The USA's response to the 2014 Ebola outbreak could have informed its COVID-19 response

Case fatality rate for Ebola disease, 1976-2022: A meta-analysis of global data

An up-to-date pooled case fatality rate (CFR) for Ebola disease (EBOD) at the global level is lacking. We abstracted EBOD data from 1976 to 2022 for 16 countries and 42 outbreaks to conduct a meta-analysis. The pooled CFR was 60.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 51.6-69.4; 95% prediction interval 12.9-99.1). Of the four ebolaviruses, Zaire virus was the most lethal (CFR = 66.6%, 95% CI 55.9-76.8), then Sudan virus (CFR=48.5%, 95% CI 38.6-58.4), Bundibugyo virus (CFR=32.8%, 95% CI 25.8-40.2) and Tai Forest virus (CFR= 0%, 95% CI 0.0-97.5). The CFR in sub-Saharan Africa was 61.3% (95% CI 52.8-69.6) and for the rest of the world was 24.5% (95% CI 0.0-67.9%). CFR declined over time but stabilized at 61.0% (95% CI, 52.0-69.0) between 2014 and 2022. Overall, the EBOD CFR is still high and heterogeneous. Accordingly, early diagnosis, early treatment if available, and supportive care are important to prevent significant morbidity and mortality.

Is Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication as Effective as Vaccination for Preventing Virus Diffusion? Measuring the Impacts of Failure in CERC with MERS-CoV Outbreak in South Korea

This study measured the impacts of failure in Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication (CERC) during the outbreak of a contagious Corona viral disease. The study measured the impacts by the number of individuals and hospitals exposed to the virus. The 2015 Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) outbreak in South Korea was used to investigate the consequences of CERC failure, where the names of hospitals exposed to MERS-CoV were withheld from the public during the early stage of virus diffusion. Empirical data analyses and simulated model tests were conducted. The findings of analyses and tests show that an early announcement of the hospital names and publicizing the necessary preventive measures could have reduced the rate of infection by approximately 85% and the number of contaminated healthcare facilities by 39% at maximum. This level of reduction is comparable to that of vaccination and of social distancing.

Clinical Laboratory Biosafety Gaps: Lessons Learned from Past Outbreaks Reveal a Path to a Safer Future

Patient care and public health require timely, reliable laboratory testing. However, clinical laboratory professionals rarely know whether patient specimens contain infectious agents, making ensuring biosafety while performing testing procedures challenging. The importance of biosafety in clinical laboratories was highlighted during the 2014 Ebola outbreak, where concerns about biosafety resulted in delayed diagnoses and contributed to patient deaths. This review is a collaboration between subject matter experts from large and small laboratories and the federal government to evaluate the capability of clinical laboratories to manage biosafety risks and safely test patient specimens. We discuss the complexity of clinical laboratories, including anatomic pathology, and describe how applying current biosafety guidance may be difficult as these guidelines, largely based on practices in research laboratories, do not always correspond to the unique clinical laboratory environments and their specialized equipment and processes. We retrospectively describe the biosafety gaps and opportunities for improvement in the areas of risk assessment and management; automated and manual laboratory disciplines; specimen collection, processing, and storage; test utilization; equipment and instrumentation safety; disinfection practices; personal protective equipment; waste management; laboratory personnel training and competency assessment; accreditation processes; and ethical guidance. Also addressed are the unique biosafety challenges successfully handled by a Texas community hospital clinical laboratory that performed testing for patients with Ebola without a formal biocontainment unit. The gaps in knowledge and practices identified in previous and ongoing outbreaks demonstrate the need for collaborative, comprehensive solutions to improve clinical laboratory biosafety and to better combat future emerging infectious disease outbreaks.