Extent of compliance with COVID-19 prevention and control guidelines among supermarkets in Kampala Capital City and Mukono Municipality, Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Despite the development and enforcement of preventive guidelines by governments, COVID-19 continues to spread across nations, causing unprecedented economic losses and mortality. Public places remain hotspots for COVID-19 transmission due to large numbers of people present; however preventive measures are poorly enforced. Supermarkets are among the high-risk establishments due to the high interactions involved, which makes compliance with the COVID-19 preventive guidelines of paramount importance. However, until now, there has been limited evidence on compliance with the set COVID-19 prevention guidelines. Therefore, this study aimed to measure compliance with the COVID-19 prevention guidelines among supermarkets in Kampala Capital City and Mukono Municipality Uganda. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among selected supermarkets in Kampala Capital City and Mukono Municipality in September 2020. A total of 229 supermarkets (195 in Kampala City and 34 in Mukono Municipality) were randomly selected for the study. Data were collected through structured observations on the status of compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines, and entered using the KoboCollect software, which was preinstalled on mobile devices (smart phones and tablets). Descriptive statistics were generated to measure compliance to the set COVID-19 Ministry of Health prevention guidelines using Stata 14 software. RESULTS: Only 16.6% (38/229) of the supermarkets complied with the COVID-19 prevention and control guidelines. In line with the specific measures, almost all supermarkets 95.2% (218/229) had hand washing facilities placed at strategic points such as the entrance, and 59.8% (137/229) of the supermarkets surveyed regularly disinfected commonly touched surfaces. Only 40.6% and 30.6% of the supermarkets enforced mandatory hand washing and use of face masks respectively for all customers accessing the premises. Slightly more than half, 52.4% (120/229) of the supermarkets had someone or a team in charge of enforcing compliance to COVID-19 measures and more than half, 55.5% (127/229) of the supermarkets had not provided their staff with job-specific training/mentorship on infection prevention and control for COVID-19. Less than a third, 26.2% (60/229) of the supermarkets had an infrared temperature gun for screening every customer, and only 5.7% (13/229) of the supermarkets captured details of clients accessing the supermarket as a measure to ease follow-up. CONCLUSION: This study revealed low compliance with COVID-19 guidelines, which required mandatory preventive measures such as face masking, regular disinfection, social distancing, and hand hygiene. This study suggests the need for health authorities to strengthen enforcement of these guidelines, and to sensitise the supermarket managers on COVID-19 in order to increase the uptake of the different measures.

Factors associated with health facility deliveries among mothers living in hospital catchment areas in Rukungiri and Kanungu districts, Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Health facility deliveries are generally associated with improved maternal and child health outcomes. However, in Uganda, little is known about factors that influence use of health facilities for delivery especially in rural areas. In this study, we assessed the factors associated with health facility deliveries among mothers living within the catchment areas of major health facilities in Rukungiri and Kanungu districts, Uganda. METHODS: Cross-sectional data were collected from 894 randomly-sampled mothers within the catchment of two private hospitals in Rukungiri and Kanungu districts. Data were collected on the place of delivery for the most recent child, mothers' sociodemographic and economic characteristics, and health facility water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) status. Modified Poisson regression was used to estimate prevalence ratios (PRs) for the determinants of health facility deliveries as well as factors associated with private versus public utilization of health facilities for childbirth. RESULTS: The majority of mothers (90.2%, 806/894) delivered in health facilities. Non-facility deliveries were attributed to faster progression of labour (77.3%, 68/88), lack of transport (31.8%, 28/88), and high cost of hospital delivery (12.5%, 11/88). Being a business-woman [APR = 1.06, 95% CI (1.01-1.11)] and belonging to the highest wealth quintile [APR = 1.09, 95% CI (1.02-1.17)] favoured facility delivery while a higher parity of 3-4 [APR = 0.93, 95% CI (0.88-0.99)] was inversely associated with health facility delivery as compared to parity of 1-2. Factors associated with delivery in a private facility compared to a public facility included availability of highly skilled health workers [APR = 1.15, 95% CI (1.05-1.26)], perceived higher quality of WASH services [APR = 1.11, 95% CI (1.04-1.17)], cost of the delivery [APR = 0.85, 95% CI (0.78-0.92)], and availability of caesarean services [APR = 1.13, 95% CI (1.08-1.19)]. CONCLUSION: Health facility delivery service utilization was high, and associated with engaging in business, belonging to wealthiest quintile and having higher parity. Factors associated with delivery in private facilities included health facility WASH status, cost of services, and availability of skilled workforce and caesarean services.

Assessment of water, sanitation and hygiene service availability in healthcare facilities in the greater Kampala metropolitan area, Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Improved Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) in Healthcare facilities (HCFs) is of significant public health importance. It is associated with a reduction in the transmission of healthcare acquired infections (HAIs), increased trust and uptake of healthcare services, cost saving from infections averted, increased efficiency and improved staff morale. Despite these benefits, there is limited evidence on availability of WASH services in HCFs in the Greater Kampala Metropolitan Area (GKMA). This study assessed the availability and status of WASH services within HCFs in the GKMA in order to inform policy and WASH programming. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in 60 HCFs. Availability of WASH services in the study HCFs was assessed using a validated WASH Conditions (WASHCon) tool comprising of structured interviews, HCF observations and microbial water quality analysis. Data were analysed using Stata 14 software and R software. RESULTS: Overall, 84.5% (49/58) and 12.1% (7/58) of HCFs had limited and basic WASH service respectively. About 48.3% (28/58) had limited water service, 84.5% (49/58) had limited sanitation service, 50.0% (29/58) had limited environmental cleanliness service, 56.9% (33/58) had limited hand hygiene service, and 51.7% (30/58) had limited waste management service. About 94.4% of public HCFs had limited WASH service compared to only 68.2% of private not for profit facilities. More health centre IIIs, 92.5% and health centre IVs (85.7%) had limited WASH service compared to hospitals (54.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that provision of water, sanitation, hand hygiene, environmental cleanliness, and health care waste management services within HCFs is largely hindered by structural and performance limitations. In spite of these limitations, it is evident that environmental cleanliness and treatment of infectious waste can be attained with better oversight and dedicated personnel. Attaining universal WASH coverage in HCFs will require deliberate and strategic investments across the different domains.

What COVID-19 Reveals about the Neglect of WASH within Infection Prevention in Low-Resource Healthcare Facilities.

The highly infectious nature of the SARS-CoV-2 virus requires rigorous infection prevention and control (IPC) to reduce the transmission of COVID-19 within healthcare facilities, but in low-resource settings, the lack of water access creates a perfect storm for low-handwashing adherence, ineffective surface decontamination, and other environmental cleaning functions that are critical for IPC compliance. Data from the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme show that one in four healthcare facilities globally lacks a functional water source on premises (i.e., basic water service); in sub-Saharan Africa, half of all healthcare facilities have no basic water services. But even these data do not tell the whole story, other water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) assessments in low-resource healthcare facilities have shown the detrimental effects of seasonal or temporary water shortages, nonfunctional water infrastructure, and fluctuating water quality. The rapid spread of COVID-19 forces us to reexamine prevailing norms within national health systems around the importance of WASH for quality of health care, the prioritization of WASH in healthcare facility investments, and the need for focused, cross-sector leadership and collaboration between WASH and health professionals. What COVID-19 reveals about infection prevention in low-resource healthcare facilities is that we can no longer afford to "work around" WASH deficiencies. Basic WASH services are a fundamental prerequisite to compliance with the principles of IPC that are necessary to protect patients and healthcare workers in every setting.

Use of force preferences and perceived effectiveness of actions among Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) police officers and non-CIT officers in an escalating psychiatric crisis involving a subject with schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined police officers' use of force toward individuals with schizophrenia, despite the widely disseminated Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) model of partnership between mental health and law enforcement that seeks to reduce use of force and enhance safety of officers and individuals with mental illnesses. This study tested the hypotheses that CIT-trained officers would select a lower level of force, identify nonphysical actions as more effective, and perceive physical force as less effective in an escalating psychiatric crisis, compared with non-CIT-trained officers. METHODS: Police officers (n = 135)-48 CIT trained and 87 non-CIT trained-completed a survey containing 3 scenario-based vignettes depicting an escalating situation involving a subject with psychosis. Data were analyzed using repeated-measures analyses of variance. RESULTS: Officers escalated their preferred actions across the scenarios. A significant scenario by group interaction indicated that CIT-trained officers chose less escalation (ie, opting for less force at the third scenario) than non-CIT-trained officers. Officers reported decreasing perceived effectiveness of nonphysical action across the 3 scenarios. A significant scenario by group interaction indicated that CIT-trained officers reported a lesser decline in perceived effectiveness of nonphysical actions at the third scenario. CIT-trained officers consistently endorsed lower perceived effectiveness of physical force. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts are needed to reduce use of force toward individuals with psychotic disorders. These findings suggest that CIT may be an effective approach. In addition to clinical and programmatic implications, such findings demonstrate a role for clinicians, advocates, and schizophrenia researchers in promoting social justice through partnerships with diverse social sectors.

Characteristics of patients referred to psychiatric emergency services by crisis intervention team police officers.

The Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) program trains police officers in crisis intervention skills and local psychiatric resources. Because the safety and appropriateness of any new intervention is a crucial consideration, it is necessary to ensure that CIT training does not result in excessive or inappropriate referrals to psychiatric emergency services (PES). Yet, aside from one prior report by Strauss et al. (2005) in Louisville, Kentucky, little is known about the comparability of patients referred to PES by CIT-trained officers in relation to other modes of referral. The research questions driving this retrospective chart review of patients referred to PES were: (1) What types of patients do CIT-trained officers refer to PES?, and (2) Do meaningful differences exist between patients referred by family members, non-CIT officers, and CIT-trained officers? Select sociodemographic and clinical variables were abstracted from the medical records of 300 patients during an eight-month period and compared by mode of referral. Differences across the three groups were found regarding: race, whether or not the patient was held on the locked observation unit, severe agitation, recent substance abuse, global functioning, and unkempt or bizarre appearance. However, there were virtually no differences between patients referred by CIT-trained and non-CIT officers. Thus, while there were some expected differences between patients referred by law enforcement and those referred by family members, CIT-trained officers appear to refer individuals appropriately to PES, as evidenced by such patients differing little from those referred by traditional, non-CIT police officers. Trained officers do not have a narrower view of people in need of emergency services (i.e., bringing in more severely ill individuals), and they do not have a broader view (i.e., bringing in those not in need of emergency services). Although CIT training does not appear to affect the type of individuals referred to PES, future research should examine the effect of CIT training on the frequency of referrals or proportion of subjects encountered that are referred, which may be expected to differ between CIT-trained and non-CIT officers.