Charting current evidence on the health and non-health benefits and equity impacts of pandemic/epidemic individual-level economic relief programmes: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The emergence of a regional or global scale infectious disease outbreak often requires the implementation of economic relief programmes in affected jurisdictions to sustain societal welfare and, presumably, population health. While economic relief programmes are considered essential during a regional or global health crisis, there is no clear consensus in the literature about their health and non-health benefits and their impact on promoting equity. Thus, our objective is to map the current state of the literature with respect to the types of individual-level economic relief programmes implemented during infectious disease outbreaks and the impact of these programmes on the effectiveness of public health measures, individual and population health, non-health benefits and equity. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Our scoping review is guided by the updated Arksey and O'Malley scoping review framework. Eligible studies will be identified in eight electronic databases and grey literature using text words and subject headings of the different pandemic and epidemic infectious diseases that have occurred, and economic relief programmes. Title and abstract screening and full-text screening will be conducted independently by two trained study reviewers. Data will be extracted using a pretested data extraction form. The charting of the key findings will follow a thematic narrative approach. Our review findings will provide in-depth knowledge on whether and how benefits associated with pandemic/epidemic individual-level economic relief programmes differ across social determinants of health factors.This information is critical for decision-makers as they seek to understand the role of pandemic/epidemic economic mitigation strategies to mitigate the health impact and reduce inequity gap. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Since the scoping review methodology aims to synthesise evidence from literature, this review does not require ethical approval. Findings of our review will be disseminated to health stakeholders at policy meetings and conferences; published in a peer-review scientific journal; and disseminated on various social media platforms.

A Protocol for a Scoping Review Comparative Bibliometric Analysis of Infectious Disease Research in Africa.

Introduction: Evidence on authorship trends of health research conducted about or in Africa shows that there is a lack of local researchers in the first and last authorship positions, with high income country collaborations taking up these positions. The differences in authorship calls into question power imbalances in global health research and who benefits from the production of new discoveries and innovations. Health studies may further go on to inform policy and clinical practice within the region having an impact on public health. This paper aims to compare the differences in authorship between COVID-19 and relevant infectious diseases in Africa. Materials and Methods: We will conduct a bibliometric analysis comparing authorship for COVID-19 research during a public health emergency with authorship for four other infectious diseases of relevance to Africa namely: Ebola, Zika Virus (ZIKV), Tuberculosis (TB) and Influenza. Our scoping review will follow the framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley and reviewed by Levac et al. We will search MEDLINE (Ovid), African Index Medicus (AIM), Eastern Mediterranean Region (IMEMR) Index Medicus, Embase (Ovid), and Web of Science (Clarivate). We will compare the different trends of disease research between the selected diseases. This study is registered with OSF registries and is licensed with the Academic Free License version 3.0. The open science registration number is 10.17605/OSF.IO/5ZPGN.

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among Ethiopian healthcare workers.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 poses significant health and economic threat prompting international firms to rapidly develop vaccines and secure quick regulatory approval. Although COVID-19 vaccination priority is given for high-risk individuals including healthcare workers (HCWs), the success of the immunization efforts hinges on peoples' willingness to embrace these vaccines. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess HCWs intention to be vaccinated against COVID-19 and the reasons underlying vaccine hesitancy. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among HCWs in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia from March to July 2021. Data were collected from eligible participants from 18 health facilities using a pre-tested semi-structured questionnaire. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression was performed to explore factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. A p<0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of 614 HCWs participated in the study, with a mean age of 30.57±6.87 years. Nearly two-thirds (60.3%) of HCWs were hesitant to use the COVID-19 vaccine. Participants under the age of 30 years were approximately five times more likely to be hesitant to be vaccinated compared to those over the age of 40 years. HCWs other than medical doctors and/or nurses (AOR = 2.1; 95%CI; 1.1, 3.8) were more likely to be hesitant for COVID-19 vaccine. Lack of believe in COVID-19 vaccine benefits (AOR = 2.5; 95%CI; 1.3, 4.6), lack of trust in the government (AOR = 1.9; 95%CI; 1.3, 3.1), lack of trust science to produce safe and effective vaccines (AOR = 2.6; 95%CI; 1.6, 4.2); and concern about vaccine safety (AOR = 3.2; 95%CI; 1.9, 5.4) were also found to be predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy showed to be high among HCWs. All concerned bodies including the ministry, regional health authorities, health institutions, and HCWs themselves should work together to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake and overcome the pandemic.

Pharmacy preparedness and response for the prevention and control of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in Aksum, Ethiopia; a qualitative exploration.

BACKGROUND: Novel Coronavirus is a global pandemic affecting all walks of life and it significantly changed the health system practices. Pharmacists are at the front line and have long been involved in combating this public health emergency. Therefore, the study was aimed to explore pharmacy preparedness and response to prevent and control coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted in six pharmacies in Aksum, Ethiopia in May, 2020. We conducted six in-depth interviews with purposively selected key informants. Direct observation measures were made to assess the activities made in the medicine retail outlets for the prevention and control of the pandemic. Interview data were audio-recorded, translated and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was employed to analyze the data and OpenCode version 4.02 software was used to facilitate the data analysis. RESULTS: The thematic analysis has resulted in seven major themes. Good preparedness measures were undertaken to control and prevent COVID-19. Study informants had good knowledge about the pandemic disease and reported they had used different resource materials to update themselves. Preparing of alcohol-based hand-rub, availing finished sanitizers and alcohol, and advising clients to maintain physical distancing were the major counseling information being delivered to prevent the disease. Some tendencies of irrational drug use and false claims of COVID-19 were observed at the beginning of the pandemic. Interview informants had reported they were working with relevant stakeholders and appropriate patient education and support were given to combat the pandemic. CONCLUSION: The study revealed necessary pharmacy services has been rendered to all clients. However, availability of drugs and medical supplies were scarce which negatively affected the optimal delivery of pharmacy services. The government and other responsible bodies should work together to solve such problems and contain the pandemic.