Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
BMJ Open ; 13(4): e067124, 2023 04 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2293527

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: In low-income settings with limited access to diagnosis, COVID-19 information is scarce. In September 2020, after the first COVID-19 wave, Mali reported 3086 confirmed cases and 130 deaths. Most reports originated from Bamako, with 1532 cases and 81 deaths (2.42 million inhabitants). This observed prevalence of 0.06% appeared very low. Our objective was to estimate SARS-CoV-2 infection among inhabitants of Bamako, after the first epidemic wave. We assessed demographic, social and living conditions, health behaviours and knowledges associated with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. SETTINGS: We conducted a cross-sectional multistage household survey during September 2020, in three neighbourhoods of the commune VI (Bamako), where 30% of the cases were reported. PARTICIPANTS: We recruited 1526 inhabitants in 3 areas, that is, 306 households, and 1327 serological results (≥1 years), 220 household questionnaires and collected answers for 962 participants (≥12 years). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We measured serological status, detecting SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies in blood sampled. We documented housing conditions and individual health behaviours through questionnaires among participants. We estimated the number of SARS-CoV-2 infections and deaths in the population of Bamako using the age and sex distributions. RESULTS: The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity was 16.4% (95% CI 15.1% to 19.1%) after adjusting on the population structure. This suggested that ~400 000 cases and ~2000 deaths could have occurred of which only 0.4% of cases and 5% of deaths were officially reported. Questionnaires analyses suggested strong agreement with washing hands but lower acceptability of movement restrictions (lockdown/curfew), and mask wearing. CONCLUSIONS: The first wave of SARS-CoV-2 spread broadly in Bamako. Expected fatalities remained limited largely due to the population age structure and the low prevalence of comorbidities. Improving diagnostic capacities to encourage testing and preventive behaviours, and avoiding the spread of false information remain key pillars, regardless of the developed or developing setting. ETHICS: This study was registered in the registry of the ethics committee of the Faculty of Medicine and Odonto-Stomatology and the Faculty of Pharmacy, Bamako, Mali, under the number: 2020/162/CA/FMOS/FAPH.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Cross-Sectional Studies , Mali/epidemiology , Social Conditions , Communicable Disease Control , Antibodies, Viral
2.
Lancet ; 395(10227): 871-877, 2020 03 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2076860

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic has spread from China to 25 countries. Local cycles of transmission have already occurred in 12 countries after case importation. In Africa, Egypt has so far confirmed one case. The management and control of COVID-19 importations heavily rely on a country's health capacity. Here we evaluate the preparedness and vulnerability of African countries against their risk of importation of COVID-19. METHODS: We used data on the volume of air travel departing from airports in the infected provinces in China and directed to Africa to estimate the risk of importation per country. We determined the country's capacity to detect and respond to cases with two indicators: preparedness, using the WHO International Health Regulations Monitoring and Evaluation Framework; and vulnerability, using the Infectious Disease Vulnerability Index. Countries were clustered according to the Chinese regions contributing most to their risk. FINDINGS: Countries with the highest importation risk (ie, Egypt, Algeria, and South Africa) have moderate to high capacity to respond to outbreaks. Countries at moderate risk (ie, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Sudan, Angola, Tanzania, Ghana, and Kenya) have variable capacity and high vulnerability. We identified three clusters of countries that share the same exposure to the risk originating from the provinces of Guangdong, Fujian, and the city of Beijing, respectively. INTERPRETATION: Many countries in Africa are stepping up their preparedness to detect and cope with COVID-19 importations. Resources, intensified surveillance, and capacity building should be urgently prioritised in countries with moderate risk that might be ill-prepared to detect imported cases and to limit onward transmission. FUNDING: EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation Horizon 2020, Agence Nationale de la Recherche.


Subject(s)
Civil Defense , Coronavirus Infections , Epidemics/prevention & control , Health Resources , Models, Theoretical , Pneumonia, Viral , Population Surveillance , Vulnerable Populations , Africa/epidemiology , COVID-19 , China/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Health Planning , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Risk Assessment , Travel
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL