What adaptation to research is needed following crises: a comparative, qualitative study of the health workforce in Sierra Leone and Nepal

Background: Health workers are critical to the performance of health systems; yet, evidence about their coping strategies and support needs during and post crisis is lacking. There is very limited discussion about how research teams should respond when unexpected crises occur during on-going research. This paper critically presents the approaches and findings of two health systems research projects that explored and evaluated health worker performance and were adapted during crises, and provides lessons learnt on re-orientating research when the unexpected occurs. Methods: Health systems research was adapted post crisis to assess health workers’ experiences and coping strategies. Qualitative in-depth interviews were conducted with 14 health workers in a heavily affected earthquake district in Nepal and 25 frontline health workers in four districts in Ebola-affected Sierra Leone. All data were transcribed and analysed using the framework approach, which included developing coding frameworks for each study, applying the frameworks, developing charts and describing the themes. A second layer of analysis included analysis across the two contexts, whereas a third layer involved the research teams reflecting on the approaches used to adapt the research during these crises and what was learned as individuals and research teams. Results: In Sierra Leone, health workers were heavily stigmatised by the epidemic, leading to a breakdown of trust. Coping strategies included finding renewed purpose in continuing to serve their community, peer and family support (in some cases), and religion. In Nepal, individual determination, a sense of responsibility to the community and professional duty compelled staff to stay or return to their workplace. The research teams had trusting relationships with policy-makers and practitioners, which brought credibility and legitimacy to the change of research direction as well as the relationships to maximise the opportunity for findings to inform practice. Conclusions: In both contexts, health workers demonstrated considerable resilience in continuing to provide services despite limited support. Embedded researchers and institutions are arguably best placed to navigate emerging ethical and social justice challenges and are strategically positioned to support the co-production of knowledge and ensure research findings have impact

Incidence and risk factors of surgical site infections and related antibiotic resistance in Freetown, Sierra Leone: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND: There is limited information on surgical site infections (SSI) and the related antibiotic resistance needed to guide their management and prevention in Sierra Leone. In this study, we aimed to establish the incidence and risk factors of SSI and the related antibiotic resistance among adults attending a tertiary hospital, and a secondary health facility in Freetown, Sierra Leone. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study designed to collect data from adult (18 years or older) patients who attended elective and emergency surgeries at two hospitals in Freetown between February and July, 2021. Data analysis was done using STATA version 16. RESULTS: Of 338 patients, 245 (72.5%) and 93 (27.5%) had their surgeries at the tertiary and secondary hospitals, respectively. Many were males 192 (56.8%), less than 35 years 164 (48.5%), and 39 (11.5%) developed an SSI. Of the 39 patients who acquired an SSI, 7 (17.9%) and 32 (82.1%) had their surgeries at the secondary and tertiary hospitals, respectively. The incidence of SSI is higher in contaminated 17 (43.6%) than in clean-contaminated 12 (30.8%) and clean 10 (25.6%) wounds. Wound swabs were collected in 29 (74.4%) patients, of which 18 (62.1%) had bacterial growth. In total, 49 isolates of 14 different bacteria including gram-negative 41 (83.7%) and gram-positive 8 (16.3%) isolates were identified. Of these, 32 (65.3%) were Enterobacteriaceae, 9 (18.4%) were Non-fermenting gram-negative bacilli and 10 (12.2%) were Enterococci. The most common isolates were Escherichia coli (12, 24.5%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (10, 20.4%), Acinetobacter baumannii (5, 10.2%), Klebsiella oxytoca (4, 8.2%) and Enterococcus faecalis (4, 8.2%). The Enterobacteriaceae were either resistance to carbapenems (4, 8.2%) or were extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) producing organisms (29, 59.2%). Male sex [p = 0.031], an ASA score >/= 2 [p = 0.020), administration of general anaesthesia [p = 0.018] and elevated fasting glucose [p = 0.033] were predictive of SSI. CONCLUSION: The incidence of SSI in this study is comparable to other low- and middle-income countries, but a substantial proportion of these postoperative wounds have an ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae. Therefore, routine surveillance of SSI and related antibiotic resistance is required in resource-limited settings

Monitoring the referral system through benchmarking in rural Niger: an evaluation of the functional relation between health centres and the district hospital

BACKGROUND: The main objective of this study is to establish a benchmark for referral rates in rural Niger so as to allow interpretation of routine referral data to assess the performance of the referral system in Niger. METHODS: Strict and controlled application of existing clinical decision trees in a sample of rural health centres allowed the estimation of the corresponding need for and characteristics of curative referrals in rural Niger. Compliance of referral was monitored as well. Need was matched against actual referral in 11 rural districts. The referral patterns were registered so as to get an idea on the types of pathology referred. RESULTS: The referral rate benchmark was set at 2.5 % of patients consulting at the health centre for curative reasons. Niger's rural districts have a referral rate of less than half this benchmark. Acceptability of referrals is low for the population and is adding to the deficient referral system in Niger. Mortality because of under-referral is highest among young children. CONCLUSION: Referral patterns show that the present programme approach to deliver health care leaves a large amount of unmet need for which only comprehensive first and second line health services can provide a proper answer. On the other hand, the benchmark suggests that well functioning health centres can take care of the vast majority of problems patients present with

The weakest link: competence and prestige as constraints to referral by isolated nurses in rural Niger

BACKGROUND: For a health district to function referral from health centres to district hospitals is critical. In many developing countries referral systems perform well below expectations. Niger is not an exception in this matter. Beyond obvious problems of cost and access this study shows to what extent the behaviour of the health worker in its interaction with the patient can be a barrier of its own. METHODS: Information was triangulated from three sources in two rural districts in Niger: first, 46 semi-structured interviews with health centre nurses; second, 42 focus group discussions with an average of 12 participants – patients, relatives of patients and others; third, 231 semi-structured interviews with referred patients. RESULTS: Passive patients without 'voice' reinforce authoritarian attitudes of health centre staff. The latter appear reluctant to refer because they see little added value in referral and fear loss of power and prestige. As a result staff communicates poorly and show little eagerness to convince reluctant patients and families to accept referral proposals. CONCLUSIONS: Diminishing referral costs and distance barriers is not enough to correct failing referral systems. There is also a need for investment in district hospitals to make referrals visibly worthwhile and for professional upgrading of the human resources at the first contact level, so as to allow for more effective referral patterns

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the provision & utilisation of primary health care services in Goma, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kambia district, Sierra Leone & Masaka district, Uganda.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to determine whether the COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on essential primary healthcare services at public primary healthcare facilities. METHODS: The number of weekly consultations for antenatal care (ANC), outpatient (OPD), immunisations (EPI), family planning (FP) and HIV services, between January 2018 and December 2020, were collected from 25 facilities in Masaka district, Uganda, 21 in Goma, and 29 in Kambia district, Sierra Leone. Negative binomial regression models accounting for clustering and season were used to analyse changes in activity levels between 2018, 2019 and 2020. RESULTS: In Goma, we found no change in OPD, EPI or ANC consultations, FP was 17% lower in March-July 2020 compared to 2019, but this recovered by December 2020. New diagnoses of HIV were 34% lower throughout 2020 compared to 2019. In Sierra Leone, compared to the same periods in 2019, facilities had 18-29% fewer OPD consultations throughout 2020, and 27% fewer DTP3 doses in March-July 2020. There was no evidence of differences in other services. In Uganda there were 20-35% fewer under-5 OPD consultations, 21-66% fewer MCV1 doses, and 48-51% fewer new diagnoses of HIV throughout 2020, compared to 2019. There was no difference in the number of HPV doses delivered. CONCLUSIONS: The level of disruption varied across the different settings and qualitatively appeared to correlate with the strength of lockdown measures and reported attitudes towards the risk posed by COVID-19. Mitigation strategies such as health communications campaigns and outreach services may be important to limit the impact of lockdowns on primary healthcare services

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

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