Willingness of WHO staff to work in health emergencies in the African Region: opportunity for phased deployment of staff and ensure continuity of health services.

A human resource base that ensures appropriate deployment of staff to emergencies, addressing different shock events in emergencies, without disrupting continuity of service is germane to a successful response. Consequently, the WHO Health Emergencies programme in the African Region, in collaboration with Africa Centre for Disease Control (ACDC) launched the African Volunteer Health Corps (AVoHC) and Strengthening and Utilization of Response Group for Emergencies (SURGE), an initiative aimed at ensuring a pool of timely responders. We explored the willingness of WHO staff to work in emergencies. A call for expression of interest to be part of the Elite Emergency Experts (Triple E) was published on 5th July 2022 via email and was open for 5 weeks. The responses were analyzed using simple descriptive statistics and presented with graphic illustrations. A total of 1253 WHO staff, from all the six WHO regions, cutting across all cadre, applied to the call. The applicants had various trainings and experiences in emergency and have responded to mostly disease outbreaks. Two-third of the applicants were males. This paper did not explore reasons for the willingness to work in emergencies. However, contrary to fears expressed in literature that health workers would not want to work in emergencies with potential for infections, the applicants have worked mostly in infectious emergencies. Literature identified some themes on factors that could impact on willingness of health workers to work in emergencies. These include concerns for the safety of the responders and impact of partners, child and elderly care, as well as other family obligations, which emergency planners must consider in planning emergency response.

Willingness of WHO staff to work in health emergencies in the African Region: opportunity for phased deployment of staff and ensure continuity of health services

A human resource base that ensures appropriate deployment of staff to emergencies, addressing different shock events in emergencies, without disrupting continuity of service is germane to a successful response. Consequently, the WHO Health Emergencies programme in the African Region, in collaboration with Africa Centre for Disease Control (ACDC) launched the African Volunteer Health Corps (AVoHC) and Strengthening and Utilization of Response Group for Emergencies (SURGE), an initiative aimed at ensuring a pool of timely responders. We explored the willingness of WHO staff to work in emergencies. A call for expression of interest to be part of the Elite Emergency Experts (Triple E) was published on 5th July 2022 via email and was open for 5 weeks. The responses were analyzed using simple descriptive statistics and presented with graphic illustrations. A total of 1253 WHO staff, from all the six WHO regions, cutting across all cadre, applied to the call. The applicants had various trainings and experiences in emergency and have responded to mostly disease outbreaks. Two-third of the applicants were males. This paper did not explore reasons for the willingness to work in emergencies. However, contrary to fears expressed in literature that health workers would not want to work in emergencies with potential for infections, the applicants have worked mostly in infectious emergencies. Literature identified some themes on factors that could impact on willingness of health workers to work in emergencies. These include concerns for the safety of the responders and impact of partners, child and elderly care, as well as other family obligations, which emergency planners must consider in planning emergency response.

What are the research priorities for strengthening public health emergency preparedness and response in Africa?

BACKGROUND: Research evidence is needed to strengthen capacities in emergency preparedness and response (EPR). However, the absence of a clear research agenda limits the optimal use of research evidence. This paper reports on the prioritization of research questions and topics that could contribute to evidence-informed strengthening of EPR capacities in the African region. METHODS: The priority-setting consisted of desk review and stakeholder consultation workshop. Twenty-nine people participated in the workshop, including representatives from WHO regional office and EPR focal points in Africa, representatives of research institutions, and partners from Science for Africa Foundation, United Nations Children's Fund and Africa Center for Disease Control. Modified Delphi technique was used to systematically arrive at specific and cross-cutting research priorities in the three broad areas of the EPR, which are program Implementation, Clinical and Epidemiology. The research questions/topics were ranked on five-point Likert scale (1 = very low to 5 = very high) based on seven agreed-on criteria. Research priority score was calculated for each question as the mean of the criteria scores. RESULTS: A total of 123 research questions comprising, 29 on Epidemiology, 22 on Clinical, 23 on program Implementation, and 49 on cross-cutting issues were ranked. The top ten research priorities were: knowledge and skills of healthcare workers in detecting and responding effectively to disease outbreaks; quality of data (accuracy, timeliness, completeness) for epidemic prone diseases; determinants of vaccine hesitancy; determinants of infection transmission among health care workers during PHE; effective measures for protecting health workers from highly infectious pathogens in PHE; strategies to improve the effectiveness of contact tracing for epidemic prone diseases; effectiveness of current case definitions as screening tools for epidemic and pandemic prone diseases; measures to strengthen national and sub-national laboratory capacity for timely disease confirmation within the Integrated Diseases Surveillance and Response framework; factors affecting prompt data sharing on epidemic-prone diseases; and effective strategies for appropriate community participation in EPR. CONCLUSIONS: The collaborative multi-stakeholder workshop produced a starting list of priority research questions and topics for strengthening EPR capacities in Africa. Action needs to be taken to continuously update the research agenda and support member States to contextualize the research priorities and commission research for timely generation and uptake of evidence.

Trends in public health emergencies in the WHO African Region: an analysis of the past two decades public health events from 2001 to 2022.

The African Region reports the heaviest burden of public health emergencies globally. This paper presents an exploratory analysis of public health events data collected the past 22 years in the WHO Africa region, to explore patterns and trends that can inform public health strategies, policy changes and develop appropriate tools to improve disease surveillance, preparedness and response to public health emergencies. A suite of exploratory data analysis methods combining time series analysis, summary statistics, temporal visualisations, geographic information system (GIS) mapping, trend analysis and statistical tests were used to derive patterns and trends from the data. An in-depth analysis of zoonotic disease outbreaks by geography and time was explored. The analysis also focused on whether these outbreaks were viral haemorrhagic related or had other characteristics. Results reveal that between 2001 and 2022, a total of 2234 public health events have been recorded in the WHO African Region of which 1886 events (84.4%) were substantiated. The paper confirms an average of 102 public health events reported yearly during the last 22 years time frame. The large majority (92%) of the substantiated events were infectious diseases (n=1730), 30% (n=566) are zoonoses and 5% (n=95) are humanitarian crises such as disaster events and conflicts. The number of zoonotic disease outbreaks has significantly increased (by 87%) between the past two decades, from 2003 to 2012 period (M=18.6, SD=4.8) and 2013-2022 period (M=34.7, SD=14); t(18) = 3.4, p=0.0032. This analysis shows growing challenges faced in the Africa region every year. One-health approach and its coordination across multiple sectors, disciplines and communities is critical to achieve the objectives.

A step towards reinvigorating the COVID-19 response: an intra-action review of the WHO Regional Office for Africa Incident Management Support Team.

The WHO Regional Office for Africa (AFRO) COVID-19 Incident Management Support Team (IMST) was first established on 21 January 2020 to coordinate the response to the pandemic in line with the Emergency Response Framework and has undergone three modifications based on intra-action reviews (IAR). An IAR of the WHO AFRO COVID-19 IMST was conducted to document best practices, challenges, lessons learnt and areas for improvement from the start of 2021 to the end of the third wave in November 2021. In addition, it was designed to contribute to improving the response to COVID-19 in the Region. An IAR design as proposed by WHO, encompassing qualitative approaches to collecting critical data and information, was used. It employed mixed methods of data collection: document reviews, online surveys, focus group discussions and key informant interviews. A thematic analysis of the data focused on four thematic areas, namely operations of IMST, data and information management, human resource management and institutional framework/governance. Areas of good practice identified, included the provision of guidelines, protocols and technical expertise, resource mobilisation, logistics management, provision of regular updates, timely situation reporting, timely deployment and good coordination. Some challenges identified included a communication gap; inadequate emergency personnel; lack of scientific updates; and inadequate coordination with partners. The identified strong points/components are the pivot for informed decisions and actions for reinvigorating the future response coordination mechanism.