Assessing training needs in infectious disease management at major ports, airports and ground-crossings in Europe.

BACKGROUND: The implementation of core capacities as stated in the International Health Regulations (IHR) is far from complete, and, as the COVID-19 pandemic shows, the spreading of infectious diseases through points of entry (POEs) is a serious problem. To guide training and exercises, we performed a training needs assessment on infectious disease management among professionals at European POE. METHODS: We disseminated a digital questionnaire to representatives of designated airports, ports, and ground-crossings in Europe. Topics were derived from the IHR core capacities for POEs. Based on the importance (4-point Likert scale) and training needs (4-point Likert scale), we identified the topics with the highest priority for training. These results were put in further perspective using prior experience (training < 3 year, exercise < 5 years, events < 5 years). Also, preferences for training methodologies were assessed. RESULTS: Fifty questionnaires were included in the analyses, representing 50 POEs from 19 European countries. Importance is high for 26/30 topics, although scores widely vary among respondents. Topics with a high training need (16/30) are amongst others the handling of ill travelers; using and composing the public health emergency contingency plan, and public health measures. Respondents from ports and airports attribute equal importance to most topics, but respondents from ports showed higher training needs on 75% of the topics. POEs are unevenly and generally little experienced. The most preferred training methods were presentations. Simulation is the preferred methodology for training the handling of ill or exposed travelers. CONCLUSIONS: The European workforce at designated ports, airports and ground-crossings has a different level of experience and perceives varying importance of the topics assessed in our study. We identified the topics on which training is required. We call for European collaboration between POEs to agree upon the importance of infectious disease management, and to jointly build a trained and prepared workforce that is ready to face the next crisis.

Improving National Intelligence for Public Health Preparedness: a methodological approach to finding local multi-sector indicators for health security.

The COVID-19 epidemic is the latest evidence of critical gaps in our collective ability to monitor country-level preparedness for health emergencies. The global frameworks that exist to strengthen core public health capacities lack coverage of several preparedness domains and do not provide mechanisms to interface with local intelligence. We designed and piloted a process, in collaboration with three National Public Health Institutes (NPHIs) in Ethiopia, Nigeria and Pakistan, to identify potential preparedness indicators that exist in a myriad of frameworks and tools in varying local institutions. Following a desk-based systematic search and expert consultations, indicators were extracted from existing national and subnational health security-relevant frameworks and prioritised in a multi-stakeholder two-round Delphi process. Eighty-six indicators in Ethiopia, 87 indicators in Nigeria and 51 indicators in Pakistan were assessed to be valid, relevant and feasible. From these, 14-16 indicators were prioritised in each of the three countries for consideration in monitoring and evaluation tools. Priority indicators consistently included private sector metrics, subnational capacities, availability and capacity for electronic surveillance, measures of timeliness for routine reporting, data quality scores and data related to internally displaced persons and returnees. NPHIs play an increasingly central role in health security and must have access to data needed to identify and respond rapidly to public health threats. Collecting and collating local sources of information may prove essential to addressing gaps; it is a necessary step towards improving preparedness and strengthening international health regulations compliance.

Towards defining core principles of public health emergency preparedness: scoping review and Delphi consultation among European Union country experts.

BACKGROUND: European Member States, the European Commission and its agencies work together to enhance preparedness and response for serious cross-border threats to health such as Ebola. Yet, common understanding of public health emergency preparedness across EU/EEA countries is challenging, because preparedness is a relatively new field of activity and is inherently fraught with uncertainty. A set of practical, widely accepted and easy to use recommendations for generic preparedness that bundles the activities described in separate guidance documents supports countries in preparing for any possible health threat. The aim of this consensus procedure was to identify and seek consensus from national-level preparedness experts from EU/EEA countries on key recommendations of public health emergency preparedness. METHODS: To identify key recommendations and to prioritize the recommendations we started with a literature consensus procedure, followed by a modified Delphi method for consultation of public health emergency preparedness leaders of EU/EEA countries. This consisted of six consecutive steps: a questionnaire to achieve consensus on a core set of recommendations, a face-to-face consultation, preselection of prioritized recommendations, a questionnaire to achieve consensus on the prioritized set and a face-to-face consensus meeting to further prioritize recommendations. RESULTS: As a result, EU/EEA experts selected 149 recommendations as core preparedness principles and prioritized 42. The recommendations were grouped in the seven domains: governance (57), capacity building and maintenance (11), surveillance (19), risk-assessment (16), risk- and crisis management (35), post-event evaluation (6) and implementation of lessons learned (5). CONCLUSIONS: This prioritised set of consensus principles can provide a foundation for countries aiming to evaluate and improve their preparedness for public health emergencies. The recommendations are practical, support generic preparedness planning, and can be used by all countries irrespective of their current level of preparedness.

Educating, training, and exercising for infectious disease control with emphasis on cross-border settings: an integrative review.

INTRODUCTION: Points of entry and other border regions educate, train, and exercise (ETEs) their staff to improve preparedness and response to cross-border health threats. However, no conclusive knowledge of these ETEs' effectiveness exists. This study aimed to review the literature on ETEs in infectious disease control concerning their methods and effect, with an emphasis on cross-border settings and methods that enlarge ETEs' reach. METHODOLOGY: We systematically searched for studies in the databases Embase, Medline, Web of Science, PsycInfo, ERIC, and Cinahl. After successively screening titles and abstracts, full-texts, and citations, 62 studies were included using in- and exclusion criteria. Data were extracted using a data-extraction form. Quality assessment was performed. We developed a theoretical framework based on which we analyzed the ETE context (target group, recruitment, autonomy, training needs), input (topic, trainers, development and quality of materials), process (design, duration, interval, goals), evaluation (pre-, post- follow-up tests), and outcome (reaction, learning, behavior, and system). RESULTS: We found a limited number of published evaluations of ETEs in general (n = 62) and of cross-border settings (n = 5) in particular. The quality assessment resulted in seven ETE methodologies and 23 evaluations with a 'good' score. Both general studies and those in a cross-border setting contain a low-moderate detail level on context, input, and process. The evaluations were performed on reaction (n = 45), learning (n = 45), behavior (n = 9) and system (n = 4), mainly using pre- and post-tests (n = 22). Online learning methods have a high potential in enlarging the reach and are effective, particularly in combination with offline training. Training-of-trainer approaches are effective for learning; new ETEs were developed by 20-44% of participants until six months after the initial training. CONCLUSION: Our study reveals a limited number of publications on ETEs in infectious disease control. Studies provide few details on methodology, and use mainly short-term evaluations and low level outcomes. We call for more extensive, higher-level evaluation standards of ETEs, and an easy and sustainable way to exchange evaluations within the workforce of infectious disease control in cross-border settings. The theoretical framework developed in this study could guide future development and evaluation of ETEs in infectious disease control.

Development of a competency profile for professionals involved in infectious disease preparedness and response in the air transport public health sector.

BACKGROUND: Recent infectious disease outbreaks highlight the importance of competent professionals with expertise on public health preparedness and response at airports. The availability of a competency profile for this workforce supports efficient education and training. Although competency profiles for infectious disease control professionals are available, none addresses the complex airport environment. Therefore, the main aim of this study is to develop a competency profile for professionals involved in infectious disease preparedness and response at airports in order to stimulate and direct further education and training. METHODS: We developed the competency profile through the following steps: 1) extraction of competencies from relevant literature, 2) assessment of the profile in a national RAND modified Delphi study with an interdisciplinary expert group (n = 9) and 3) assessment of the profile in an international RAND modified Delphi study with an airport infectious disease management panel of ten European countries (n = 10). RESULTS: We systematically studied two competency profiles on infectious disease control and three air transport guidelines on event management, and extracted 61 relevant competencies for airports. The two RAND modified Delphi procedures further refined the profile, mainly by specifying a competency's target group, the organizational level it should be present on, and the exact actions that should be mastered. The final profile, consisting of 59 competencies, covers the whole process from infectious disease preparedness, through the response phase and the recovery at airports. CONCLUSION: We designed a profile to support training and exercising the multidisciplinary group of professionals in infectious disease management in the airport setting, and which is ready for use in practice. The many adaptations and adjustments that were needed to develop this profile out of existing profiles and air transport guidelines suggest that other setting-specific profiles in infectious disease control are desirable.

Qualitative Research: Institutional Preparedness During Threats of Infectious Disease Outbreaks.

BACKGROUND: As demonstrated during the global Ebola crisis of 2014-2016, healthcare institutions in high resource settings need support concerning preparedness during threats of infectious disease outbreaks. This study aimed to exploratively develop a standardized preparedness system to use during unfolding threats of severe infectious diseases. METHODS: A qualitative three-step study among infectious disease prevention and control experts was performed. First, interviews (n = 5) were conducted to identify which factors trigger preparedness activities during an unfolding threat. Second, these triggers informed the design of a phased preparedness system which was tested in a focus group discussion (n = 5) were conducted to identify which factors trigger preparedness activities during an unfolding threat. Second, these triggers informed the design of a phased preparedness system which was tested in a focus group discussion (n = 5) were conducted to identify which factors trigger preparedness activities during an unfolding threat. Second, these triggers informed the design of a phased preparedness system which was tested in a focus group discussion (. RESULTS: Four preparedness phases were identified: preparedness phase green is a situation without the presence of the infectious disease threat that requires centralized care, anywhere in the world. Phase yellow is an outbreak in the world with some likelihood of imported cases. Phase orange is a realistic chance of an unexpected case within the country, or unrest developing among population or staff; phase red is cases admitted to hospitals in the country, potentially causing a shortage of resources. Specific preparedness activities included infection prevention, diagnostics, patient care, staff, and communication. Consensus was reached on the need for the development of a preparedness system and national coordination during threats. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we developed a standardized system to support institutional preparedness during an increasing threat. Use of this system by both curative healthcare institutions and the (municipal) public health service, could help to effectively communicate and align preparedness activities during future threats of severe infectious diseases.

Exit and Entry Screening Practices for Infectious Diseases among Travelers at Points of Entry: Looking for Evidence on Public Health Impact.

A scoping search and a systematic literature review were conducted to give an insight on entry and exit screening referring to travelers at points of entry, by analyzing published evidence on practices, guidelines, and experiences in the past 15 years worldwide. Grey literature, PubMed. and Scopus were searched using specific terms. Most of the available data identified through the systematic literature review concerned entry screening measures at airports. Little evidence is available about entry and exit screening measure implementation and effectiveness at ports and ground crossings. Exit screening was part of the World Health Organisation's (WHO) temporary recommendations for implementation in certain points of entry, for specific time periods. Exit screening measures for Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) in the three most affected West African countries did not identify any cases and showed zero sensitivity and very low specificity. The percentages of confirmed cases identified out of the total numbers of travelers that passed through entry screening measures in various countries worldwide for Influenza Pandemic (H1N1) and EVD in West Africa were zero or extremely low. Entry screening measures for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) did not detect any confirmed SARS cases in Australia, Canada, and Singapore. Despite the ineffectiveness of entry and exit screening measures, authors reported several important concomitant positive effects that their impact is difficult to assess, including discouraging travel of ill persons, raising awareness, and educating the traveling public and maintaining operation of flights from/to the affected areas. Exit screening measures in affected areas are important and should be applied jointly with other measures including information strategies, epidemiological investigation, contact tracing, vaccination, and quarantine to achieve a comprehensive outbreak management response. Based on review results, an algorithm about decision-making for entry/exit screening was developed.

Positive experiences of volunteers working in deployable laboratories in West Africa during the Ebola outbreak.

The largest outbreak of Ebola virus disease ever started in West Africa in December 2013; it created a pressing need to expand the workforce dealing with it. The aim of this study was to gain insight into the experiences of volunteers from the European Union who worked in deployable laboratories in West Africa during the outbreak. This study is part of the EMERGE project. We assessed the experiences of 251 volunteers with a 19-item online questionnaire. The questions asked about positive aspects of volunteering such as learning new skills, establishing a new path in life, and changing life values. Other questionnaire subjects were the compliance to follow-up measures, the extent to which volunteers felt these measures restricted their daily activities, the fear of stigmatization, and worries about becoming infected or infecting their families. The volunteers reported positive effects that reached far beyond their daily work, such as changes in life priorities and a greater appreciation of the value of their own lives. Although the volunteers did not feel that temperature monitoring restricted their daily activities, full compliance to temperature monitoring and reporting it to the authorities was low. The volunteers did not fear Ebola infection for themselves or their families and were not afraid of stigmatization. With respect to the burden on the families, 50% reported that their family members were worried that the volunteer would be infected with Ebola virus. Altogether, the positive experiences of the volunteers in this study far outweigh the negative implications and constitute an important argument for inspiring people who intend to join such missions and for motivating the hesitant ones.

Which recommendations are considered essential for outbreak preparedness by first responders?

BACKGROUND: Preparedness is considered essential for healthcare organizations to respond effectively to outbreaks. In the current study we aim to capture the views of first responders on what they consider key recommendations for high quality preparedness. Furthermore, we identified the recommendations with the highest urgency from the perspective of first responders. METHODS: We chose a multistep approach using a systematic Delphi procedure. Previously extracted recommendations from scientific literature were presented to a national and two international expert panels. We asked the experts to score the recommendations based on relevance for high quality preparedness. In addition we asked them to choose the ten most urgent recommendations. RESULTS: Starting with 80 recommendations from scientific literature, 49 key recommendations were selected by both international expert panels. Differences between both panels were mainly on triage protocols. In addition, large differences were found in the selection of the ten most urgent recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: In this study infectious disease experts selected a set of key recommendations representing high quality preparedness and specified which ones should be given the highest urgency when preparing for a future crisis. These key recommendations can be used to shape their preparedness activities.

Influencing factors for high quality care on postpartum haemorrhage in the Netherlands: patient and professional perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) remains a major contributor to maternal morbidity even in high resource settings, despite the development and dissemination of evidence-based guidelines and Advance-Trauma-Life-Support (ATLS) based courses for optimal management of PPH. We aimed to assess current influencing factors (obstacles and facilitators) for the delivery of high quality PPH-care from both patient and professional perspective. METHODS: We qualitatively explored influencing factors for delivering high quality PPH-care, by having individual interviews with PPH-patients and focus group interviews with the different types of professionals working in the delivery room. For both perspectives, the theoretical frameworks of Grol and Cabana were used to classify the influencing factors for optimal PPH-care (factors of the guidelines, of professionals, of patients, of the social setting and of the organisation). In order to assess the importance of the influencing factors found among the professionals, we quantified these factors in a web-based questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 12 patients and 41 professionals participated in the interviews, and 315 complete surveys were analyzed. The main obstacle for high quality PPH-care identified by patients was the lack of information given by the professionals to the patient and partner before, during and after the PPH event. An informative patient website, a patient leaflet and a follow-up consultation were mentioned as facilitators. The main obstacles according to the professionals were: lack of clarity of the guidelines, lack of knowledge and failing team-communication. Team training and checklists/ flowcharts were considered facilitators. CONCLUSIONS: Different obstacles to the delivery of high quality PPH-care were identified by both patients and professionals. These data can be used to develop a focused strategy to improve PPH-care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT 00928863.

Selection of key recommendations for quality indicators describing good quality outbreak response.

BACKGROUND: The performance of recommended control measures is necessary for quick and uniform infectious disease outbreak control. To assess whether these procedures are performed, a valid set of quality indicators (QIs) is required. The goal of this study was to select a set of key recommendations that can be systematically translated into QIs to measure the quality of infectious disease outbreak response from the perspective of disaster emergency responders and infectious disease control professionals. METHODS: Applying the Rand modified Delphi procedure, the following steps were taken to systematically select a set of key recommendations: extraction of recommendations from relevant literature; appraisal of the recommendations in terms of relevance through questionnaires to experts; expert meeting to discuss recommendations; prioritization of recommendations through a second questionnaire; and final expert meeting to approve the selected set. Infectious disease physicians and nurses, policymakers and communication experts participated in the expert group (n=48). RESULTS: In total, 54 national and international publications were systematically searched for recommendations, yielding over 200 recommendations. The Rand modified Delphi procedure resulted in a set of 65 key recommendations. The key recommendations were categorized into 10 domains describing the whole response pathway from outbreak recognition to aftercare. CONCLUSION: This study provides a set of key recommendations that represents 'good quality of response to an infectious disease outbreak'. These key recommendations can be systematically translated into QIs. Organizations and professionals involved in outbreak control can use these QIs to monitor the quality of response to infectious disease outbreaks and to assess in which domains improvement is needed.