METHODOLOGY: A mutlinational study was conducted from April-June 2020 involving researchers from 12 countries (Japan, Austria, U.S., Taiwan, India, Sudan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Myanmar, Vietnam and Thailand). Steps in this research consisted of carrying out open-ended questionnaires, qualitative analyses in NVivo, and a multinational meeting to reflect, exchange, and validate results. Lastly, a commuinty response model was synthesized from multinational experiences.
RESULTS: Effective communication is key in promoting collective action for preventing virus transmission. Health literacy, habits and social norms in different populations are core components of public health interventions. To enable people to stay home while sustaining livelihoods, economic and social support are essential. Countries could benefit from previous pandemic experience in their community response. Whilst contact tracing and isolation are crucial intervention components, issues of privacy and human rights need to be considered.
CONCLUSIONS: Understanding community responses to containment policies will help in ending current and future pandemics in the world.
RESULTS: A total of 36 studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. Numerous stakeholders were identified as involved in the intersectoral actions to defeat malaria amongst MMPs. Almost all studies discussed the involvement of Ministry of Health/Public Health (MOH/MOPH). The most frequently assessed intervention among the studies that were included was the coverage and utilization of insecticide-treated nets as personal protective measures (40.5%), followed by the intervention of early diagnoses and treatment of malaria (33.3%), the surveillance and response activities (13.9%) and the behaviour change communication (8.3%). There is a dearth of information on how these stakeholders shared roles and responsibilities for implementation, and about the channels of communication between-and-within the partners and with the MOH/MOPH. Despite limited details in the studies, the intermediate outcomes showed some evidence that the intersectoral collaborations contributed to improvement in knowledge about malaria, initiation and promotion of bed nets utilization, increased access to diagnosis and treatment in a surveillance context and contributed towards a reduction in malaria transmission. Overall, a high proportion of the targeted MMPs was equipped with correct knowledge about malaria transmission (70%, 95% CI 57-83%). Interventions targeting the use of bed nets utilization were two times more likely to reduce malaria incidence amongst the targeted MMPs (summary OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.43-2.6) than the non-users. The various intersectoral actions were often more vertically organized and not fully integrated in a systemic way within a given country or sub-national administrative setting.
CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that interventions supported by the multiple stakeholders had a significant impact on the reduction of malaria transmission amongst the targeted MMPs. Well-designed studies from different countries are recommended to robustly assess the role of intersectoral interventions targeted to MMPs and their impact on the reduction of transmission.
METHODS: This study adopted the mixed-method approach using both qualitative and quantitative data. The qualitative study relied on two data collection methods to explore the impacts of COVID-19 control measures on women and children in Ghana. These were: Focus Group Discussions (FGDs; n = 12) and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs; n = 18). The study complemented the qualitative data with survey data - household surveys (n = 78) which were used to support the nutrition and school closure data; and policy data gathered from government websites consisting of government responses to COVID-19. The qualitative data was analysed using the thematic approach with codes generated apriori with the NVIVO software. The quantitative data used percentages and frequencies.
RESULTS: Engagements with participants in the study revealed that the lockdown measures implemented in Ghana had consequences on child and maternal health, and the health care system as a whole. Our study revealed, for example, that there was a decrease in antenatal and postnatal attendance in hospitals. Childhood vaccinations also came to a halt. Obesity and malnutrition were found to be common among children depending on the location of our study participants (urban and rural areas respectively). Our study also revealed that TB, Malaria and HIV treatment seeking reduced due to the fear of going to health facilities since those ailments manifest similar symptoms as COVID 19.
CONCLUSION: Government responded to COVID-19 using different strategies however the policy response resulted in both intended and unintended consequences especially for women and children in Ghana. It is recommended that national policy directions should ensure the continuous provision of child and maternal healthcare services which are essential health services during lockdowns.
METHODS: A online cross-sectional survey was conducted with the people living in Wuhan between March 12th and 23rd, 2020.
RESULTS: Of a total of 2411 complete responses, the mean and standard deviation for the total physical prevention barriers score was 19.73 (standard deviation ± 5.3; range 12-45) out of a possible score of 48. Using a cut-off score of 44 for the State-Trait Inventory score, 79.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 78.2-81.5) of the participants reported moderate to severe anxiety during the early phase of the outbreak, and 51.3% (95% CI 49.2-53.3) reported moderate to severe anxiety after the peak of coronavirus disease 2019 was over (during the study period). Comparing anxiety levels in the early phase of the outbreak and after the peak of the outbreak, 58.5% (95% CI 56.5-60.5) recorded a decreased anxiety. Females reported a higher likelihood of having decreased levels of anxiety than males (odds ratio = 1.78, 95% CI 1.48-2.14). Low negative attitudes score were associated with a higher decrease in anxiety (odds ratio = 1.59, 95% CI 1.33-1.89).
CONCLUSIONS: The attitudinal barriers to prevention of transmission of coronavirus disease 2019 are more prominent than physical prevention barriers after the peak of coronavirus disease 2019. High anxiety levels even after the peak warrant serious attention.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A validated database was used to generate data related to countries with declared lockdown. Simple regression analysis was conducted to assess the rate of change in infection and death rates. Subsequently, a k-means and hierarchical cluster analysis was done to identify the countries that performed similarly. Sweden and South Korea were included as counties without lockdown in a second-phase cluster analysis.
RESULTS: There was a significant 61% and 43% reduction in infection rates 1-week post lockdown in the overall and India cohorts, respectively, supporting its effectiveness. Countries with higher baseline infections and deaths (Spain, Germany, Italy, UK, and France-cluster 1) fared poorly compared to those who declared lockdown early on (Belgium, Austria, New Zealand, India, Hungary, Poland and Malaysia-cluster 2). Sweden and South Korea, countries without lock-down, fared as good as the countries in cluster 2.
CONCLUSION: Lockdown has proven to be an effective strategy is slowing down the SARS-CoV-2 disease progression (infection rate and death) exponentially. The success story of non-lock-down countries (Sweden and South Korea) need to be explored in detail, to identify the variables responsible for the positive results.
METHODS: This was a randomized controlled parallel-group trial in which 372 antenatal care attendees were randomly assigned to either an intervention or control group after collecting baseline data using a structured questionnaire. The intervention group received a 4-h health education on malaria, guided by a module developed based on the IMB theory, while the control group received health education on breastfeeding for a similar duration and by the same facilitator. Follow-up data were subsequently collected at 2 months and at 4 months post-intervention using the same questionnaire. The generalized linear mixed models analysis was used to determine the between-group and within-group effects of the intervention. The intention-to-treat analysis was used after missing data had been replaced. This was followed by a sensitivity analysis, where the analyses were repeated without replacing the missing values.
RESULTS: The intervention was significant in achieving a 12.75% (p control group. The sensitivity analysis revealed no great differences in the effect sizes, even when missing data were not replaced.
CONCLUSION: The intervention module was effective in improving knowledge, motivation and behavioural skills. It is as such recommended to be adopted and incorporated into the routine antenatal health education schedules. It is also recommended that booster doses of the module be given say 2 months after the first dose to sustain levels of motivation and behavioural skills. Trial registration Pan African Clinical Trial Registry, PACTR201610001823405. Registered 26 October 2016, http://www.pactr.org.