RESUMO
ObjectivesThe first case of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was identified on March 21, 2020, in Uganda. The number of cases increased to 8,287 by September 30, 2020. By May throughout June, most of the cases were predominantly imported cases of truck drivers from neighbouring countries. Uganda responded with various restrictions and interventions including lockdown, physical distancing, hand hygiene, and use of face masks in public, to control the growth rate of the outbreak. By end of September 2020, Uganda had transitioned into community transmissions and most of the reported cases were locals contacts and alerts. This study assessed risks associated with SARS-CoV-2 in Uganda, and presents estimates of the reproduction ratio in real time. An optimal control analysis was performed to determine how long the current mitigation measures such as controlling the exposure in communities, rapid detection, confirmation and contact tracing, partial lockdown of the vulnerable groups and control at the porous boarders, could be implemented and at what cost. MethodsThe daily confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2 in Uganda were extracted from publicly available sources. Using the data, relative risks for age, gender, and geographical location were determined. Four approaches were used to forecast SARS-CoV-2 in Uganda namely linear exponential, nonlinear exponential, logistic and a deterministic model. The discrete logistic model and the next generation matrix method were used to estimate the effective reproduction number. ResultsResults showed that women were at a higher risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 than the men, and the population attributable risk of SARS-CoV-2 to women was 42.22%. Most of the women affected by SARS-CoV-2 were likely contacts of cargo truck drivers at the boarders, where high infection rates were reported. Although most deaths in Uganda were in the age group of 60-69, the highest case fatality rate per 1000 was attributable the age group of 80-89, followed by 70-79. Geographically, Amuru had the highest relative risk compared to the national risk to SARS-CoV-2. For the case of mitigation scenarios, washing hands with 70% com pliance and regular hand washing of 6 times a day, was the most effective and sustainable to reduce SARS- CoV-2 exposure. This was followed by public wearing of face masks if at least 60% of the population complied, and physical distancing by 60% of the population. If schools, bars and churches were opened without compliance, i.e., no distancing, no handwashing and no public wearing of face masks, to mitigation measures, the highest incidence was observed, leading to a big replacement number. If mitigation measures are not followed by the population, then there will be high incidences and prevalence of the virus in the population.
RESUMO
Evidence that face masks provide effective protection against respiratory infections in the community is scarce. However, face masks are widely used by health workers as part of droplet precautions when caring for patients with respiratory infections. It would therefore be reasonable to suggest that consistent widespread use of face masks in the community could prevent further spread of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In this study we examine public face mask wearing in Uganda where a proportion wears masks to protect against acquiring, and the other to prevent from transmitting SARS-CoV-2. The objective of this study was to determine what percentage of the population would have to wear face masks to reduce susceptibility to and infectivity of SARS-COV-2 in Uganda, keeping the basic reproduction number below unity and/or flattening the curve. We used an SEIAQRD model for the analysis. Results show that implementation of facemasks has a relatively large impact on the size of the coronavirus epidemic in Uganda. We find that the critical mask adherence is 5 per 100 when 80% wear face masks. A cost-effective analysis shows that utilizing funds to provide 1 public mask to the population has a per capita compounded cost of USD 1.34. If provision of face masks is done simultaneously with supportive care, the per capita compounded cost is USD 1.965, while for the case of only treatment and no provision of face masks costs each Ugandan USD 4.0579. We conclude that since it is hard to achieve a 100% adherence to face masks, government might consider provision of face masks in conjunction with provision of care.
