An Ethnographic Examination of People's Reactions to State-Led COVID-19 Measures in Sierra Leone

COVID-19 preparedness and response in rural and remote areas: A scoping review

This scoping review used the Arksey and O'Malley approach to explore COVID-19 preparedness and response in rural and remote areas to identify lessons to inform future health preparedness and response planning. A search of scientific and grey literature for rural COVID-19 preparedness and responses identified 5 668 articles published between 2019 and early 2022. A total of 293 articles were included, of which 160 (54.5%) were from high income countries and 106 (36.2%) from middle income countries. Studies focused mostly on the Maintenance of Essential Health Services (63; 21.5%), Surveillance, epidemiological investigation, contact tracing and adjustment of public health and social measures (60; 20.5%), Coordination and Planning (32; 10.9%); Case Management (30; 10.2%), Social Determinants of Health (29; 10%) and Risk Communication (22; 7.5%). Rural health systems were less prepared and national COVID-19 responses were often not adequately tailored to rural areas. Promising COVID-19 responses involved local leaders and communities, were collaborative and multisectoral, and engaged local cultures. Non-pharmaceutical interventions were applied less, support for access to water and sanitation at scale was weak, and more targeted approaches to the isolation of cases and quarantine of contacts were preferable to blanket lockdowns. Rural pharmacists, community health workers and agricultural extension workers assisted in overcoming shortages of health professionals. Vaccination coverage was hindered by weaker rural health systems. Digital technology enabled better coordination, communication, and access to health services, yet for some was inaccessible. Rural livelihoods and food security were affected through disruptions to local labour markets, farm produce markets and input supply chains. Important lessons include the need for rural proofing national health preparedness and response and optimizing synergies between top-down planning with localised planning and coordination. Equity-oriented rural health systems strengthening and action on rural social determinants is essential to better prepare for and respond to future outbreaks.

Perceived coercion, perceived pressures and procedural justice arising from global lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic: A scoping review

This aim of this scoping review is to map what is known about perceived coercion, perceived pressures and procedural justice within the context of the general population's experience of 'lockdowns' imposed by governments worldwide in response to the increased transmission of COVID-19. Arksey & O'Malley's (2005) framework for conducting scoping reviews was chosen. A sensitive search strategy was devised and conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science using the following search terms: (adherence OR acceptance OR agreement OR trust OR distrust OR compliance OR willing*) OR (perceived coerc* OR percept* coerc* OR pressure OR force OR influence OR control OR threat OR justice) AND (lockdown) AND (COVID OR SARS-CoV-2 OR COVID-19). The database search initially produced 41,628 articles to screen. A total of 40 articles were included in this review and the following five themes were identified from the studies: perceived acceptability and willingness to adhere to lockdown; perceived control during lockdown; perceived pressures arising from lockdown; perceived threat of sanction from others and the procedural (in)justice of lockdown. Our synthesis suggests that i) individuals experienced an initial willingness and tolerance of lockdown that lessened over time as perceptions of personal control decreased; ii) that social influences may pressure individuals to follow or break lockdown rules; and iii) that justifiability and proportionality together with individuals' perceptions of harm from COVID-19 may impact the extent to which individuals adhere to lockdown. Furthermore, the review found an absence of information regarding specific individual characteristics and circumstances that increase the likelihood of experiencing perceived coercion and its related constructs and highlights a need for a better understanding of the cultural and socioeconomic factors affecting perceptions of, and adherence to, lockdown.

Epidemiological Trends of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Sierra Leone From March 2020 to October 2021

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), a serious public health challenge the world over, has led to significant health concerns in Sierra Leone. In the present study, epidemic indices, such as the number of cases, positivity rate, reproduction rate (R0), case fatality rate (CFR), age, and sex, were used to characterize the epidemiological trends of COVID-19. As of October 31, 2021, a total of 6,398 cases and 121 related deaths had been confirmed. The total number of COVID-19 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests conducted to October 31, 2021, was 249,534, and the average positivity rate was 2.56%. Three waves of COVID-19 were recorded, occurring during weeks 15–46 in 2020 (2,369 cases), week 47 in 2020 to week 16 in 2021 (1,665 cases), and weeks 17–43 in 2021 (2,364 cases), respectively. Remarkably, there was no increase in the numbers of confirmed COVID-19 cases despite rising test numbers throughout the three waves. Moreover, three high R0 values were observed before each wave. The number of positive cases significantly correlated with positive numbers of international arrivals (P < 0.01), deaths (P < 0.01), and the positivity rate of tested samples (P < 0.01). Moreover, all of the deaths occurred during the peak of the three waves. Our results indicate that there was a low level of COVID-19 epidemic in Sierra Leone and that COVID-19's introduction led to local transmission. It is vital to fight against the spread of SARS-CoV-2 from the source of origin by strengthening testing and management of people entering the country. Our findings will provide important clues for expanding sample screening and will contribute to the reasonable allocation of medical resources.

Community-Level Experiences, Understandings, and Responses to COVID-19 in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review of Qualitative and Ethnographic Studies

(1) Background: COVID-19 disruptions offer researchers insight into how pandemics are at once biological and social threats, as communities struggle to construct meaning from novel challenges to their ontological status quo. Multiple epistemes, in which public health imperatives confront and negotiate locally derived knowledge and traditions, vie for legitimacy and agency, resulting in new cultural forms. (2) Methods: To investigate the context and construction of community responses, a systematic review of qualitative literature was conducted with the aim of evaluating those insights provided by empirical, social field research in low- and middle-income countries since the onset of COVID-19. Six scholarly databases were searched for empirical, qualitative, field-based, or participatory research that was published in peer-reviewed journals between December 2019 and August 2021. (3) Results: Twenty-five studies were selected for data extraction, following critical appraisal for methodological rigor by two independent reviewers, and were then analyzed thematically. Faced with unprecedented social ruptures, restrictions in social and physical mobility, and ever-looming uncertainties of infection, financial insecurity, stigma, and loss, communities worldwide reacted in multiple and complex ways. Pervasive misinformation and fear of social rejection resulted in noncompliance with pandemic sanctions, resistance, and increased isolation, allowing the spread of the disease. The meaning of, and understandings about, COVID-19 were constructed using traditional, religious, and biomedical epistemologies, which were occasionally in conflict with each other. Innovations and adaptations, through syntheses of traditional and biomedical discourses and practice, illustrated community resilience and provided models for successful engagement to improve public health outcomes. (4) Conclusion: Local context and community engagement were indispensable considerations when enacting effective public health interventions to meet the challenges of the pandemic.