Abstract
Introduction In the early parts of the COVID-19 pandemic, non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) were implemented worldwide, including in sub-Saharan Africa, to prevent and control SARS-CoV-2 transmission. This mixed-methods study examines adherence to and enforcement of NPIs implemented to curb COVID-19 in Nigeria, Rwanda, and Zambia, leading up to the 10,000th case of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 in each country. Additionally, we aim to evaluate the relationship between levels and changes of NPIs over time and changes in COVID-19 cases and deaths.
Methods This mixed-methods analysis utilized semi-structured interviews and a quantitative dataset constructed using multiple open data sources, including the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker. To understand potential barriers and facilitators in implementing and enforcing NPIs qualitative data were collected from those involved in the COVID-19 response and analyzed using NVivo. Quantitative results were analyzed using descriptive statistics, plots, ANOVA, and post hoc Tukey.
Results Individual indicator scores varied with the COVID-19 response in all three countries. Nigeria had sustained levels of strict measures for containment and closure NPIs, while in Rwanda there was substantial variation in NPI score as it transitioned through the different case windows for the same measures. Zambia implemented moderate stringency throughout the pandemic using gathering restrictions and business/school closure measures but maintained low levels of strictness for other containment and closure measures. Rwanda had far more consistent and stringent measures compared to Nigeria and Zambia. Rwanda’s success in implementing COVID-related measures was partly due to strong enforcement and having a population that generally obeys its government.
Conclusion Various forces either facilitated or hindered adherence and compliance to COVID-19 control measures. This research highlights important lessons, including the need to engage communities early and create buy-in, as well as the need for preparation to ensure that response efforts are proactive rather than reactive when faced with an emergency.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
“The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.”
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Not Applicable
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
IRB exemption was granted by the Boston University Medical Center Institutional Review Board
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Not Applicable
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Not Applicable
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Not Applicable
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, upon reasonable request.
