Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council, Box 19070, Cape Town, PO, 7505, South Africa.
Vaccines for Africa Initiative, Division of Medical Microbiology and Institute of Infectious Disease and Molecular Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
BMC Infect Dis. 2018 Nov 14;18(1):567. doi: 10.1186/s12879-018-3466-1.
Prior to the 2009 pandemic H1N1, and the unprecedented outbreak of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) caused by the H5N1 virus, the World Health Organization (WHO) called upon its Member States to develop preparedness plans in response to a new pandemic in humans. The WHO Member States responded to this call by developing national pandemic plans in accordance with the International Health Regulations (IHR) to strengthen the capabilities of Member States to respond to different pandemic scenarios. In this study, we aim to evaluate the quality of the preparedness plans in the WHO African region since their inception in 2005.
A standard checklist with 61 binary indicators ("yes" or "no") was used to assess the quality of the preparedness plans. The checklist was categorised across seven thematic areas of preparedness: preparation (16 indicators); coordination and partnership (5 indicators); risk communication (8 indicators); surveillance and monitoring (7 indicators); prevention and containment (10 indicators); case investigation and treatment (10 indicators) and ethical consideration (5 indicators). Four assessors independently scored the plans against the checklist.
Of the 47 countries in the WHO African region, a total of 35 national pandemic plans were evaluated. The composite score for the completeness of the pandemic plans across the 35 countries was 36%. Country-specific scores on each of the thematic indicators for pandemic plan completeness varied, ranging from 5% in Côte d'Ivoire to 79% in South Africa. On average, preparation and risk communication scored 48%, respectively, while coordination and partnership scored the highest with an aggregate score of 49%. Surveillance and monitoring scored 34%, while prevention and containment scored 35%. Case investigation and treatment scored 25%, and ethical consideration scored the lowest of 14% across 35 countries. Overall, our assessment shows that pandemic preparedness plans across the WHO African region are inadequate.
Moving forward, these plans must address the gaps identified in this study and demonstrate clarity in their goals that are achievable through drills, simulations and tabletop exercises.
在 2009 年大流行的 H1N1 流感和前所未有的 H5N1 病毒高致病性禽流感(HPAI)爆发之前,世界卫生组织(WHO)呼吁其成员国制定应对人类新大流行的准备计划。世卫组织成员国根据《国际卫生条例》(IHR)制定了国家大流行计划,以加强成员国应对不同大流行情景的能力。在这项研究中,我们旨在评估自 2005 年以来世卫组织非洲区域准备计划的质量。
使用带有 61 个二进制指标(“是”或“否”)的标准检查表来评估准备计划的质量。检查表按七个准备主题领域进行分类:准备(16 个指标);协调与伙伴关系(5 个指标);风险沟通(8 个指标);监测和监测(7 个指标);预防和遏制(10 个指标);病例调查和治疗(10 个指标)和伦理考虑(5 个指标)。四名评估员根据检查表对计划进行了独立评分。
在世卫组织非洲区域的 47 个国家中,共评估了 35 个国家大流行计划。35 个国家大流行计划完整性的综合评分为 36%。每个主题指标的国家特定得分因国家而异,从科特迪瓦的 5%到南非的 79%不等。平均而言,准备和风险沟通分别得分为 48%,而协调与伙伴关系的得分最高,总分为 49%。监测和监测得分为 34%,预防和遏制得分为 35%。病例调查和治疗得分为 25%,伦理考虑得分为 14%,在 35 个国家中得分最低。总体而言,我们的评估表明,世卫组织非洲区域的大流行准备计划不足。
今后,这些计划必须解决本研究中确定的差距,并明确其目标,这些目标可以通过演练、模拟和桌面演习来实现。