W Bazeyo, Roy W Mayega, I Nabukenya, J Keyyu, S Mamuya, S J Tabu, L Senna, M Mohammad, E Rugigana, A Alingi, M Mapatano, J Kiguli, C G Orach, G Burnham, J Killewo
{"title":"Institutional frameworks for management of epizoonotic emergencies in six countries in the Eastern Africa region: a situational analysis.","authors":"W Bazeyo, Roy W Mayega, I Nabukenya, J Keyyu, S Mamuya, S J Tabu, L Senna, M Mohammad, E Rugigana, A Alingi, M Mapatano, J Kiguli, C G Orach, G Burnham, J Killewo","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The Eastern Africa region is a hot-spot for epidemics of emerging zoonotic diseases ('epizoonotics'). However, the region's capacity for response to epidemics of zoonotic origin has not been documented. This paper presents a multi-country situational analysis on the institutional frameworks for management of zoonotic epidemics in the Eastern Africa region.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A multi-country assessment of 6 country teams was conducted (Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Ethiopia, DRC and Rwanda). It involved a review of records and interviews with key informants from agencies with a stake in the management of zoonotic and disasters in general in the respective countries. Qualitative data were analyzed for key emerging themes.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>There are many socio-cultural risk factors to epidemic prone zoonotic diseases in the region. Countries have varying levels of preparedness for zoonotic emergencies. All 6 countries have a framework for disaster management. However, technical response to epidemics is managed by the line sectors, with limited Inter-sectoral collaboration. Some sectors were disproportionately more prepared than others. Surveillance systems are mostly passive and inadequate for early detection. All 6 countries have built reasonable capacity to respond to avian influenza, but not other zoonotic emergencies. Most countries lack personnel at the operational levels, and veterinary public health services are ill-facilitated.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is need to strengthen veterinary public health services at all levels, but with a 'one health' approach. There is also need to establish 'risk-based surveillance' hot spots for zoonotic epidemics and to build community resilience 'epizoonotic' diseases.</p>","PeriodicalId":87601,"journal":{"name":"East African journal of public health","volume":"10 2","pages":"387-96"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"East African journal of public health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: The Eastern Africa region is a hot-spot for epidemics of emerging zoonotic diseases ('epizoonotics'). However, the region's capacity for response to epidemics of zoonotic origin has not been documented. This paper presents a multi-country situational analysis on the institutional frameworks for management of zoonotic epidemics in the Eastern Africa region.
Methods: A multi-country assessment of 6 country teams was conducted (Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Ethiopia, DRC and Rwanda). It involved a review of records and interviews with key informants from agencies with a stake in the management of zoonotic and disasters in general in the respective countries. Qualitative data were analyzed for key emerging themes.
Findings: There are many socio-cultural risk factors to epidemic prone zoonotic diseases in the region. Countries have varying levels of preparedness for zoonotic emergencies. All 6 countries have a framework for disaster management. However, technical response to epidemics is managed by the line sectors, with limited Inter-sectoral collaboration. Some sectors were disproportionately more prepared than others. Surveillance systems are mostly passive and inadequate for early detection. All 6 countries have built reasonable capacity to respond to avian influenza, but not other zoonotic emergencies. Most countries lack personnel at the operational levels, and veterinary public health services are ill-facilitated.
Conclusion: There is need to strengthen veterinary public health services at all levels, but with a 'one health' approach. There is also need to establish 'risk-based surveillance' hot spots for zoonotic epidemics and to build community resilience 'epizoonotic' diseases.