Cargando…

Assessment of Ebola virus disease preparedness in the WHO South-East Asia Region

OBJECTIVE: To conduct assessments of Ebola virus disease preparedness in countries of the World Health Organization (WHO) South-East Asia Region. METHODS: Nine of 11 countries in the region agreed to be assessed. During February to November 2015 a joint team from WHO and ministries of health conduct...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vong, Sirenda, Samuel, Reuben, Gould, Philip, El Sakka, Hammam, Rana, Bardan J, Pinyowiwat, Vason, Bezbaruah, Supriya, Ofrin, Roderico
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: World Health Organization 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5153931/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27994284
http://dx.doi.org/10.2471/BLT.16.174441
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: To conduct assessments of Ebola virus disease preparedness in countries of the World Health Organization (WHO) South-East Asia Region. METHODS: Nine of 11 countries in the region agreed to be assessed. During February to November 2015 a joint team from WHO and ministries of health conducted 4–5 day missions to Bangladesh, Bhutan, Indonesia, Maldives, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Timor-Leste. We collected information through guided discussions with senior technical leaders and visits to hospitals, laboratories and airports. We assessed each country’s Ebola virus disease preparedness on 41 tasks under nine key components adapted from the WHO Ebola preparedness checklist of January 2015. FINDINGS: Political commitment to Ebola preparedness was high in all countries. Planning was most advanced for components that had been previously planned or tested for influenza pandemics: multilevel and multisectoral coordination; multidisciplinary rapid response teams; public communication and social mobilization; drills in international airports; and training on personal protective equipment. Major vulnerabilities included inadequate risk assessment and risk communication; gaps in data management and analysis for event surveillance; and limited capacity in molecular diagnostic techniques. Many countries had limited planning for a surge of Ebola cases. Other tasks needing improvement included: advice to inbound travellers; adequate isolation rooms; appropriate infection control practices; triage systems in hospitals; laboratory diagnostic capacity; contact tracing; and danger pay to staff to ensure continuity of care. CONCLUSION: Joint assessment and feedback about the functionality of Ebola virus preparedness systems help countries strengthen their core capacities to meet the International Health Regulations.