Biosafety and biosecurity capacity building: insights from implementation of the NUITM-KEMRI biosafety training model

Measuring training effectiveness of laboratory biosafety program offered at African Center for Integrated Laboratory Training in 22 President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief supported countries (2008-2014)

INTRODUCTION

The African Center for Integrated Laboratory Training (ACILT) in Johannesburg, South Africa offered a laboratory biosafety program to improve laboratory biosafety practices in 22 President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) supported countries. This manuscript evaluates the transference of newly gained knowledge and skills to the participants' place of employment for HIV and TB diagnostic laboratory programs. It also serves as a follow-on to a previously published manuscript that measured training effectiveness for all courses offered at ACILT.

METHODS

ACILT offered 20 Laboratory Biosafety and Infrastructure courses (2008-2014), also referred as biosafety course/course comprising of 14 core laboratory safety elements to 402 participants from 22 countries. In 2015, participants received 22 e-questions divided into four categories: (1) Safety Policies, (2) Management's Engagement, (3) Safety Programs and (4) Assessments of Safety Practices to determine retrospectively the training effectiveness of biosafety practices in their place of employment 6 months before and after attending their course. We used Kirkpatrick model to assess the transference of knowledge, skills and obstructive factors.

RESULTS

20% (81/402) of the participants completed the e-questionnaire. The overall percentage of positive responses indicating implementation of new safety practices increased from 50% to 84%. Improvement occurred in all four categories after attending the course, with the greatest increases in Safety Policies (67-94%) and Safety Programs (43-91%). Creating a safety committee, allocating resources, and establishing a facility safety policy were important drivers for implementing and maintaining laboratory safety practices. In addition, accredited laboratories and countries with national safety regulations or policies had a higher percentage of improvements. The most reported challenges were inadequate funding and lack of management enforcement.

CONCLUSIONS

PEPFAR and other partners' investments in training institutions, such as ACILT, were effective in building sustainable country ownership to strengthen biosafety practices and were leveraged to combat zoonotic diseases and COVID-19. Although support continues at the national/regional level, a standardized, coordinated and continent-wide sustainable approach to offer a biosafety program-like ACILT is missing. Continuous offerings of biosafety programs similar to ACILT could contribute to sustainable strengthening of laboratory biosafety, QMS and pandemic preparedness.

How Does Epidemic Prevention Training for Pig Breeding Affect Cleaning and Disinfection Procedures Adoption? Evidence from Chinese Pig Farms

African Swine Fever (ASF) is a highly infectious disease, severely affecting domestic pigs and wild boar. It has significantly contributed to economic losses within the pig farming industry. As a critical component of biosecurity measures, the selection of cleaning and disinfection (C&D) procedures is a dynamic and long-term decision that demands a deeper knowledge base among pig farmers. This study uses a binary logit model to explore the effect of epidemic prevention training on the adoption of C&D procedures among pig farmers with irregular and regular C&D procedures based on micro-survey data obtained from 333 pig farmers from Sichuan. The endogeneity issue was handled using propensity score matching, resulting in solid conclusions. In addition, the critical mediating impact of biosecurity cognition was investigated using a bootstrap analysis. The empirical study demonstrated that epidemic prevention training encourages pig farmers to adopt C&D procedures, with biosecurity cognition significantly mediating. Furthermore, epidemic prevention training was more likely to promote the adoption of C&D procedures among pig farmers with shorter breeding experiences and those having breeding insurance. Our study emphasized the importance of implementing epidemic prevention training to improving pig farmers' biosecurity cognition and promoting the adoption of C&D procedures. The results included suggested references for preventing ASF and the next epidemic of animal diseases.

Effectiveness of international virtual training on biorisk management in the context of COVID-19

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in enormous increases in laboratory activities to keep pace with diagnostic testing and research efforts. However, traditional training, technical assistance, and capacity-building approaches were disrupted by the travel and movement restrictions put in place to control the spread of the disease. To address the needs of laboratorians and managers to conduct laboratory activities safely and securely during the pandemic, a highly interactive virtual training (IVT) workshop on biorisk management during COVID-19 was conducted through active learning strategies that connected speakers with participants. The objective of the training was to increase the basic knowledge and standards of biosafety and biosecurity practices, risk assessment, and control measures with reference specifically to the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and apply a rigorous evaluation methodology to assess the effectiveness of the IVT. The training covered a broad range of topics and encompassed national to international guidelines.

Methods

Participants were selected through official channels at the national level, focusing on institutions within Pakistan. The sessions included lectures from international experts in biorisk management concepts, and incorporated poll questions as well as pre- and post-tests and feedback on the speakers' knowledge and presentation skills, to increase interactivity. The pre- and post-test comprised similar multiple-choice questions and provided to every participant to ascertain the impact of the training on awareness and knowledge of biorisk management topics and concepts, and results were compared using paired t-tests. For feedback on the speakers, participants were asked to submit their ratings measured on a five-point Likert scale. The reliability of the Likert scale was estimated using Cronbach's alpha. Analyses were performed using Microsoft Excel and SPSS version 23.

Results

In total, 52 individuals from different laboratories across Pakistan and Pakistani students from abroad (China) as well participated in at least one session of the IVT. The participants' pre- and post-test scores showed a significant increase in knowledge and awareness (p < 0.001). The obtained Cronbach's alpha score was >0.8, indicating high reliability of the generated feedback on the IVT approach and speakers.

Conclusion

The IVT on biosafety and biosecurity in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic proved beneficial for laboratory professionals and could be a useful model to continue in the future for raising awareness and knowledge.

Strengthening laboratory biosafety in Liberia during the COVID-19 pandemic: Experience from the Global Laboratory Leadership Programme

Background

The Global Laboratory Leadership Programme (GLLP) has biosafety and biosecurity as one of its core competencies and advocates for a One Health approach involving all relevant sectors across the human-animal-environment interface to empower national laboratory systems and strengthen health security. Decentralization of SARS-CoV-2 testing in Liberia coupled with an increase in the number of COVID-19 infections among laboratory professionals raised biosafety concerns. In response, a set of trainings on laboratory biosafety was launched for lab personnel across the country under the framework of the GLLP. The goal was to deliver a comprehensive package for laboratory biosafety in the context of SARS-CoV-2 through active learning.

Methods

Three one-day workshops were conducted between September and October 2020, training personnel from human, animal and environmental laboratories through a One Health approach. Concepts critical to laboratory biosafety were delivered in an interactive engagement format to ensure effective learning and retention of concepts. Pre- and post-training assessments were performed, and a paired t-test was used to assess knowledge gain.

Results

Of the 67 participants, 64 were from the human health sector, one from veterinary sector and two from environmental health sector. The average pre-test score was 41%. The main gaps identified were failure to acknowledge surgical antisepsis as a form of hand hygiene and recognition of PPE as the best risk control measure. The average post-test score was 75.5%. The mean difference of pre-test and post-test scores was statistically significant (p-value <0.001). Participants indicated satisfaction with the workshop content, mode of delivery and trainers' proficiency.

Conclusions

The workshops were impactful as evidenced by significant improvement (34.5%) in the post-test scores and positive participant feedback. Repeated refresher trainings are vital to addressing the gaps, ensuring compliance, and promoting biosafety culture. GLLP's approach to cultivating multisectoral national laboratory leaders ready to take responsibility and ownership for capacity building provides a sustainable solution for attaining strong national laboratory systems better prepared for health emergencies and pandemics like COVID-19.

Reasons for and barriers to biosafety and biosecurity training in health-related organizations in Africa, Middle East and Central Asia: findings from GIBACHT training needs assessments 2018-2019

Introduction

the Global-Partnership-Initiated-Biosecurity-Academia for Controlling Health Threats (GIBACHT) consortium conducts a biosafety and biosecurity training for fellows from Africa, the Middle East and Asia. To achieve a multiplier effect, fellows conduct trainings in their own organizations. It was during such trainings that training needs assessments were done assessing reasons for and barriers to biosafety and biosecurity training.

Methods

this was a cross sectional assessment. Trainings were conducted from April to July 2018 and April to June 2019. In 2018, training needs were explored using a structured tool. Responses were coded using manifest content analysis and key issues identified. In 2019, respondents quantified the identified key issues using a Likert scale. Proportions of those who strongly agreed, agreed, neither agreed nor disagreed, disagreed or strongly disagreed were calculated and results presented in tables and charts.

Results

in 2018 and 2019, there were 183 and 191 respondents respectively. About 96% of respondents in 2018 supported training in biosafety and biosecurity citing individual, community and global benefits. Barriers highlighted included governance, financial, human resource, information and infrastructure challenges. In 2019, majority of respondents indicated inadequate guidelines dissemination, lack of financial resources, inadequate personnel, lack of equipped laboratories and lack of instructional materials among major barriers.

Conclusion

support for biosafety and biosecurity training was high though systemic barriers exist. Improving human resource capacity and provision of instructional materials can be achieved through training programs. However, systemic assessments need to be done before each training as different organizations have different barriers.

Current status and future prospect of management of biosafety laboratories for emerging infectious diseases

In recent years, there have been several outbreaks of infectious diseases around the world, including severe acute respiratory syndrome, Ebola virus disease, Middle East respiratory syndrome, and corona virus disease 2019. Experience suggests that the detection and research of emergent infectious diseases play a crucial role in the process of responding to the epidemic, which also brings great challenges to biosafety laboratories. In the face of unknown biological risk factors, the non-standard biosafety protection measures have a serious impact on the life safety of laboratory staff and the research of infectious diseases, which stresses the necessity of safety protection in biosafety laboratories. This article will briefly review the current status and future prospect of management of biosafety laboratories both in China and other countries in terms of safety protection measures during new sudden infectious disease incidents.