PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Joseph Musaazi
AU  - Apophia Namageyo-Funa
AU  - Victoria M. Carter
AU  - Rosalind J. Carter
AU  - Mohammed Lamorde
AU  - Rose Apondi
AU  - Tabley Bakyaita
AU  - Amy L. Boore
AU  - Vance R. Brown
AU  - Jaco Homsy
AU  - Joanita Kigozi
AU  - Aybüke Koyuncu
AU  - Maria Sarah Nabaggala
AU  - Vivian Nakate
AU  - Emmanuel Nkurunziza
AU  - Daniel F. Stowell
AU  - Richard Walwema
AU  - Apollo Olowo
AU  - Mohamed F. Jalloh
TI  - Evaluation of Community Perceptions and Prevention Practices Related to Ebola Virus as Part of Outbreak Preparedness in Uganda, 2020
AID  - 10.9745/GHSP-D-21-00661
DP  - 2022 Jun 06
TA  - Global Health: Science and Practice
4099  - http://www.ghspjournal.org/content/early/2022/06/03/GHSP-D-21-00661.short
4100  - http://www.ghspjournal.org/content/early/2022/06/03/GHSP-D-21-00661.full
AB  - Key FindingsIndividuals in Ebola virus disease (EVD) high-risk districts reported greater EVD message exposure and comprehensive knowledge compared to individuals in EVD low-risk districts.Individuals with comprehensive knowledge of EVD were more likely to self-report frequent handwashing with soap, avoiding physical contact with suspected Ebola patients, and avoiding funerals/burials that involve physical contact with a corpse.Rejection of EVD misconceptions was not significantly associated with self-reported EVD-related prevention practices.Key ImplicationsEfforts to promote EVD comprehensive knowledge may facilitate the uptake of EVD prevention practices.Risk communication and community engagement efforts continue to be critical for EVD preparedness and response efforts, especially in high-risk geographic areas.Introduction:During the 2018–2020 Ebola virus disease (EVD) outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, risk communication and community engagement (RCCE) were prioritized in geographic areas in Uganda considered at high risk of introduction of EVD. To inform EVD preparedness in Uganda, we evaluated community perceptions and prevention practices related to EVD in 6 districts in Uganda.Methods:In March 2020, we conducted a population-based survey in 6 purposively selected districts in Uganda using multistage cluster sampling. We examined differences between districts classified as high- versus low risk for EVD in terms of their message exposure from RCCE; risk perception; and EVD knowledge, attitudes, and prevention practices.Results:A total of 3,485 respondents were interviewed (91% response rate). EVD message exposure was more common in the high- versus low-risk districts. EVD risk perceptions were low overall but greater in the high- versus low-risk districts. Comprehensive knowledge was significantly greater in the high- versus low-risk districts (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] 1.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.35, 1.93). Respondents’ engagement in all 3 EVD prevention practices (frequent handwashing with soap, avoiding physical contact with suspected Ebola patients, and avoiding burials involving contact with a corpse) was very low (4%). However, respondents with comprehensive knowledge were more likely to engage in all 3 EVD prevention practices compared to respondents without comprehensive knowledge (aPR 1.87, 95% CI=1.08, 3.25).Conclusion:Our findings suggest that while RCCE efforts as part of EVD outbreak preparedness may have contributed to higher EVD knowledge in the targeted high-risk districts, uptake of prevention behaviors was similarly low across districts. In a non-outbreak setting, implementing targeted RCCE strategies may not be sufficient to motivate people to adopt protective behaviors in the absence of a high threshold of perceived threat such as in an active outbreak.