Characterizing Community Hesitancy in Ebola Response: Responder Reflections from the Sudan Ebolavirus Disease (SVD) 2022 Outbreak in Uganda

Author:

Opesen Chris. C1,Njuguna Charles Kuria2,Komakech Innocent1,Adhiambo Elizabeth Mgamb1,Kabanda Richard3,Sensasi Benjamin1,Kagirita Atek4,Ngabirano Annet Alenyo1,Atuhaire Immaculate1,Ochien Maurice Emmanuel1,Akweny Solome Okware5,Amone Jackson1,Tola Habteyes1,Braka Fiona2,Nanyunja Miriam1,Katushabe Edson1,Ssenyonga Muzafalu1,Bodo Bongomin1,Niwagaba Andrew Bakainaga1,Anoko Julienne Ngoundoung1,Chimbaru Alexander1,Okot Charles Lukoya2,Kyobe Henry B4,Woldemariam Yonas Tegegn1

Affiliation:

1. World Health Organisation

2. World Health Organisation Africa Regional Office

3. Martyrs University

4. Ministry of Health

5. Makerere University

Abstract

Abstract

Background: Thearticle explores community emergency response intervention hesitancy using reflections from the Sudan Ebolavirus Disease (SVD) 2022 outbreak response in Uganda. Methods: Data from participant observation are complemented with data from four other sources particularly, documentary reviews, ethnographic group discussions (12), informant interviews (60) and transect drives for social risk mapping. Results: The main results indicate that, community emergency response intervention hesitancy in the SVD 2022 outbreak response in Uganda occurred both in direct and non-direct forms. The direct ones included some suspected cases refusing to go to and/or running away from isolation units (IUs) and Ebola treatment units (ETUs), some bereaved families refusing to handover bodies for safe and dignified burials (SDBs) and accosting responders, some bereaved families exhuming and reburying SVD bodies and survivors having sex without protection. The indirect ones included dual naming and false identity declarations, visiting traditional healers and spiritual leaders, hiding identities of high-risk contacts, secretly burying the dead at night and lastly, changing location of or taking patients to other districts Conclusions: The conclusion the study generates is that to avert community emergency response intervention hesitancy, response teams should strike a balance between the health protocol prioritization on one hand and the environmental and socio-economic context of the outbreak on the other hand that includes, lived and observed transgenerational experiences. This must be augmented with a sustained integrated community engagement action that the study found critical to recovery of community trust and control of outbreaks in the community.

Publisher

Research Square Platform LLC

Reference38 articles.

1. MoH. National Action Plan for Health Security 2019–2023. 2019.

2. Tackling Deadly Diseases in Africa: Key Considerations for Epidemic Response and Preparedness in Uganda;Kaawa-Mafigiri D;Social Sci Action,2021

3. USAID. Uganda environmental threats and opportunities assessment (ETOA): Final ETOA report. 2015.

4. MTWA. Ministerial Policy Statement 2013/2014. Kampala: Ministry of Tourism, Wildlife and Heritage; 2023.

5. NEMA. National biodiversity strategy and action plan II (2015–2025). 2016. 121 p.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3