-19 pandemic and quantify relationships between disruptions and the intensity of national pandemic responses. METHODS: We leveraged routine data from 104 Partners In Health-supported facilities from January 2016 to December 2021. We first quantified COVID-19-related disruptions in each country by month using negative binomial time series models. We then modelled the relationship between disruptions and the intensity of national pandemic responses, as measured by the stringency index from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker. RESULTS: For all the studied countries, we observed at least one month with a significant decline in outpatient visits during the COVID-19 pandemic. We also observed significant cumulative drops in outpatient visits across all months in Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Rwanda, and Sierra Leone. A significant cumulative decrease in facility-based deliveries was observed in Haiti, Lesotho, Mexico, and Sierra Leone. No country had significant cumulative drops in family planning visits. For a 10-unit increase in the average monthly stringency index, the proportion deviation in monthly facility outpatient visits compared to expected fell by 3.9% (95% CI: -5.1%, -1.6%). No relationship between stringency of pandemic responses and utilisation was observed for facility-based deliveries or family planning. CONCLUSIONS: Context-specific strategies show the ability of health systems to sustain essential health services during the pandemic. The link between pandemic responses and healthcare utilisation can inform purposeful strategies to ensure communities have access to care and provide lessons for promoting the utilisation of health services elsewhere

Safety and long-term immunogenicity of the two-dose heterologous Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo Ebola vaccine regimen in adults in Sierra Leone: a combined open-label, non-randomised stage 1, and a randomised, double-blind, controlled stage 2 trial

Background The Ebola epidemics in west Africa and the Democratic Republic of the Congo highlight an urgent need for safe and effective vaccines to prevent Ebola virus disease. We aimed to assess the safety and long-term immunogenicity of a two-dose heterologous vaccine regimen, comprising the adenovirus type 26 vector-based vaccine encoding the Ebola virus glycoprotein (Ad26.ZEBOV) and the modified vaccinia Ankara vector-based vaccine, encoding glycoproteins from Ebola virus, Sudan virus, and Marburg virus, and the nucleoprotein from the Tai Forest virus (MVA-BN-Filo), in Sierra Leone, a country previously affected by Ebola. Methods The trial comprised two stages: an open-label, non-randomised stage 1, and a randomised, double-blind, controlled stage 2. The study was done at three clinics in Kambia district, Sierra Leone. In stage 1, healthy adults (aged ≥18 years) residing in or near Kambia district, received an intramuscular injection of Ad26.ZEBOV (5×1010 viral particles) on day 1 (first dose) followed by an intramuscular injection of MVA-BN-Filo (1×108 infectious units) on day 57 (second dose). An Ad26.ZEBOV booster vaccination was offered at 2 years after the first dose to stage 1 participants. The eligibility criteria for adult participants in stage 2 were consistent with stage 1 eligibility criteria. Stage 2 participants were randomly assigned (3:1), by computer-generated block randomisation (block size of eight) via an interactive web-response system, to receive either the Ebola vaccine regimen (Ad26.ZEBOV followed by MVA-BN-Filo) or an intramuscular injection of a single dose of meningococcal quadrivalent (serogroups A, C, W135, and Y) conjugate vaccine (MenACWY; first dose) followed by placebo on day 57 (second dose; control group). Study team personnel, except those with primary responsibility for study vaccine preparation, and participants were masked to study vaccine allocation. The primary outcome was the safety of the Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo vaccine regimen, which was assessed in all participants who had received at least one dose of study vaccine. Safety was assessed as solicited local and systemic adverse events occurring in the first 7 days after each vaccination, unsolicited adverse events occurring in the first 28 days after each vaccination, and serious adverse events or immediate reportable events occurring up to each participant’s last study visit. Secondary outcomes were to assess Ebola virus glycoprotein-specific binding antibody responses at 21 days after the second vaccine in a per-protocol set of participants (ie, those who had received both vaccinations within the protocol-defined time window, had at least one evaluable post-vaccination sample, and had no major protocol deviations that could have influenced the immune response) and to assess the safety and tolerability of the Ad26.ZEBOV booster vaccination in stage 1 participants who had received the booster dose. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02509494. Findings Between Sept 30, 2015, and Oct 19, 2016, 443 participants (43 in stage 1 and 400 in stage 2) were enrolled; 341 participants assigned to receive the Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo regimen and 102 participants assigned to receive the MenACWY and placebo regimen received at least one dose of study vaccine. Both regimens were well tolerated with no safety concerns. In stage 1, solicited local adverse events (mostly mild or moderate injection-site pain) were reported in 12 (28%) of 43 participants after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination and in six (14%) participants after MVA-BN-Filo vaccination. In stage 2, solicited local adverse events were reported in 51 (17%) of 298 participants after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination, in 58 (24%) of 246 after MVA-BN-Filo vaccination, in 17 (17%) of 102 after MenACWY vaccination, and in eight (9%) of 86 after placebo injection. In stage 1, solicited systemic adverse events were reported in 18 (42%) of 43 participants after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination and in 17 (40%) after MVA-BN-Filo vaccination. In stage 2, solicited systemic adverse events were reported in 161 (54%) of 298 participants after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination, in 107 (43%) of 246 after MVA-BN-Filo vaccination, in 51 (50%) of 102 after MenACWY vaccination, and in 39 (45%) of 86 after placebo injection. Solicited systemic adverse events in both stage 1 and 2 participants included mostly mild or moderate headache, myalgia, fatigue, and arthralgia. The most frequent unsolicited adverse event after the first dose was headache in stage 1 and malaria in stage 2. Malaria was the most frequent unsolicited adverse event after the second dose in both stage 1 and 2. No serious adverse event was considered related to the study vaccine, and no immediate reportable events were observed. In stage 1, the safety profile after the booster vaccination was not notably different to that observed after the first dose. Vaccine-induced humoral immune responses were observed in 41 (98%) of 42 stage 1 participants (geometric mean binding antibody concentration 4784 ELISA units [EU]/mL [95% CI 3736–6125]) and in 176 (98%) of 179 stage 2 participants (3810 EU/mL [3312–4383]) at 21 days after the second vaccination. Interpretation The Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo vaccine regimen was well tolerated and immunogenic, with persistent humoral immune responses. These data support the use of this vaccine regimen for Ebola virus disease prophylaxis in adults

Safety and immunogenicity of the two-dose heterologous Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo Ebola vaccine regimen in children in Sierra Leone: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial

Background—Children account for a substantial proportion of cases and deaths from Ebola virus disease. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of a two-dose heterologous vaccine regimen, comprising the adenovirus type 26 vector-based vaccine encoding the Ebola virus glycoprotein (Ad26.ZEBOV) and the modified vaccinia Ankara vectorbased vaccine, encoding glycoproteins from the Ebola virus, Sudan virus, and Marburg virus, and the nucleoprotein from the Tai Forest virus (MVA-BN-Filo), in a paediatric population in Sierra Leone. Methods—This randomised, double-blind, controlled trial was done at three clinics in Kambia district, Sierra Leone. Healthy children and adolescents aged 1–17 years were enrolled in three age cohorts (12–17 years, 4–11 years, and 1–3 years) and randomly assigned (3:1), via computer-generated block randomisation (block size of eight), to receive an intramuscular injection of either Ad26.ZEBOV (5 × 1010 viral particles; first dose) followed by MVA-BN-Filo (1 × 108 infectious units; second dose) on day 57 (Ebola vaccine group), or a single dose of meningococcal quadrivalent (serogroups A, C, W135, and Y) conjugate vaccine (MenACWY; first dose) followed by placebo (second dose) on day 57 (control group). Study team personnel (except for those with primary responsibility for study vaccine preparation), participants, and their parents or guardians were masked to study vaccine allocation. The primary outcome was safety, measured as the occurrence of solicited local and systemic adverse symptoms during 7 days after each vaccination, unsolicited systemic adverse events during 28 days after each vaccination, abnormal laboratory results during the study period, and serious adverse events or immediate reportable events throughout the study period. The secondary outcome was immunogenicity (humoral immune response), measured as the concentration of Ebola virus glycoprotein-specific binding antibodies at 21 days after the second dose. The primary outcome was assessed in all participants who had received at least one dose of study vaccine and had available reactogenicity data, and immunogenicity was assessed in all participants who had received both vaccinations within the protocol-defined time window, had at least one evaluable post-vaccination sample, and had no major protocol deviations that could have influenced the immune response. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02509494. Findings—From April 4, 2017, to July 5, 2018, 576 eligible children or adolescents (192 in each of the three age cohorts) were enrolled and randomly assigned. The most common solicited local adverse event during the 7 days after the first and second dose was injection-site pain in all age groups, with frequencies ranging from 0% (none of 48) of children aged 1–3 years after placebo injection to 21% (30 of 144) of children aged 4–11 years after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination. The most frequently observed solicited systemic adverse event during the 7 days was headache in the 12–17 years and 4–11 years age cohorts after the first and second dose, and pyrexia in the 1–3 years age cohort after the first and second dose. The most frequent unsolicited adverse event after the first and second dose vaccinations was malaria in all age cohorts, irrespective of the vaccine types. Following vaccination with MenACWY, severe thrombocytopaenia was observed in one participant aged 3 years. No other clinically significant laboratory abnormalities were observed in other study participants, and no serious adverse events related to the Ebola vaccine regimen were reported. There were no treatment-related deaths. Ebola virus glycoprotein-specific binding antibody responses at 21 days after the second dose of the Ebola virus vaccine regimen were observed in 131 (98%) of 134 children aged 12–17 years (9929 ELISA units [EU]/mL [95% CI 8172–12 064]), in 119 (99%) of 120 aged 4–11 years (10 212 EU/mL [8419–12 388]), and in 118 (98%) of 121 aged 1–3 years (22 568 EU/mL [18 426–27 642]). Interpretation—The Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo Ebola vaccine regimen was well tolerated with no safety concerns in children aged 1–17 years, and induced robust humoral immune responses, suggesting suitability of this regimen for Ebola virus disease prophylaxis in children

Attitudes toward COVID-19 Vaccination: Staff and Patient Perspectives at Six Health Facilities in Sierra Leone

Sierra Leone is a West African country with a population of over 8 million. With more than half of Sierra Leone’s population living in rural areas, it is important to understand rural populations’ access to and attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine. In November 2021, the rate of vaccination coverage in Sierra Leone was only 7% for one dose and 4% for two doses. Understanding perspectives of health facility staff and patients can help strengthen future vaccine campaigns. We conducted a cross-sectional study, between March 2022 and May 2022, of clinical staff, non-clinical staff, and adult (>18 years) patients/caregivers attending six Ministry of Health and Sanitation (MoHS) facilities supported by Partners In Health, four in the Kono district and two in the Western Urban Area district, the capital of Sierra Leone. We assessed the opportunity to vaccinate, vaccine uptake, and intention to vaccinate. Out of the 2015 participants, 11.4% were clinical staff, 18.8% were non-clinical staff, and 69.8% were patients/caregivers. Less than half of the patients/caregivers had the opportunity to be vaccinated (42%), and 22% of patients/caregivers were fully vaccinated. Among the unvaccinated population, 44% would refuse a vaccine if offered to them at no cost. Lack of access to COVID-19 vaccines and to official education messaging, especially for patients and caregivers, is still an underlying problem in Sierra Leone for vaccine uptake, rather than a lack of willingness to be vaccinated

Community and facility-level barriers to achieving UHC in Kono District, Sierra Leone and Maryland County, Liberia.

Universal Health Coverage (UHC) is achieved when individuals and communities receive the health services they need without suffering financial hardship. However, many countries face barriers to building health systems that enable the availability of affordable, accessible care. The goal of this study was to present a model of local monitoring of barriers and to provide a roadmap for designing interventions that improve access to and use of healthcare delivery systems. We conducted household, individual, and health facility surveys in seven catchment areas in Sierra Leone and Liberia between December 2019 and March 2020. A two-stage cluster sampling method was used to sample households and individuals, and all health facilities were included. We divide access barriers into demand (patient-side care seeking behavior), supply (availability of facilities and services), and their intersection (affordability, spending, and use rates). Among the 2,576 respondents within our 1,051 surveyed households, the propensity to seek care when ill was reported at 90% in Sierra Leone (n = 1,283) and 70% in Liberia (n = 806). We estimated that 31% of households spent greater than 10% of their total expenditure on healthcare in a month, and that 14.5% of households spent greater than 25%. Overall, the general service readiness index mean score for all health centers was around 70%. The greatest hindrance to service readiness was the availability of essential medicines, with facilities reporting an average score of 32% in Sierra Leone and 63% in Liberia. Our evidence suggests that the cost of care is both a barrier to care-seeking and a persisting problem among care-seeking patients. Lack of service availability (essential equipment and medicines), poses a risk to high-quality care. The research team recommends deploying interventions (visit cost subsidies, supply chain improvements) targeted at resolving these issues in order to advance the goal of achieving UHC

Impact of COVID-19 on access to cancer care in Rwanda: a retrospective time-series study using electronic medical records data

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has caused disruptions in access to routine healthcare services worldwide, with a particularly high impact on chronic care patients and low and middle-income countries. In this study, we used routinely collected electronic medical records data to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on access to cancer care at the Butaro Cancer Center of Excellence (BCCOE) in rural Rwanda.Methods We conducted a retrospective time-series study among all Rwandan patients who received cancer care at the BCCOE between 1 January 2016 and 31 July 2021. The primary outcomes of interest included a comparison of the number of patients who were predicted based on time-series models of pre-COVID-19 trends versus the actual number of patients who presented during the COVID-19 period (between March 2020 and July 2021) across four key indicators: the number of new patients, number of scheduled appointments, number of clinical visits attended and the proportion of scheduled appointments completed on time.Results In total, 8970 patients (7140 patients enrolled before COVID-19 and 1830 patients enrolled during COVID-19) were included in this study. During the COVID-19 period, enrolment of new patients dropped by 21.7% (95% prediction interval (PI): −31.3%, −11.7%) compared with the pre-COVID-19 period. Similarly, the number of clinical visits was 25.0% (95% PI: −31.1%, −19.1%) lower than expected and the proportion of scheduled visits completed on time was 27.9% (95% PI: −39.8%, −14.1%) lower than expected. However, the number of scheduled visits did not deviate significantly from expected.Conclusion Although scheduling procedures for visits continued as expected, our findings reveal that the COVID-19 pandemic interrupted patients’ ability to access cancer care and attend scheduled appointments at the BCCOE. This interruption in care suggests delayed diagnosis and loss to follow-up, potentially resulting in a higher rate of negative health outcomes among cancer patients in Rwanda