Men’s Involvement in a Parenting Programme to Reduce Child Maltreatment and Gender-Based Violence: Formative Evaluation in Uganda

AbstractParenting programmes involving fathers can reduce child maltreatment and gender-based violence. However, most parenting programmes find it difficult to recruit fathers. We piloted a 21 session parenting intervention, ‘Parenting for Respectability’, with fathers and mothers near Kampala, Uganda. Sixty-one fathers and 83 mothers were recruited initially and 52 fathers and 76 mothers retained to the end. We interviewed with 24 fathers and 16 mothers. Data were analysed thematically. Success in involving fathers was probably due to (a) the first 10 sessions being father-only, allowing them to share experiences before participating in mixed-sex sessions; (b) exploiting men’s pre-existing motivation to improve their children’s behaviour, thereby enhancing family respectability; and (c) the interactive, participatory delivery. Mixed sessions enabled couples to clarify conflicting perspectives regarding spousal relationships and gendered norms. However, men experienced social pressure to conform to conventional masculinity, suggesting the need to instil intervention values at community level. </jats:p

Uganda's experience in Ebola virus disease outbreak preparedness, 2018-2019.

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

The 2021 WHO catalogue of Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex mutations associated with drug resistance: a genotypic analysis.

Background: Molecular diagnostics are considered the most promising route to achievement of rapid, universal drug susceptibility testing for Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC). We aimed to generate a WHO-endorsed catalogue of mutations to serve as a global standard for interpreting molecular information for drug resistance prediction. Methods: In this systematic analysis, we used a candidate gene approach to identify mutations associated with resistance or consistent with susceptibility for 13 WHO-endorsed antituberculosis drugs. We collected existing worldwide MTBC whole-genome sequencing data and phenotypic data from academic groups and consortia, reference laboratories, public health organisations, and published literature. We categorised phenotypes as follows: methods and critical concentrations currently endorsed by WHO (category 1); critical concentrations previously endorsed by WHO for those methods (category 2); methods or critical concentrations not currently endorsed by WHO (category 3). For each mutation, we used a contingency table of binary phenotypes and presence or absence of the mutation to compute positive predictive value, and we used Fisher's exact tests to generate odds ratios and Benjamini-Hochberg corrected p values. Mutations were graded as associated with resistance if present in at least five isolates, if the odds ratio was more than 1 with a statistically significant corrected p value, and if the lower bound of the 95% CI on the positive predictive value for phenotypic resistance was greater than 25%. A series of expert rules were applied for final confidence grading of each mutation. Findings: We analysed 41 137 MTBC isolates with phenotypic and whole-genome sequencing data from 45 countries. 38 215 MTBC isolates passed quality control steps and were included in the final analysis. 15 667 associations were computed for 13 211 unique mutations linked to one or more drugs. 1149 (7·3%) of 15 667 mutations were classified as associated with phenotypic resistance and 107 (0·7%) were deemed consistent with susceptibility. For rifampicin, isoniazid, ethambutol, fluoroquinolones, and streptomycin, the mutations' pooled sensitivity was more than 80%. Specificity was over 95% for all drugs except ethionamide (91·4%), moxifloxacin (91·6%) and ethambutol (93·3%). Only two resistance mutations were identified for bedaquiline, delamanid, clofazimine, and linezolid as prevalence of phenotypic resistance was low for these drugs. Interpretation: We present the first WHO-endorsed catalogue of molecular targets for MTBC drug susceptibility testing, which is intended to provide a global standard for resistance interpretation. The existence of this catalogue should encourage the implementation of molecular diagnostics by national tuberculosis programmes. Funding: Unitaid, Wellcome Trust, UK Medical Research Council, and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Field evaluation of PIMA point-of-care CD4 testing in Rakai, Uganda.

To assess the accuracy of PIMA Point-of-Care (POC) CD4 testing in rural Rakai, Uganda.903 HIV positive persons attending field clinics provided a venous blood sample assessed on site using PIMA analyzers per manufacturer's specifications. The venous samples were then run on FACSCalibur flow cytometry at a central facility. The Bland-Altman method was used to estimate mean bias and 95% limits of agreement (LOA). Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV) were calculated for a CD4 threshold of <350 and <500 cells/uL for antiretroviral eligibility.There was a high correlation between PIMA and FACSCalibur CD4 counts (r = 0.943, p<0.001). Relative to FACSCalibur, the PIMA POC CD4 had negative mean bias of -34.6 cells/uL (95% LOA: -219.8 to 150.6) overall. The dispersion at CD4<350 cells/uL was 5.1 cells/uL (95% LOA: -126.6 to 136.8). For a threshold of CD4<350 cells/uL, PIMA venous blood had a sensitivity of 88.6% (95%CI 84.8-92.4%), specificity of 87.5% (95%CI 84.9-90.1%), NPV of 94.9% (95%CI 93.1-96.7%), and PPV of 74.4% (95%CI 69.6-79.2%). PIMA sensitivity and PPV significantly increased to 96.1% and 88.3% respectively with increased threshold of 500 cells/uL.Overall, PIMA POC CD4 counts demonstrated negative bias compared to FACSCalibur. PIMA POC sensitivity improved significantly at a higher CD4 threshold of 500 than a 350 cells/uL threshold

Bias results of PIMA Venous versus FACSCalibur measurements.

<p>Bias results of PIMA Venous versus FACSCalibur measurements.</p

Bland-Altman plots comparing FACSCalibur and PIMA venous measurements.

<p>Bland-Altman plots comparing FACSCalibur and PIMA venous measurements.</p

CD4 Ranges by Instrument used at 500 cells/µl*.

‡<p>FACSCalibur measurements mean and range.</p>†<p>PIMA results.</p

Sensitivity, Specificity, NPV and PPV at 500 cells/uL ART eligibility threshold.

<p>Sensitivity, Specificity, NPV and PPV at 500 cells/uL ART eligibility threshold.</p

CD4 Ranges by Instrument used at 350 cells/µl*.

‡<p>FACSCalibur measurements mean and range.</p>†<p>PIMA results.</p

Scatter plots of FACSCalibur Vs PIMA measurements.

<p>Scatter plots of FACSCalibur Vs PIMA measurements.</p