Last data update: Apr 18, 2025. (Total: 49119 publications since 2009)
Records 1-4 (of 4 Records) |
Query Trace: Ward SE[original query] |
---|
Ebola virus disease preparedness assessment and risk mapping in Uganda, August-September 2018
Nanziri C , Ario AR , Ntono V , Monje F , Aliddeki DM , Bainomugisha K , Kadobera D , Bulage L , Nsereko G , Kayiwa J , Nakiire L , Walwema R , Tusiime PK , Mabumba E , Makumbi I , Ocom F , Lamorde M , Kasule JN , Ward SE , Merrill RD . Health Secur 2020 18 (2) 105-113 Uganda's proximity to the tenth Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) presents a high risk of cross-border EVD transmission. Uganda conducted preparedness and risk-mapping activities to strengthen capacity to prevent EVD importation and spread from cross-border transmission. We adapted the World Health Organization (WHO) EVD Consolidated Preparedness Checklist to assess preparedness in 11 International Health Regulations domains at the district level, health facilities, and points of entry; the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Border Health Capacity Discussion Guide to describe public health capacity; and the CDC Population Connectivity Across Borders tool kit to characterize movement and connectivity patterns. We identified 40 ground crossings (13 official, 27 unofficial), 80 health facilities, and more than 500 locations in 12 high-risk districts along the DRC border with increased connectivity to the EVD epicenter. The team also identified routes and congregation hubs, including origins and destinations for cross-border travelers to specified locations. Ten of the 12 districts scored less than 50% on the preparedness assessment. Using these results, Uganda developed a national EVD preparedness and response plan, including tailored interventions to enhance EVD surveillance, laboratory capacity, healthcare professional capacity, provision of supplies to priority locations, building treatment units in strategic locations, and enhancing EVD risk communication. We identified priority interventions to address risk of EVD importation and spread into Uganda. Lessons learned from this process will inform strategies to strengthen public health emergency systems in their response to public health events in similar settings. |
Uganda's experience in Ebola virus disease outbreak preparedness, 2018-2019
Aceng JR , Ario AR , Muruta AN , Makumbi I , Nanyunja M , Komakech I , Bakainaga AN , Talisuna AO , Mwesigye C , Mpairwe AM , Tusiime JB , Lali WZ , Katushabe E , Ocom F , Kaggwa M , Bongomin B , Kasule H , Mwoga JN , Sensasi B , Mwebembezi E , Katureebe C , Sentumbwe O , Nalwadda R , Mbaka P , Fatunmbi BS , Nakiire L , Lamorde M , Walwema R , Kambugu A , Nanyondo J , Okware S , Ahabwe PB , Nabukenya I , Kayiwa J , Wetaka MM , Kyazze S , Kwesiga B , Kadobera D , Bulage L , Nanziri C , Monje F , Aliddeki DM , Ntono V , Gonahasa D , Nabatanzi S , Nsereko G , Nakinsige A , Mabumba E , Lubwama B , Sekamatte M , Kibuule M , Muwanguzi D , Amone J , Upenytho GD , Driwale A , Seru M , Sebisubi F , Akello H , Kabanda R , Mutengeki DK , Bakyaita T , Serwanjja VN , Okwi R , Okiria J , Ainebyoona E , Opar BT , Mimbe D , Kyabaggu D , Ayebazibwe C , Sentumbwe J , Mwanja M , Ndumu DB , Bwogi J , Balinandi S , Nyakarahuka L , Tumusiime A , Kyondo J , Mulei S , Lutwama J , Kaleebu P , Kagirita A , Nabadda S , Oumo P , Lukwago R , Kasozi J , Masylukov O , Kyobe HB , Berdaga V , Lwanga M , Opio JC , Matseketse D , Eyul J , Oteba MO , Bukirwa H , Bulya N , Masiira B , Kihembo C , Ohuabunwo C , Antara SN , Owembabazi W , Okot PB , Okwera J , Amoros I , Kajja V , Mukunda BS , Sorela I , Adams G , Shoemaker T , Klena JD , Taboy CH , Ward SE , Merrill RD , Carter RJ , Harris JR , Banage F , Nsibambi T , Ojwang J , Kasule JN , Stowell DF , Brown VR , Zhu BP , Homsy J , Nelson LJ , Tusiime PK , Olaro C , Mwebesa HG , Woldemariam YT . Global Health 2020 16 (1) 24 BACKGROUND: Since the declaration of the 10th Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreak in DRC on 1st Aug 2018, several neighboring countries have been developing and implementing preparedness efforts to prevent EVD cross-border transmission to enable timely detection, investigation, and response in the event of a confirmed EVD outbreak in the country. We describe Uganda's experience in EVD preparedness. RESULTS: On 4 August 2018, the Uganda Ministry of Health (MoH) activated the Public Health Emergency Operations Centre (PHEOC) and the National Task Force (NTF) for public health emergencies to plan, guide, and coordinate EVD preparedness in the country. The NTF selected an Incident Management Team (IMT), constituting a National Rapid Response Team (NRRT) that supported activation of the District Task Forces (DTFs) and District Rapid Response Teams (DRRTs) that jointly assessed levels of preparedness in 30 designated high-risk districts representing category 1 (20 districts) and category 2 (10 districts). The MoH, with technical guidance from the World Health Organisation (WHO), led EVD preparedness activities and worked together with other ministries and partner organisations to enhance community-based surveillance systems, develop and disseminate risk communication messages, engage communities, reinforce EVD screening and infection prevention measures at Points of Entry (PoEs) and in high-risk health facilities, construct and equip EVD isolation and treatment units, and establish coordination and procurement mechanisms. CONCLUSION: As of 31 May 2019, there was no confirmed case of EVD as Uganda has continued to make significant and verifiable progress in EVD preparedness. There is a need to sustain these efforts, not only in EVD preparedness but also across the entire spectrum of a multi-hazard framework. These efforts strengthen country capacity and compel the country to avail resources for preparedness and management of incidents at the source while effectively cutting costs of using a "fire-fighting" approach during public health emergencies. |
Population movement patterns among the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, and Uganda During an outbreak of Ebola virus disease: Results from community engagement in two districts - Uganda, March 2019
Nakiire L , Mwanja H , Pillai SK , Gasanani J , Ntungire D , Nsabiyumva S , Mafigiri R , Muneza N , Ward SE , Daffe Z , Ahabwe PB , Kyazze S , Ojwang J , Homsy J , McLntyre E , Lamorde M , Walwema R , Makumbi I , Muruta A , Merrill RD . MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2020 69 (1) 10-13 Tailoring communicable disease preparedness and response strategies to unique population movement patterns between an outbreak area and neighboring countries can help limit the international spread of disease. Global recognition of the value of addressing community connectivity in preparedness and response, through field work and visualizing the identified movement patterns, is reflected in the World Health Organization's declaration on July 17, 2019, that the 10th Ebola virus disease (Ebola) outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) was a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (1). In March 2019, the Infectious Diseases Institute (IDI), Uganda, in collaboration with the Ministry of Health (MOH) Uganda and CDC, had previously identified areas at increased risk for Ebola importation by facilitating community engagement with participatory mapping to characterize cross-border population connectivity patterns. Multisectoral participants identified 31 locations and associated movement pathways with high levels of connectivity to the Ebola outbreak areas. They described a major shift in the movement pattern between Goma (DRC) and Kisoro (Uganda), mainly through Rwanda, when Rwanda closed the Cyanika ground crossing with Uganda. This closure led some travelers to use a potentially less secure route within DRC. District and national leadership used these results to bolster preparedness at identified points of entry and health care facilities and prioritized locations at high risk further into Uganda, especially markets and transportation hubs, for enhanced preparedness. Strategies to forecast, identify, and rapidly respond to the international spread of disease require adapting to complex, dynamic, multisectoral cross-border population movement, which can be influenced by border control and public health measures of neighboring countries. |
From one to the other: responding to Ebola cases on either side of the line
Merrill RD , Ward SE , Oppert MC , Schneider DA . Pan Afr Med J 2017 27 12 This case study is adapted from events that occurred along the Sierra Leone and Guinea land border during the 2014-2016 Ebola epidemic in West Africa. The response activities involved Sierra Leone and Guinea officials, along with assistance from U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organisation (WHO). This case study builds upon an understanding of basic surveillance systems and outbreak response activities. Through this exercise, students will understand how to incorporate communication and coordination into surveillance and response efforts with counterparts across the border in neighbouring countries. This integration is important to reduce the spread of communicable diseases between neighbouring countries. The time required to complete this case study is 2-3 hours. |
- Page last reviewed:Feb 1, 2024
- Page last updated:Apr 18, 2025
- Content source:
- Powered by CDC PHGKB Infrastructure