Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake and hesitancy among healthcare workers in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Vaccination is a critical intervention to reduce morbidity and mortality and limit strain on health systems caused by COVID-19. The slow pace of COVID-19 vaccination uptake observed in some settings raises concerns about COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The Democratic Republic of the Congo experienced logistical challenges and low uptake at the start of vaccine distribution, leading to one of the lowest overall COVID-19 vaccine coverage rates in the world in 2021. This study assessed the magnitude and associated factors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake among healthcare workers (HCWs) in seven provinces in DRC. We implemented a cross-sectional Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices (KAP) questionnaire targeting HCWs, administered by trained data collectors in Haut-Katanga, Kasaï Orientale, Kinshasa, Kongo Centrale, Lualaba, North Kivu, and South Kivu provinces. Data were summarized and statistical tests were performed to assess factors associated with vaccine uptake. HCWs across the seven provinces completed the questionnaire (N = 5,102), of whom 46.3% had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Older age, being married, being a medical doctor, being a rural resident, and having access to or having previously worked in a COVID-19 vaccination site were all strongly associated with vaccination uptake. Vaccinated individuals most frequently cited protection of themselves, their families, and their communities as motivations for being vaccinated, whereas unvaccinated individuals were most concerned about safety, effectiveness, and risk of severe side effects. The findings suggest an opinion divide between vaccine-willing and vaccine-hesitant HCWs. A multidimensional approach may be needed to increase the acceptability of the COVID-19 vaccine for HCWs. Future vaccine campaign messaging could center around the positive impact of vaccination on protecting friends, family, and the community, and also emphasize the safety and very low risk of adverse effects. These types of messages may further be useful when planning future immunization campaigns with new vaccines.

Lost in translation: the importance of addressing language inequities in global health security.

Language inequities in global health stem from colonial legacies, and global health security is no exception. The International Health Regulations (IHRs), a legally binding framework published by the WHO, lay the foundation for global health security and state the roles and responsibilities States Parties are compelled to follow to improve their capabilities to prevent, detect and respond to potential public health emergencies of international concern. It includes the submission of a mandatory status report that assesses a nation's implementation of IHRs. Known as the States Party Self-Assessment Annual Report (SPAR) tool, WHO has made its guidance document available in all six WHO official languages (Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish). The Republic of Iraq (Iraq) experienced significant challenges during the completion and submission of the 2022 SPAR. This experience demonstrated that translation of English materials to other languages, such as Arabic, is not prioritised and further underscored how scoring of a country's global health security capacities can be significantly impacted by users' ability to read and comprehend the materials in English. Not only can this lead to inaccurate SPAR scoring, but it can also lead to the improper allocation of resources and prioritisation of policy developments and/or amendments. By drawing attention to this issue, we aim to inform and advocate for global health security decision-makers to consider opportunities for increasing inclusion and accessibility, especially for requirements under legally binding international instruments.

One Health Systems Assessments for Sustainable Capacity Strengthening to Control Priority Zoonotic Diseases Within and Between Countries.

One Health is increasingly recognized as an important approach for health systems, particularly with respect to strengthening prevention, detection and response to zoonotic and other emerging disease threats. While many global health security frameworks reference the importance of One Health, there are fewer existing methodologies, tools, and resources for supporting countries and other regional or sub-national authorities in systematically assessing their One Health capabilities. We describe here two methodologies, One Health Systems Assessment for Priority Zoonoses (OHSAPZ) and One Health Transboundary Assessment for Priority Zoonoses (OHTAPZ), which have been developed to assist with creating consensus lists of priority zoonotic diseases for cross-sectoral consideration; identification of current strengths and gaps in One Health communication and coordination between sectors (and, in the case of OHTAPZ, between countries); and the development and dissemination of prioritized recommendations for future capacity strengthening. Implemented to date in seven diverse countries in Africa and the Eastern Mediterranean regions, these tools provide a modular, flexible and easily adaptable approach to One Health systems assessment that can support national capacity strengthening, regional epidemic preparedness, and compliance with international frameworks.

Using One Health assessments to leverage endemic disease frameworks for emerging zoonotic disease threats in Libya.

Continued emergence, re-emergence and spread of zoonotic diseases demonstrates the imperative need for multisectoral communication and joint coordination of disease detection and response. While there are existing international frameworks underpinning One Health capacity building for pandemic prevention and response, often guidance does not account for challenges faced by countries undergoing long-term conflict and sociopolitical instability. The purpose of this research was to identify Libya's laboratory and surveillance networks and routes of inter- and multisectoral communication and coordination for priority zoonotic diseases. The One Health Systems Assessment for Priority Zoonoses (OH-SAPZ) tool is an established methodology that was adapted and applied to the Libyan context to support prioritization of zoonotic diseases, development of systems map schematics outlining networks of communication and coordination, and analysis of operations for targeted capacity building efforts. Five zoonotic diseases were selected to undergo assessment: highly pathogenic avian influenza, brucellosis, Rift Valley fever, leishmaniasis and rabies. Through decisive acknowledgement of Libya's unique health setting, we mapped how patient and sample information is both communicated within and between the human, animal and environmental health sectors, spanning from local index case identification to international notification. Through our assessment we found strong communication within the public and animal health sectors, as well as existing multisectoral coordination on zoonotic disease response. However, local-level communication between the sectors is currently lacking. Due to the ongoing conflict, resources (financial and human) and access have been severely impacted, resulting in limited laboratory diagnostic capacity and discontinued disease prevention and control measures. We sought to identify opportunities to leverage existing operations for endemic diseases like brucellosis for emerging zoonotic threats, such as Rift Valley fever. Analysis of these operations and capabilities supports the development of targeted recommendations that address gaps and may be used as an implementation guide for future One Health capacity building efforts.

Vocational assessment: a review of the literature from an occupation-based perspective.

The vast majority of the currently available vocational assessments are used to measure a worker's physical body functions and/or work capacity, while very few, if any, can be utilized to measure actual work performance. Within this research project, the authors conducted a brief review of the literature and synthesized the existing evidence related to some of the key vocational assessments that are utilized by occupational therapists. It was found that the current "gold standard" of vocational assessment is the Functional Capacity Evaluation, yet the evidence does not fully support its reliability and validity in determining an employee's ability to safely return to work. Alternative assessment options were explored, emphasizing the utilization of occupation-focused, performance-based assessment strategies. It is concluded that occupational therapists need to take action to develop and promote the use of performance-based measures of actual work ability. Occupational therapists must capitalize on their unique strengths of evaluating occupational performance and take the lead to develop standardized means of assessing, measuring, and predicting work performance and work status.