How to strengthen a health research system: WHO's review, whose literature and who is providing leadership?

Understanding Health Inequalities Research Capacities: Insights and Recommendations From Comparing Two High Income Settings

Generating evidence on health inequalities (HI) is necessary to raise awareness of these issues, describe and monitor their evolution, analyze their causes, and inform interventions aiming to improve health equity. Yet not all cities and countries have the capacity to produce this type of research. Recent research provides new contextual and causal insights into this research production process, and in-depth understanding on why and how this type of research is produced in certain settings. This article aims to analyze two recent case studies that have uniquely explored this process in two high producers of HI research and high-income country settings to identify learning and distil recommendations, which may be insightful for other settings. Expanding and investing in this line of research is critical, particularly in places with lower HI research output and related capacity, in order to identify key contextual conditions and mechanisms that may enable or hinder this process. This new knowledge could guide the development of new HI research capacity strengthening strategies to foster this research in different settings, worldwide. More understanding is also needed on the relationship between HI research, policy, and action in order to tackle HI.

Health research prioritization in Somalia: setting the agenda for context specific knowledge to advance universal health coverage

Introduction

Despite recognition that health research is an imperative to progress toward universal health coverage, resources for health research are limited. Yet, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, more than 85% of the resources available for health research are spent on answering less relevant research questions. This misalignment is partially due to absence of locally determined health research priorities. In this study, we identified health research priorities which, if implemented, can inform local interventions required to accelerate progress toward universal health coverage in Somalia.

Methods

We adapted the child health and nutrition research initiative method for research priority setting and applied it in 4 major phases: (1) establishment of an exercise management team, (2) a web-based survey among 84 respondents to identify health research questions; (3) categorization of identified health research questions; and (4) a workshop with 42 participants to score and rank the identified health research questions. Ethical approval was received from ethics review committee of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (Ref:26524) and the Somali Research and Development Institute (Ref: EA0143).

Results

Two hundred and thirty-one unique health research questions were identified and categorized under health systems, services and social determinants (77), communicable diseases (54), non-communicable diseases (41) and reproductive, maternal, new-born, child, adolescent health and nutrition (59). A priority score ranging from 1 to 9 was assigned to each of the questions. For each category, a list of 10 questions with the highest priority scores was developed. Across the four categories, an overall list of 10 questions with the highest priority scores was also developed. These related to bottlenecks to accessing essential health services, use of evidence in decision making, antimicrobial resistance, distribution and risk factors for non-communicable diseases, post-traumatic stress disorder and factors associated with low antenatal care attendance among others.

Conclusion and recommendations

The developed priority research questions can be used to focus health research and to inform appropriation of health research resources to questions that contribute to generation of local health system knowledge which is required to accelerate progress toward universal health coverage in Somalia. The Somalia national institute of health should set up a consortium for provision of technical and financial support for research addressing the identified priority research questions, establish a mechanism to continuously monitor the extent to which new health interventions in Somalia are informed by knowledge generated through conducting prioritized health research and prioritize interventions aimed at strengthening the broader national health research system for Somalia.

Knowledge management tools and mechanisms for evidence-informed decision-making in the WHO European Region: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Knowledge management (KM) emerged as a strategy to promote evidence-informed decision-making. This scoping review aims to map existing KM tools and mechanisms used to promote evidence-informed health decision-making in the WHO European Region and identify knowledge gaps.

METHODS

Following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidance for conducting scoping reviews, we searched Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, and Open Grey. We conducted a descriptive analysis of the general characteristics of the included papers and conducted narrative analysis of the included studies and categorized studies according to KM type and phase.

RESULTS

Out of 9541 citations identified, we included 141 studies. The KM tools mostly assessed are evidence networks, surveillance tools, observatories, data platforms and registries, with most examining KM tools in high-income countries of the WHO European region. Findings suggest that KM tools can identify health problems, inform health planning and resource allocation, increase the use of evidence by policymakers and stimulate policy discussion.

CONCLUSION

Policymakers and funding agencies are called to support capacity-building activities, and future studies to strengthen KM in the WHO European region particularly in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. An updated over-arching strategy to coordinate KM activities in the WHO European region will be useful in these efforts.

Advancing health through evidence assisted decisions with health policy and systems research program: a qualitative evaluation of a national health research grant management process in the Philippines

BACKGROUND

Health policy and systems research (HPSR) has influenced Philippine policies, including tobacco control, mental health, and COVID-19. The Department of Health (DOH) Philippines and Philippine Council for Health Research and Development (PCHRD) launched the Advancing Health through Evidence-Assisted Decisions (AHEAD) with HPSR program in 2017, aiming to build a community of researchers and decision-makers committed to evidence production and utilization. Research systems employ grant management processes for transparency and accountability in research funding, preventing waste, fraud, and misuse of funds.

METHODS

This study evaluated AHEAD-HPSR's grant management using surveys, interviews, and focus groups to document (1) grant administration processes implemented by DOH and PCHRD, and (2) experiences of grantees, program managers, staff, and policymakers. Data were initially analyzed through the USA Grant Accountability Office's Federal Grant Life Cycle, with new themes created as they emerged. The study identified processes and gaps in the research grant life cycle stages: design/redesign, pre-award, award, implementation, closeout, and research dissemination and utilization.

RESULTS

Identification of research areas for the grant are identified using national and departmental research priorities. While Calls for Proposals are posted publicly, researchers that have previously worked with policymakers are contacted directly to submit proposals. The evaluation found that research is delayed by bureaucracies in grant administration, particularly in financial reporting and ethics review processes. Complying with the terminal financial report was identified as the most challenging part of the grant process due to immense auditing requirements. Grantees recommend the simplification of bureaucracy for fund release to enable them to focus on research work.

CONCLUSION

This study contributes to the limited literature on health research grant management in developing countries. Valuable information and recommendations were contributed by stakeholders in this evaluation. These are manifestations of a continuing interest and desire to make health policy and systems research in the Philippines more robust and relevant. It is imperative for the program to continually evolve and build systems most applicable to its multidisciplinary context.

The abiding, hidden, and pervasive centrality of the health research workforce

Research for health and development (R4HD) acknowledges that many of the determinants of health lie outside the boundaries of the health system. The size and quality of the health and care workforce (HCWF) are key drivers towards the future trajectory of many of these factors. We consider researchers for health and development an abiding, pervasive but neglected constituent part of this HCWF. This workforce straddles many professional groups and sectors. The diversity of occupations, lack of standardization in occupational cadres, the complexity and gendered aspects of the labour market, and the variable demographic, epidemiological, socio-economic and health systems' contexts in the global south and the global north, led to a kaleidoscopic perception of the health research workforce that have kept it hidden from public opinion. This led to neglect by science as well as health policymakers and created an orphan sub-set of the HCWF. Understanding the health researchers' labour market will help to identify means to develop, retain and utilize the health research workforce, addressing size, composition, role, skills transferability, careers and social impact through building, enabling or sustaining its research functions, capacity, employment opportunities and career tracks, among other issues. This thematic series of the Human Resources for Health Journal, calls for papers that go beyond narrow conceptual approaches and professional understandings of health care workers and the health research workforce, and requests that contributors examine important workforce issues through the broad lens of R4HD within a sustainable development goals framework.

Why and how has the United Kingdom become a high producer of health inequalities research over the past 50 years? A realist explanatory case study

BACKGROUND

Evidence on health inequalities has been growing over the past few decades, yet the capacity to produce research on health inequalities varies between countries worldwide and needs to be strengthened. More in-depth understanding of the sociohistorical, political and institutional processes that enable this type of research and related research capacity to be generated in different contexts is needed. A recent bibliometric analysis of the health inequalities research field found inequalities in the global production of this type of research. It also found the United Kingdom to be the second-highest global contributor to this research field after the United States. This study aims to understand why and how the United Kingdom, as an example of a "high producer" of health inequalities research, has been able to generate so much health inequalities research over the past five decades, and which main mechanisms might have been involved in generating this specific research capacity over time.

METHODS

We conducted a realist explanatory case study, which included 12 semi-structured interviews, to test six theoretical mechanisms that we proposed might have been involved in this process. Data from the interviews and grey and scientific literature were triangulated to inform our findings.

RESULTS

We found evidence to suggest that at least four of our proposed mechanisms have been activated by certain conditions and have contributed to the health inequalities research production process in the United Kingdom over the past 50 years. Limited evidence suggests that two new mechanisms might have potentially also been at play.

CONCLUSIONS

Valuable learning can be established from this case study, which explores the United Kingdom's experience in developing a strong national health inequalities research tradition, and the potential mechanisms involved in this process. More research is needed to explore additional facilitating and inhibiting mechanisms and other factors involved in this process in this context, as well as in other settings where less health inequalities research has been produced. This type of in-depth knowledge could be used to guide the development of new health inequalities research capacity-strengthening strategies and support the development of novel approaches and solutions aiming to tackle health inequalities.

Environmental policies for the treatment of waste generated by COVID-19: Text mining review

The rapid transmission of COVID-19 has meant that all economic and human efforts have been focused on confronting it, ignoring environmental aspects whose consequences are causing adverse situations all over the planet. The saturation of the sanitary system and confinement measures have multiplied the waste generated, which implies the need to adapt environmental policies to this new situation caused by the pandemic. It is a review article whose objective was to identify the environmental policies that would facilitate an adequate treatment of the waste generated by the pandemic. It was proposed to analyse the current lines of research developed on this paradigm, applying the text mining methodology. A systematic review of 111 studies published in environmental journals indexed in the Web of Science was carried out. The results identified three areas of interest: knowledge of transmission routes, management of the massive generation of plastics and appropriate treatment of solid waste in extreme situations. Leaders are called upon to implement the contingency plans to sustainably alleviate the enormous waste burden caused by society's adaptation to the restrictions imposed by the pandemic. Specifically, innovation aimed at achieving the reuse of medical products, the promotion of the circular economy and educational campaigns to promote clean environments should be encouraged.

Saving millions of lives but some resources squandered: emerging lessons from health research system pandemic achievements and challenges

During the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, astonishingly rapid research averted millions of deaths worldwide through new vaccines and repurposed and new drugs. Evidence use informed life-saving national policies including non-pharmaceutical interventions. Simultaneously, there was unprecedented waste, with many underpowered trials on the same drugs. We identified lessons from COVID-19 research responses by applying WHO's framework for research systems. It has four functions-governance, securing finance, capacity-building, and production and use of research-and nine components. Two linked questions focused the analysis. First, to what extent have achievements in knowledge production and evidence use built on existing structures and capacity in national health research systems? Second, did the features of such systems mitigate waste? We collated evidence on seven countries, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States, to identify examples of achievements and challenges.We used the data to develop lessons for each framework component. Research coordination, prioritization and expedited ethics approval contributed to rapid identification of new therapies, including dexamethasone in the United Kingdom and Brazil. Accelerated vaccines depended on extensive funding, especially through the Operation Warp Speed initiative in the United States, and new platforms created through long-term biomedical research capacity in the United Kingdom and, for messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) vaccines, in Canada, Germany and the United States. Research capacity embedded in the United Kingdom's healthcare system resulted in trial acceleration and waste avoidance. Faster publication of research saved lives, but raised challenges. Public/private collaborations made major contributions to vastly accelerating new products, available worldwide, though unequally. Effective developments of living (i.e. regularly updated) reviews and guidelines, especially in Australia and Canada, extended existing expertise in meeting users' needs. Despite complexities, effective national policy responses (less evident in Brazil, the United Kingdom and the United States) also saved lives by drawing on health research system features, including collaboration among politicians, civil servants and researchers; good communications; and willingness to use evidence. Comprehensive health research strategies contributed to success in research production in the United Kingdom and in evidence use by political leadership in New Zealand. In addition to waste, challenges included equity issues, public involvement and non-COVID research. We developed recommendations, but advocate studies of further countries.

How successful was the use of a community of practice for the implementation of evidence-based practices for heart failure within the United States Department of Veterans Affairs: Insights from a formative evaluation

Background

Communities of Practice (CoPs) are a promising approach to facilitate the implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) to improve care for chronic conditions like heart failure (HF). CoPs involve a complex process of acquiring and converting both explicit and tacit knowledge into clinical activities. This study describes the conceptualization, creation, capacity-building and dissemination of a CoP sustained over 9 years, and evaluates its value and impact on EBP.

Methods

In July 2006, a CoP called the Heart Failure Provider Network (HF Network) was established within the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) with the overarching goal of improving the quality of care for HF patients. We assessed (formative) the HF Network in terms of its various activities (inputs) and proximal impacts (mediators) at the individual level, and its distal impacts (outcomes) at the site level including implementation of new/improved EBPs at the systemwide level.

Results

The HF Network membership grew steadily over the 9 years. The CoP has involved a total of 1341 multidisciplinary and multilevel members at all 144 VA Health Care Systems (sites). Most members were practising clinicians (n = 891, 66.4%), followed by administrators (n = 342, 25.5%), researchers (n = 70, 5.2%) and others (n = 38, 2.8%). Participation was assessed to be “active” for 70.6% versus “passive” for 29.4% of members. The distribution of active members (clinicians 64.7%, administrators 21.6%) was similar to the distribution of overall membership.

Conclusions

Survey respondents perceived the HF Network as useful in terms of its varied activities and resources relevant for patient care. Strong evidence shows that these members, particularly those who considered themselves influential in improving quality of care, noted multiple benefits of membership, which included confirmation of their own clinical practices, evidence-based changes to their practice and help in understanding facilitators and barriers in setting up or running HF clinics and other programmes. Such CoPs have strong impacts on the quality of care being delivered for both mandated and non-mandated initiatives.

Research can be integrated into public health policy-making: global lessons for and from Spanish economic evaluations

WHO promotes the use of research in policy-making to drive improvements in health, including in achieving Sustainable Development Goals such as tobacco control. The European Union’s new €95 billion Horizon Europe research framework programme parallels these aims, and also includes commitments to fund economic evaluations. However, researchers often express frustration at the perceived lack of attention to scientific evidence during policy-making. For example, some researchers claim that evidence regarding the return on investment from optimal implementation of evidence-based policies is frequently overlooked. An increasingly large body of literature acknowledges inevitable barriers to research use, but also analyses facilitators encouraging such use. This opinion piece describes how some research is integrated into policy-making. It highlights two recent reviews. One examines impact assessments of 36 multi-project research programmes and identifies three characteristics of projects more likely to influence policy-making. These include a focus on healthcare system needs, engagement of stakeholders, and research conducted for organizations supported by structures to receive and use evidence. The second review suggests that such characteristics are likely to occur as part of a comprehensive national health research system strategy, especially one integrated into the healthcare system. We also describe two policy-informing economic evaluations conducted in Spain. These examined the most cost-effective package of evidence-based tobacco control interventions and the cost-effectiveness of different strategies to increase screening coverage for cervical cancer. Both projects focused on issues of healthcare concern and involved considerable stakeholder engagement. The Spanish examples reinforce some lessons from the global literature and, therefore, could help demonstrate to authorities in Spain the value of developing comprehensive health research systems, possibly following the interfaces and receptor model. The aim of this would be to integrate needs assessment and stakeholder engagement with structures spanning the research and health systems. In such structures, economic evaluation evidence could be collated, analysed by experts in relation to healthcare needs, and fed into both policy-making as appropriate, and future research calls. The increasingly large local and global evidence base on research utilization could inform detailed implementation of this approach once accepted as politically desirable. Given the COVID-19 pandemic, increasing the cost-effectiveness of healthcare systems and return on investment of public health interventions becomes even more important.

The collaborative outcomes study on health and functioning during infection times in adults (COH-FIT-Adults): Design and methods of an international online survey targeting physical and mental health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

. High-quality comprehensive data on short-/long-term physical/mental health effects of the COVID-19 pandemic are needed.

METHODS

. The Collaborative Outcomes study on Health and Functioning during Infection Times (COH-FIT) is an international, multi-language (n=30) project involving >230 investigators from 49 countries/territories/regions, endorsed by national/international professional associations. COH-FIT is a multi-wave, on-line anonymous, cross-sectional survey [wave 1: 04/2020 until the end of the pandemic, 12 months waves 2/3 starting 6/24 months threreafter] for adults, adolescents (14-17), and children (6-13), utilizing non-probability/snowball and representative sampling. COH-FIT aims to identify non-modifiable/modifiable risk factors/treatment targets to inform prevention/intervention programs to improve social/health outcomes in the general population/vulnerable subgrous during/after COVID-19. In adults, co-primary outcomes are change from pre-COVID-19 to intra-COVID-19 in well-being (WHO-5) and a composite psychopathology P-Score. Key secondary outcomes are a P-extended score, global mental and physical health. Secondary outcomes include health-service utilization/functioning, treatment adherence, functioning, symptoms/behaviors/emotions, substance use, violence, among others.

RESULTS

. Starting 04/26/2020, up to 14/07/2021 >151,000 people from 155 countries/territories/regions and six continents have participated. Representative samples of ≥1,000 adults have been collected in 15 countries. Overall, 43.0% had prior physical disorders, 16.3% had prior mental disorders, 26.5% were health care workers, 8.2% were aged ≥65 years, 19.3% were exposed to someone infected with COVID-19, 76.1% had been in quarantine, and 2.1% had been COVID 19-positive.

LIMITATIONS

. Cross-sectional survey, preponderance of non-representative participants.

CONCLUSIONS

. Results from COH-FIT will comprehensively quantify the impact of COVID-19, seeking to identify high-risk groups in need for acute and long-term intervention, and inform evidence-based health policies/strategies during this/future pandemics.

Mapping regional cooperation of state actors for health research systems in Africa: A social network analysis

Regional bodies can potentially play an important role in improving health research in Africa. This study analyses the network of African state-based regional organisations for health research and assesses their potential relationship with national health research performance metrics. After cataloguing organisations and their membership, we conducted a social network analysis to determine key network attributes of national governments' connections via regional organisations supporting functions of health research systems. This data was used to test the hypothesis that state actors with more connections to other actors via regional organisations would have higher levels of health research performance across indicators. With 21 unique regional organisations, the African continent is densely networked around health research systems issues. In general, the regional network for health research is inclusive. No single actor serves as a nexus. However, when statistics are grouped by African Union regions, influential poles emerge, with the most predominate spheres of influence in Eastern and Western Africa. Further, when connectivity data was analysed against national health research performance, there were no statistically significant relationships between increased connectivity and higher performance of key health research metrics. The inclusive and dense network dynamics of African regional organisations for health research strengthening present key opportunities for knowledge diffusion and cooperation to improve research capacity on the continent. Further reflection is needed on appropriate and meaningful ways to assess the role of regionalism and evaluate the influence of regional organisations in strengthening health research systems in Africa.

Challenges of evidence synthesis during the 2020 COVID pandemic: a scoping review

AIM

The objectives of this scoping review are to identify the challenges to conducting evidence synthesis during the COVID-19 pandemic and to propose some recommendations addressing the identified gaps.

METHODS

A scoping review methodology was followed to map the literature published on the challenges and solutions of conducting evidence synthesis using the Joanna Briggs Methodology of performing scoping review. We searched several databases from the start of the Pandemic in December 2019 until 10th June 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 28 publications was included in the review. The challenges cited in the included studies have been categorised into four distinct but interconnected themes including: upstream, Evidence synthesis, downstream and contextual challenges. These challenges have been further refined into issues with primary studies, databases, team capacity, process, resources, and context. Several proposals to improve the above challenges included: transparency in primary studies registration and reporting, establishment of online platforms that enables collaboration, data sharing and searching, the use of computable evidence and coordination of efforts at an international level.

CONCLUSION

This review has highlighted the importance of including artificial intelligence, a framework for international collaboration and a sustained funding model to address many of the shortcomings and ensure we are ready for similar challenges in the future.

Health Inequalities in the Time of COVID-19: The Globally Reinforcing Need to Strengthen Health Inequalities Research Capacities

The full impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is yet to be well established; however, as the pandemic spreads, and early results emerge, unmet needs are being revealed, and pressing questions are being asked about who is most affected, how, where, and in what ways government responses might be exacerbating inequalities. A number of scholars have called for more in-depth critical research on COVID-19 and health inequalities to produce a strong empirical evidence based on these issues. There are also justifiable concerns about the scarcity of health-equity actions oriented analyses of the situation and calls for more empirical evidence on COVID-19 and health inequalities. A preliminary condition to establish this type of information is strong capacity to conduct health inequalities research. Worldwide, however, this type of capacity is limited, which, alongside other challenges, will likely hinder capacities of many countries to develop comprehensive equity-oriented COVID-19 analyses, and adequate responses to present and future crises. The current pandemic reinforces the pending need to invest in and strengthen these research capacities. These capacities must be supported by widespread recognition and concern, cognitive social capital, and greater commitment to coordinated, transparent action, and responsibility. Otherwise, we will remain inadequately prepared to respond and meet our society's unmet needs.

Cardiovascular disease risk prevention services by pharmacists in Saudi Arabia: what do policymakers and opinion leaders think?

Background

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is an emerging contributor to national morbidity and mortality in Saudi Arabia. CVD risk prevention services are limited, particularly with an over-utilised public health sector and an under-utilised and under-resourced primary care sector. Globally, there is evidence that community pharmacists can play a key role in CVD prevention within primary care. However, the perspectives of policymakers and opinion leaders are critical to successful translation of evidence into practice. Thus, the aim was to engage policymakers and professional leaders in discussions about implementing high-quality CVD risk prevention services in community pharmacy.

Methods

Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted, audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. All transcripts were thematically analysed.

Results

A total of 23 participants (87% male) from government and non-government sectors were interviewed. Of these, almost 65% had pharmacy qualifications. Limited provision of CVD risks preventative services in primary care was acknowledged by most participants and building community pharmacists’ capacity to assist in preventive health services was viewed favourably as one way of improving the status quo. The data yielded four key themes: (1) future pharmacy CVD health service models; (2) demonstrable outcomes; (3) professional engagement and advocacy; and (4) implementability. CVD health services roles (health screening, primary and secondary prevention services), pragmatic factors and tiered models of care (minimal, medium, and comprehensive pharmacist involvement) were discussed. The need for humanistic, clinical, and cost effectiveness outcomes to be demonstrated and active involvement of professional bodies were deemed important for such services to be sustainable. Professional pharmacy governance to develop pharmacy careers and workforce, pharmacy curricular reform and ongoing education were posed as key success factors for novel pharmacy roles. Practice policies, standards, and guidelines were seen as required to adhere to stringent quality control for future pharmacy services provision. Participant’s implementation vision for such services included scalability, affordability, access, adoption and health system reform. Most discussions focused on the need for structural improvement with limited input regarding processes or outcomes required to establish such models.

Conclusions

Most participants favoured pharmacy-based CVD risk prevention services, despite the variability in proposed service models. However, prior to developing such services, support structures at the health system and health professional level are needed as well as building public support and acceptability for pharmacy services.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40545-021-00319-6.

"Rehabilitation Research Framework for Patients With COVID-19" Defined by Cochrane Rehabilitation and the World Health Organization Rehabilitation Programme

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in a surge of research activity. Since its outset, efforts have been made to guide the rapid generation of research in medicine. There are gaps in some areas of rehabilitation research for patients with COVID-19. The development of a specific research framework might serve to help monitor the status of research (mapping), shape and strengthen research by pointing to under-investigated areas, and promote rehabilitation research in this context. This article introduces and discusses the COVID-19 Rehabilitation Research Framework (CRRF) and presents the methodology used for its development. The questions have been developed among the World Health Organization (WHO) Rehabilitation Programme, Cochrane Rehabilitation, and the experts of its Rehabilitation-COVID-19 Evidence-based Response Action International Multiprofessional Steering Committee. The framework is divided into 2 parts and includes 20 questions organized in 4 groups: epidemiology, and evidence at the micro- (individual), meso- (health services), and macro- (health systems) levels. The CRRF offers a comprehensive view of the research areas relevant to COVID-19 and rehabilitation that are necessary to inform best practice and ensure rehabilitation services and health systems can best serve the population with COVID-19. The collaboration between Cochrane Rehabilitation and the WHO Rehabilitation Programme in establishing the CRRF brought together perspectives from the health systems, health management, and clinical evidence. The authors encourage researchers to use the CRRF when planning studies on rehabilitation in the context of COVID-19.

An Exploration of COVID-19 Management Policies across Nine African Countries

Background:

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has registered more than 16 million cases and has been declared a global pandemic. Social distancing measures have been recommended as part of health policies aimed at reducing the transmission of the disease. These have resulted in adverse social and economic implications; many countries are therefore discussing exit strategies for the relaxation of COVID-19 restrictions.

Aim:

To explore the COVID-19 management policies and their outcomes among 9 African countries in order to guide the upcoming and ongoing relaxation of containment and mitigation measures.

Methods:

Daily COVID-19 statistics were obtained from the World Health Organization between12th March 2020 and 17th July 2020). Data on government policies was obtained from the Human Data Exchange Program between 20th January 2020 and 24th July 2020, a service operated by the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). Data analysis was conducted using the Python (version 3) programming language modules: Pandas, NumPy, Matplotlib, Seaborn and SciPy

Results:

The most common containment and mitigation measures were under the categories of; health systems strengthening, enhanced detection measures, implementation of quarantine measures, movement restrictions and social distancing. Countries with low cases and low deaths prioritised social distancing and movement restriction policies, while countries with high cases and high deaths focused on quarantines, closures of public places and borders and public communication. High cases with low death areas implemented health systems strengthening, social distancing, detection and logistics/security improvement. Low cases with high death countries focused on public communication and improved detection measures.

Conclusion:

The current study found that social distancing measures remain an effective method of controlling COVID-19. However, coordination between government and organisations to develop social distancing protocols within businesses and specialist organisations such as the military, prisons, educational facilities and the transport industry was observed in countries with better control of the disease.