scholarly journals Lessons learned from China’s mitigation strategies in fighting COVID-19

2021 ◽  
Vol 292 ◽  
pp. 03088
Author(s):  
Sijiang Liu ◽  
Mingyuan Wan

In late 2019, the first SARS-CoV-2 case was reported in Wuhan, China. It has been known as a deadly virus that could cause many severe health complications, particularly respiratory illnesses. With its extraordinary ability to transmit between humans, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread worldwide, including Antarctica and the Arctic region. On 11th March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the COVID-19 as a public health emergency worldwide (global pandemic) to raise global awareness of the dangerous virus. With immediate and efficient public health interventions, progress has been seen in many countries such as China and New Zealand. Therefore, in this review, we summarized the important public health risk mitigation measures applied in China.

2020 ◽  

In the past 100 years, the world has faced four distinctly different pandemics: the Spanish flu of 1918-1919, the SARS pandemic of 2003, the H1N1 or “swine flu” pandemic of 2012, and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Each public health crisis exposed specific systemic shortfalls and provided public health lessons for future events. The Spanish flu revealed a nursing shortage and led to a great appreciation of nursing as a profession. SARS showed the importance of having frontline clinicians be able to work with regulators and those producing guidelines. H1N1 raised questions about the nature of a global organization such as the World Health Organization in terms of the benefits and potential disadvantages of leading the fight against a long-term global public health threat. In the era of COVID-19, it seems apparent that we are learning about both the blessing and curse of social media.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne-Marie Turcotte-Tremblay ◽  
Idriss Ali Gali Gali ◽  
Valéry Ridde

Abstract Background COVID-19 has led to the adoption of unprecedented mitigation measures which could trigger many unintended consequences. These unintended consequences can be far-reaching and just as important as the intended ones. The World Health Organization identified the assessment of unintended consequences of COVID-19 mitigation measures as a top priority. Thus far, however, their systematic assessment has been neglected due to the inattention of researchers as well as the lack of training and practical tools. Main text Over six years our team has gained extensive experience conducting research on the unintended consequences of complex health interventions. Through a reflexive process, we developed insights that can be useful for researchers in this area. Our analysis is based on key literature and lessons learned reflexively in conducting multi-site and multi-method studies on unintended consequences. Here we present practical guidance for researchers wishing to assess the unintended consequences of COVID-19 mitigation measures. To ensure resource allocation, protocols should include research questions regarding unintended consequences at the outset. Social science theories and frameworks are available to help assess unintended consequences. To determine which changes are unintended, researchers must first understand the intervention theory. To facilitate data collection, researchers can begin by forecasting potential unintended consequences through literature reviews and discussions with stakeholders. Including desirable and neutral unintended consequences in the scope of study can help minimize the negative bias reported in the literature. Exploratory methods can be powerful tools to capture data on the unintended consequences that were unforeseen by researchers. We recommend researchers cast a wide net by inquiring about different aspects of the mitigation measures. Some unintended consequences may only be observable in subsequent years, so longitudinal approaches may be useful. An equity lens is necessary to assess how mitigation measures may unintentionally increase disparities. Finally, stakeholders can help validate the classification of consequences as intended or unintended. Conclusion Studying the unintended consequences of COVID-19 mitigation measures is not only possible but also necessary to assess their overall value. The practical guidance presented will help program planners and evaluators gain a more comprehensive understanding of unintended consequences to refine mitigation measures.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olga Sokolova

Increased production of processed foods, rapid urbanization and changing lifestyles have led to a shift in dietary patterns. Nowadays, people consume more foods high in calories, fat, free sugars, and salt/sodium, and many do not consume enough fruits, vegetables, and other types of fiber such as whole grains. The article describes the principles of healthy nutrition, which are justified by the World Health Organization (WHO). The recipe composition of the biscuit using a mixture of potato and corn starches, oat bran replace part of the sugar on stevioside with the addition of functional additives in the Arctic region, namely black currant juice, grown in Lovozero. It is known that black currant contains vitamins, organic acids, sugars (fructose and glucose), flavonoids, pectin, minerals and adding it to the formulation can increase nutritional and functional value. The article shows the results of the study of biscuit quality using functional additives of the Arctic region. The composition of the biscuit: the ratio of the added vegetable raw materials is scientifically proved. A point scale of quality of functional biscuit products with the use of additives from the raw materials of the Arctic region was developed. The composition of the finished product was investigated.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (Special1) ◽  
pp. 198-200
Author(s):  
Olayinka Stephen Ilesanmi ◽  
Aanuoluwapo Adeyimika Afolabi

Background: The declaration of COVID-19 as a public health emergency by the World Health Organization necessitated countries across the globe to implement response and mitigation measures. We aimed to assess the Nigerian government's response following six months of detection of COVID-19 in Nigeria. Methods: A narrative review of existing literature on the topic was done. The authors' opinion as experts supporting the COVID-19 pandemic response was included. The review and opinion were summarized, covering six months of the outbreak response in Nigeria. Results: Contact tracing commenced after identifying the index case of COVID-19 in Nigeria but has been faced with challenges such as inadequate equipment and shortage of funds. School closure was implemented barely three weeks after detecting the index case, but the resumption of terminal classes has been announced recently. The Nigerian government implemented restrictions on gatherings involving up to 11 people after three weeks following the detection of the index case of COVID-19. The lack of enforcement and supervision of gatherings and public events made many individuals disregard the restriction measures. Lockdowns on religious gatherings and public events have been recently eased nationwide, and regulatory measures have been put in place. The Nigerian government implemented bans on international travel from all countries, especially high-risk countries. However, the existence of porous borders limited success, which could have been obtained from the travel ban. Conclusion: COVID-19 mitigation measures should be implemented and reinforced as required nationwide and get provided the needed support.   References World Health Organization. COVID-19 public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) global research and innovation forum, 2020 February 12. In: WHO 2020. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/covid-19-public-health-emergency-of-international-concern-(pheic)-global-research-and-innovation-forum [Accessed on 26 August 2020].] European centre for disease prevention and control. COVID-19 situation updates worldwide, as of 26 August 2020. In: ECDC 2020. Available from: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/geographical-distribution-2019-ncov-cases [ Accessed on 26 August 2020].] Nigeria centre for disease control. COVID-19 outbreak in Nigeria situation report. Abuja. In: NCDC. 2020 Contract No.: S/N: 001. Available from: https://covid19.ncdc.gov.ng/ [Accessed on 26 August 2020]. Ogundele K. UPDATED: FG places travel ban on China, Italy, US, UK, nine others. Punch Newspapers, 2020 Mar 18. Available from: https://punchng.com/breaking-fg-places-travel-ban-on-china-italy-us-uk-others/ [ Accessed on 26 August 2020] Presidential task force on COVID-19. Available from: https://statehouse.gov.ng/covid19/ [Accessed on 26 August 2020]. Okunola A. 5 Challenges facing health care workers in Nigeria as they tackle COVID-19. On 9 June 2020. In: Global citizen. Available from: https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/challenges-for-health-care-workers-nigeria-covid/ [Accessed on 26 August 2020]. Sessou E. COVID-19: Why we provided testing kits in Kano- ADF. 2020 May 8. In: Vanguard. Available from: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2020/05/covid-19-why-we-provided-testing-kits-in-kano-adf/ [Accessed on 26 August 2020]. Ilesanmi OS, Afolabi AA. Time to move from vertical to horizontal approach in our COVID-19 response in Nigeria. SciMed J. 2020; 2:28-29. https://doi.org/10.28991/SciMedJ-2020-02-S1-3. Olisa C. Covid-19: FG orders immediate shut down of all schools. 2020 March 20. In: Naira Metrics [Internet]. Available at: https://nairametrics.com/2020/03/20/covid-19-fg-orders-immediate-shut-down-of-all-schools/ [Accessed on 26 August 2020]. Adejayan G. COVID-19: Lagos decontaminates schools for partial resumption. On 1 August 2020 [cited 26 August 2020]. In: Within Nigeria. Available from: https://www.withinnigeria.com/2020/08/01/covid-19-lagos-decontaminates-public-schools-for-partial-resumption/ [Accessed on 26 August 2020]. Oyetimi K, Adewakun A. E-learning: How COVID-19 is reshaping education in Nigeria. On 10 April 2020. Publish In: MSN. Available at: https://www.msn.com/en-za/news/other/e-learning-how-covid-19-is-reshaping-education-in-nigeria/ar-BB12pMEd [Accessed on 26 August 2020]. Hale T, Webster S, Petherick A, Phillips T, Kira B. Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker, Blavatnik School of Government. 2020 March 21. In: Our World in Data. Oxford COVID-19 government response tracker. Available from: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/public-gathering-rules-covid?year=2020-08-26&time=2020-01-01.2020-08-04&region=Africa [Accessed on 26 August 2020]. Lagos police command enforces ban on social gatherings to prevent spread of coronavirus. On 22 March 2020. In Vanguard. Available from: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2020/03/lagos-police-command-enforces-ban-on-social-gatherings-to-prevent-spread-of-coronavirus/ [Accessed on 26 August 2020]. Donohue JM, Miller E. COVID-19 and School Closures. JAMA. 2020;324(9):845-847. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.13092 Sahara Reporters. Nigerian government lifts ban on religious gatherings, reduces curfew hours. On 1 June 2020. In: Sahara Reporters. Available from: http://saharareporters.com/2020/06/01/nigerian-government-lifts-ban-religious-gatherings-reduces-curfew-hours [Accessed on 26 August 2020]. COVID-19: Lagos reels out guidelines for reopening of Mosques, Churches. On 6 August 2020. In: Vanguard. Available from: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2020/08/covid-19-lagos-reels-out-guidelines-for-reopening-of-mosques-churches/ [Accessed on 26 August 2020]. Vanguard. Porous borders, cause of rise in COVID-19 cases — FG. On 3 April 2020. In: Vanguard [internet]. Available from: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2020/04/porous-borders-cause-of-rise-in-covid-19-cases-fg/ [Accessed on 26 August 2020].


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon R Procter ◽  
Kaja R Abbas ◽  
Stefan Flasche ◽  
Ulla Griffiths ◽  
Brittany Hagedorn ◽  
...  

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted delivery of immunisation services globally. Many countries have postponed vaccination campaigns out of concern about infection risks to staff delivering vaccination, the children being vaccinated and their families. The World Health Organization recommends considering both the benefit of preventive campaigns and the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission when making decisions about campaigns during COVID-19 outbreaks, but there has been little quantification of the risks. Methods We modelled excess SARS-CoV-2 infection risk to vaccinators, vaccinees and their caregivers resulting from vaccination campaigns delivered during a COVID-19 epidemic. Our model used population age-structure and contact patterns from three exemplar countries (Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, and Chile). It combined an existing compartmental transmission model of an underlying COVID-19 epidemic with a Reed-Frost model of SARS-CoV-2 infection risk to vaccinators and vaccinees. We explored how excess risk depends on key parameters governing SARS-CoV-2 transmissibility, and aspects of campaign delivery such as campaign duration, number of vaccinations, and effectiveness of personal protective equipment (PPE) and symptomatic screening. Results Infection risks differ considerably depending on the circumstances in which vaccination campaigns are conducted. A campaign conducted at the peak of a SARS-CoV-2 epidemic with high prevalence and without special infection mitigation measures could increase absolute infection risk by 32% to 58% for vaccinators, and 0.3% to 0.9% for vaccinees and caregivers. However, these risks could be reduced to 3.6% to 8.0% and 0.1% to 0.4% respectively by use of PPE that reduces transmission by 90% (as might be achieved with N95 respirators or high-quality surgical masks) and symptomatic screening. Conclusions SARS-CoV-2 infection risks to vaccinators, vaccinees and caregivers during vaccination campaigns can be greatly reduced by adequate PPE, symptomatic screening, and appropriate campaign timing. Our results support the use of adequate risk mitigation measures for vaccination campaigns held during SARS-CoV-2 epidemics, rather than cancelling them entirely.


Zoonoses ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun Feng ◽  
Li Zhang ◽  
Zhi-Gui Xia ◽  
Shui-Sen Zhou ◽  
Ning Xiao

Malaria was once one of the most severe public health problems in China. However, after 70 years of integrated interventions, substantial progress has been made, and remarkable milestones have been met in malaria elimination in China. On June 30th, 2021, China was officially certified as a malaria-free country by the World Health Organization. This paper highlights the achievements of, and lessons learned from the malaria elimination programme.


2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (9) ◽  
pp. e0009807
Author(s):  
Fatoumata Sakho ◽  
Christelly Flore Badila ◽  
Benoit Dembele ◽  
Aissatou Diaby ◽  
Abdoul Karim Camara ◽  
...  

Background Guinea reported its first case of COVID-19 on March 12, 2020. Soon thereafter, a national state of emergency was declared, all land borders were closed, schools were shut down, and public gatherings were limited. Many health activities, including field-based activities targeting neglected tropical diseases (NTDs), were paused. The World Health Organization (WHO) issued updated guidance on the resumption of NTD field-based activities on July 27, 2020. In response, the Guinea Ministry of Health (MoH) and its partners planned and resumed mass drug administration (MDA) in mid-August to September 2020 in 19 health districts. Methodology/principal findings A risk-benefit assessment was conducted to identify potential risks associated with the MDA in the COVID-19 context. Following this assessment, a risk mitigation plan with barrier measures was developed to guide MDA implementation. These measures included COVID-19 testing for all national staff leaving Conakry, mask wearing, social distancing of two meters, and hand washing/sanitizing. A checklist was developed and used to monitor compliance to risk mitigation measures. Data on adherence to risk mitigation measures were collected electronically during the MDA. A total of 120 checklists, representing 120 community drug distributor (CDD) teams (two CDDs per team) and 120 households, were completed. Results indicated that washing or disinfecting hands was practiced by 68.3% of CDD teams, compared to 45.0% among households. Face masks to cover the mouth and nose were worn by 79.2% of CDD teams, while this was low among households (23.3%). In 87.5% of households, participants did not touch the dose pole and in 88.3% of CDD teams, CDDs did not touch the hands of the participants while giving the drugs. A large majority of CDD teams (94.2%) and household members (94.2%) were willing to participate in the MDA despite the pandemic. The epidemiological coverage was ≥65% for lymphatic filariasis, onchocerciasis and soil-transmitted helminths in 10 out of 19 HDs and ≥75% for schistosomiasis for school-aged children in 7 out of 11 HDs. Conclusions/significance Guinea was one of the first countries in Africa to resume MDA activities during the COVID-19 pandemic without causing an observed increase of transmission. The development of a risk mitigation plan and a method to monitor adherence to barrier measures was critical to this unprecedented effort. The rapid incorporation of COVID-19 barrier measures and their acceptance by CDDs and household members demonstrated both the adaptability of the National NTD Program to respond to emerging issues and the commitment of the MoH to implement NTD programs.


Author(s):  
Adeleye Adeshakin ◽  
Oluwamuyiwa Ayanshina ◽  
Samuel Essien-Baidoo

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) since its declaration as a pandemic by world health organization (WHO) has spread across the various continent with little known about the most effective public health response for containing and mitigating the transmission of the epidemic. It is important to state that some authors have published on the lessons learned from transmission and management of COVID-19 infection but only a few considered it from the Africa perspective. Despite the late arrival of the pandemic in Africa and the notion that the virus may not thrive because of the high temperature in the continent; today the narrative has changed with the number of infected patients increasing daily. Herein, the authors have shared their perspectives and opinions on the dynamics and response to COVID-19 from Africa context to create more awareness and approach in mitigating the spread of the virus should the continent becomes the epicenter of COVID-19.


BMC Medicine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon R. Procter ◽  
Kaja Abbas ◽  
Stefan Flasche ◽  
Ulla Griffiths ◽  
Brittany Hagedorn ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the delivery of immunisation services globally. Many countries have postponed vaccination campaigns out of concern about infection risks to the staff delivering vaccination, the children being vaccinated, and their families. The World Health Organization recommends considering both the benefit of preventive campaigns and the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission when making decisions about campaigns during COVID-19 outbreaks, but there has been little quantification of the risks. Methods We modelled excess SARS-CoV-2 infection risk to vaccinators, vaccinees, and their caregivers resulting from vaccination campaigns delivered during a COVID-19 epidemic. Our model used population age structure and contact patterns from three exemplar countries (Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, and Brazil). It combined an existing compartmental transmission model of an underlying COVID-19 epidemic with a Reed-Frost model of SARS-CoV-2 infection risk to vaccinators and vaccinees. We explored how excess risk depends on key parameters governing SARS-CoV-2 transmissibility, and aspects of campaign delivery such as campaign duration, number of vaccinations, and effectiveness of personal protective equipment (PPE) and symptomatic screening. Results Infection risks differ considerably depending on the circumstances in which vaccination campaigns are conducted. A campaign conducted at the peak of a SARS-CoV-2 epidemic with high prevalence and without special infection mitigation measures could increase absolute infection risk by 32 to 45% for vaccinators and 0.3 to 0.5% for vaccinees and caregivers. However, these risks could be reduced to 3.6 to 5.3% and 0.1 to 0.2% respectively by use of PPE that reduces transmission by 90% (as might be achieved with N95 respirators or high-quality surgical masks) and symptomatic screening. Conclusions SARS-CoV-2 infection risks to vaccinators, vaccinees, and caregivers during vaccination campaigns can be greatly reduced by adequate PPE, symptomatic screening, and appropriate campaign timing. Our results support the use of adequate risk mitigation measures for vaccination campaigns held during SARS-CoV-2 epidemics, rather than cancelling them entirely.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 364-371
Author(s):  
Ronald B. Brown

ABSTRACTIn testimony before US Congress on March 11, 2020, members of the House Oversight and Reform Committee were informed that estimated mortality for the novel coronavirus was 10-times higher than for seasonal influenza. Additional evidence, however, suggests the validity of this estimation could benefit from vetting for biases and miscalculations. The main objective of this article is to critically appraise the coronavirus mortality estimation presented to Congress. Informational texts from the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are compared with coronavirus mortality calculations in Congressional testimony. Results of this critical appraisal reveal information bias and selection bias in coronavirus mortality overestimation, most likely caused by misclassifying an influenza infection fatality rate as a case fatality rate. Public health lessons learned for future infectious disease pandemics include: safeguarding against research biases that may underestimate or overestimate an associated risk of disease and mortality; reassessing the ethics of fear-based public health campaigns; and providing full public disclosure of adverse effects from severe mitigation measures to contain viral transmission.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document