Safely resuming neglected tropical disease control activities during COVID-19: Perspectives from Nigeria and Guinea

Since its early spread in early 2020, the disease caused by the novel Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused mass disruptions to health services. These have included interruptions to programs that aimed to prevent, control, and eliminate neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). In March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) released interim guidelines recommending the temporary cessation of mass drug administration (MDA), community-based surveys, and case detection, while encouraging continuation of morbidity management and vector control where possible. Over the course of the following months, national programs and implementing partners contributed to COVID-19 response efforts, while also beginning to plan for resumption of NTD control activities. To understand the challenges, opportunities, and recommendations for maximizing continuity of disease control during public health emergencies, we sought perspectives from Nigeria and Guinea on the process of restarting NTD control efforts during the COVID-19 pandemic. Through semistructured interviews with individuals involved with NTD control at the local and national levels, we identified key themes and common perspectives between the 2 countries, as well as observations that were specific to each. Overall, interviewees stressed the challenges posed by COVID-19 interruptions, particularly with respect to delays to activities and related knock-on impacts, such as drug expiry and prolonged elimination timelines, as well as concerns related to funding. However, respondents in both countries also highlighted the benefits of a formal risk assessment approach, particularly in terms of encouraging information sharing and increasing coordination and advocacy. Recommendations included ensuring greater availability of historical data to allow better monitoring of how future emergencies affect NTD control progress; continuing to use risk assessment approaches in the future; and identifying mechanisms for sharing lessons learned and innovations between countries as a means of advancing postpandemic health systems and disease control capacity strengthening.

Neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) are a group of medically diverse diseases that affect over 1 billion people, predominantly in tropical and subtropical areas, and can cause severe long-term disability and even death. Controlled through mass drug administration (MDA), morbidity management, and/or vector control, NTD programs work closely with communities to identify cases, conduct surveys, and achieve target coverage levels for interventions. The advent of the pandemic of the novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in early 2020 led to major disruptions to all facets of life, including health services, with NTD control efforts no exception. Per interim guidelines released by the World Health Organization (WHO) in March 2020, most control activities were halted and only resumed much later in 2020. We sought perspectives from NTD control stakeholders at the subnational and national levels in Guinea and Nigeria regarding the process of planning and executing the resumption of NTD activities to identify challenges, opportunities, and recommendations that might be applicable both to other countries that have experienced disruptions to NTD control efforts during the pandemic and to increase the resilience of NTD programs in the face of future public health emergencies.

Opportunities and challenges to integrating mental health into HIV programs in a low- and middle-income country: insights from the Nigeria implementation science Alliance

Background

In Nigeria, there is an estimated 1.9 million people living with HIV (PLHIV), 53% of whom utilize HIV care and services. With decreasing HIV-related deaths and increasing new infections, HIV with its associated comorbidities continue to be a key public health challenge in Nigeria. Untreated, comorbid mental disorders are a critical but potentially modifiable determinant of optimal HIV treatment outcomes.

This study aimed to identify the challenges and opportunities related to integrating mental health care into existing HIV programs in Nigeria.

Method

Attendees at the Nigeria Implementation Science Alliance (NISA)‘s 2019 conference participated in nominal group technique (NGT) exercise informed by the “Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment (EPIS)” framework. The NGT process was conducted among the nominal groups in two major sessions of 30-min phases followed by a 30-min plenary session. Data analysis proceeded in four steps: transcription, collation, theming and content analysis.

Results

The two major theoretical themes from the study were – opportunities and challenges of integrating mental health treatment into HIV services. Three sub-themes emerged on opportunities: building on health care facilities for HIV services (screening, counseling, task-sharing monitoring and evaluation frameworks), utilizing existing human resources or workforce in HIV programs (in-service training and including mental health in education curriculum) and the role of social and cultural structures (leveraging existing community, traditional and faith-based infrastructures). Four sub-themes emerged for challenges: double burden of stigma and the problems of early detection (HIV and mental health stigma, lack of awareness), existing policy gaps and structural challenges (fragmented health system), limited human resources for mental health care in Nigeria (knowledge gap and burnout) and dearth of data/evidence for planning and action (research gaps).

Conclusions

Potential for integrating treatments for mental disorders into HIV programs and services exist in Nigeria. These include opportunities for clinicians’ training and capacity building as well as community partnerships. Multiple barriers and challenges such as stigma, policy and research gaps would need to be addressed to leverage these opportunities. Our findings serve as a useful guide for government agencies, policy makers and research organizations to address co-morbid mental disorders among PLHIV in Nigeria.

National and subnational governance and decision-making processes during the COVID-19 pandemic in Nigeria: an empirical analysis

Governance of the COVID-19 pandemic required decision-makers to make and implement decisions amidst uncertainty, public pressure and time constraints. However, few studies have attempted to assess these decision-making processes empirically during health emergencies. Thus, we aimed to understand governance, defined as the process of decision-making and implementation of decisions, during the COVID-19 pandemic in Nigeria. We conducted key informant interviews and focus group discussions with national and subnational government officials, civil society organisation (CSO) members, development partners and academic experts. Our study identified several themes on governance and decision-making processes. First, Nigeria established high-level decision-making structures at the federal and state levels, providing clear and integrated multisectoral decision-making mechanism. However, due to the emergence of conflicts between government levels, there is a need to strengthen intergovernmental arrangements. Second, while decision-makers relied on input from academic experts and CSOs, additional efforts are required to engage such stakeholders in decision-making processes, especially during the early stages of health emergencies. Third, Nigeria's previous experiences responding to disease outbreaks aided the overall response, as many capacities and coordination mechanisms for cohesive action were present. Fourth, while decision-makers took a holistic view of scientific, social and economic factors for decision-making, this process was also adaptive to account for rapidly evolving information. Lastly, more efforts are needed to ensure decisions are inclusive, equitable and transparent, and improve overall public trust in governance processes. This study provides insights and identifies opportunities to enhance governance and decision-making processes in health emergency responses, aiding future pandemic preparedness efforts.

Decision-making under epistemic, strategic and institutional uncertainty during COVID-19: findings from a six-country empirical study

BACKGROUND

Uncertainty is defined as limited knowledge or lack of predictability about past, present or future events. The COVID-19 pandemic management was significantly impacted by uncertainty, as the gaps between existing information and the necessary knowledge hindered decision-making. Current uncertainty literature primarily focuses on natural disasters, leaving a gap in understanding decision-making under uncertainty in times of public health emergencies. Analysing strategies for making decisions under uncertainty during the pandemic is crucial for future pandemic preparedness.

METHODS

Using a comparative research design, we study the strategies governments used to make decisions under uncertainty during the COVID-19 pandemic. We collected data through desk reviews, stakeholder interviews and focus group discussions with stakeholders from government, academia and civil society from six purposefully selected countries: Nigeria, Singapore, South Africa, Bangladesh, Jordan and the UK.

RESULTS

Regardless of political, geographic and economic context, all six countries adopted common strategies to make decisions under three types of uncertainties. Decision-making under epistemic uncertainty involved seeking expert advice and collecting evidence from other countries and international organisations. Decision-making under strategic uncertainty involved coordination, collaboration and communication. Decision-making under institutional uncertainty involved using or adapting pre-existing experiences, structures and relationships and establishing new institutions and processes.

CONCLUSIONS

We contribute to the theory and practice of public health crisis decision-making by presenting a unified national-level applied decision-making framework for events involving uncertainty. We provide practical guidance for approaches to enhance decision-making in future health crises that could also be used for other emergencies.