The impacts of COVID-19 and its policy response on access and utilization of maternal and child health services in Tanzania: A mixed methods study.

The SARS-Cov-2 virus (COVID-19) has had a global social and economic impact. Despite the growing evidence, its effects on access and delivery of maternal and child health services in low-income countries are still unclear. This cross-sectional case study was conducted in Mjini Magharibi, Chake Chake, and Ilala districts in Tanzania to help fill this gap. The study combined qualitative and quantitative data collection methods, providing an account of the evolution of the pandemic and the associated control measures in Tanzania. We drew from 34 in-depth interviews, 60 semi-structured interviews, and 14 focus group discussions with key informants, patients, and health providers, and complemented the findings with a review of pandemic reports and health facility records. We followed the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) to provide an account of the findings. Our account of the pandemic shows that there was at times an inconsistent policy response in Tanzania, with diverse control measures adopted at various stages of the epidemic. There was a perception that COVID-19 services were prioritized during the epidemic at the expense of regular ones. There were reports of reorganisation of health facilities, reallocation of staff, rescheduled antenatal and postnatal clinics, and reduced time for health education and child monitoring. Scarcity of essential commodities was reported, such as vaccines, equipment, and medical supplies. Such perceptions were in part supported by the routine utilization evidence in the three districts, showing a lower uptake of antenatal, postnatal, family planning, and immunization services, as well as fewer institutional deliveries. Our findings suggest that, although the policy response in Tanzania was erratic, it was rather fear of the pandemic itself and diversion of resources to control COVID-19, that may have contributed most to lower the utilization of mother and child services. For future emergencies, it will be crucial to ensure the policy response does not weaken the population's demand for services.

How prepared is the world? Identifying weaknesses in existing assessment frameworks for global health security through a One Health approach.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed faults in the way we assess preparedness and response capacities for public health emergencies. Existing frameworks are limited in scope, and do not sufficiently consider complex social, economic, political, regulatory, and ecological factors. One Health, through its focus on the links among humans, animals, and ecosystems, is a valuable approach through which existing assessment frameworks can be analysed and new ways forward proposed. Although in the past few years advances have been made in assessment tools such as the International Health Regulations Joint External Evaluation, a rapid and radical increase in ambition is required. To sufficiently account for the range of complex systems in which health emergencies occur, assessments should consider how problems are defined across stakeholders and the wider sociopolitical environments in which structures and institutions operate. Current frameworks do little to consider anthropogenic factors in disease emergence or address the full array of health security hazards across the social-ecological system. A complex and interdependent set of challenges threaten human, animal, and ecosystem health, and we cannot afford to overlook important contextual factors, or the determinants of these shared threats. Health security assessment frameworks should therefore ensure that the process undertaken to prioritise and build capacity adheres to core One Health principles and that interventions and outcomes are assessed in terms of added value, trade-offs, and cobenefits across human, animal, and environmental health systems.

Zoonotic Tuberculosis - The Changing Landscape.

Despite slow reductions in the annual burden of active human tuberculosis (TB) cases, zoonotic TB (zTB) remains a poorly monitored and an important unaddressed global problem. There is a higher incidence in some regions and countries, especially where close association exists between growing numbers of cattle (the major source of Mycobacterium bovis) and people, many suffering from poverty, and where dairy products are consumed unpasteurised. More attention needs to be focused on possible increased zTB incidence resulting from growth in dairy production globally and increased demand in low income countries in particular. Evidence of new zoonotic mycobacterial strains in South Asia and Africa (e.g. M. orygis), warrants urgent assessment of prevalence, potential drivers and risk in order to develop appropriate interventions. Control of M. bovis infection in cattle through detect and cull policies remain the mainstay of reducing zTB risk, whilst in certain circumstances animal vaccination is proving beneficial. New point of care diagnostics will help to detect animal infections and human cases. Given the high burden of human tuberculosis (caused by M. tuberculosis) in endemic areas, animals are affected by reverse zoonosis, including multi-drug resistant strains. This, may create drug resistant reservoirs of infection in animals. Like COVID-19, zTB is evolving in an ever-changing global landscape.

COVID-19-Zoonosis or Emerging Infectious Disease?

The World Health Organization defines a zoonosis as any infection naturally transmissible from vertebrate animals to humans. The pandemic of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2 has been classified as a zoonotic disease, however, no animal reservoir has yet been found, so this classification is premature. We propose that COVID-19 should instead be classified an "emerging infectious disease (EID) of probable animal origin." To explore if COVID-19 infection fits our proposed re-categorization vs. the contemporary definitions of zoonoses, we reviewed current evidence of infection origin and transmission routes of SARS-CoV-2 virus and described this in the context of known zoonoses, EIDs and "spill-over" events. Although the initial one hundred COVID-19 patients were presumably exposed to the virus at a seafood Market in China, and despite the fact that 33 of 585 swab samples collected from surfaces and cages in the market tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, no virus was isolated directly from animals and no animal reservoir was detected. Elsewhere, SARS-CoV-2 has been detected in animals including domesticated cats, dogs, and ferrets, as well as captive-managed mink, lions, tigers, deer, and mice confirming zooanthroponosis. Other than circumstantial evidence of zoonotic cases in mink farms in the Netherlands, no cases of natural transmission from wild or domesticated animals have been confirmed. More than 40 million human COVID-19 infections reported appear to be exclusively through human-human transmission. SARS-CoV-2 virus and COVID-19 do not meet the WHO definition of zoonoses. We suggest SARS-CoV-2 should be re-classified as an EID of probable animal origin.

Lockdown measures in response to COVID-19 in nine sub-Saharan African countries.

Lockdown measures have been introduced worldwide to contain the transmission of COVID-19. However, the term 'lockdown' is not well-defined. Indeed, WHO's reference to 'so-called lockdown measures' indicates the absence of a clear and universally accepted definition of the term 'lockdown'. We propose a definition of 'lockdown' based on a two-by-two matrix that categorises different communicable disease measures based on whether they are compulsory or voluntary; and whether they are targeted at identifiable individuals or facilities, or whether they are applied indiscriminately to a general population or area. Using this definition, we describe the design, timing and implementation of lockdown measures in nine countries in sub-Saharan Africa: Ghana, Nigeria, South Africa, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe. While there were some commonalities in the implementation of lockdown across these countries, a more notable finding was the variation in the design, timing and implementation of lockdown measures. We also found that the number of reported cases is heavily dependent on the number of tests carried out, and that testing rates ranged from 2031 to 63 928 per million population up until 7 September 2020. The reported number of COVID-19 deaths per million population also varies (0.4 to 250 up until 7 September 2020), but is generally low when compared with countries in Europe and North America. While lockdown measures may have helped inhibit community transmission, the pattern and nature of the epidemic remains unclear. However, there are signs of lockdown harming health by affecting the functioning of the health system and causing social and economic disruption.

Transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) to animals: an updated review.

COVID-19 caused by a novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) originated in Wuhan (Hubei province, China) during late 2019. It has spread across the globe affecting nearly 21 million people with a toll of 0.75 million deaths and restricting the movement of most of the world population during the past 6 months. COVID-19 became the leading health, economic, and humanitarian challenge of the twenty-first century. In addition to the considerable COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths in humans, several cases of SARS-CoV-2 infections in animal hosts (dog, cat, tiger, lion, and mink) have been reported. Thus, the concern of pet owners is increasing. Moreover, the dynamics of the disease requires further explanation, mainly concerning the transmission of the virus from humans to animals and vice versa. Therefore, this study aimed to gather information about the reported cases of COVID-19 transmission in animals through a literary review of works published in scientific journals and perform genomic and phylogenetic analyses of SARS-CoV-2 isolated from animal hosts. Although many instances of transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 have been reported, caution and further studies are necessary to avoid the occurrence of maltreatment in animals, and to achieve a better understanding of the dynamics of the disease in the environment, humans, and animals. Future research in the animal-human interface can help formulate and implement preventive measures to combat the further transmission of COVID-19.