ArticleBMJ open2026
Infection prevention and control measures during the COVID-19 pandemic in sub-Saharan Africa: a multinational cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
29 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the implementation of infection prevention and control (IPC) measures and associated factors in healthcare in low-resource settings during the COVID-19 pandemic.
designMultinational cross-sectional study.
settingThe study was conducted from February to November 2022 in Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Madagascar and Nigeria.
participantsA total of 6749 healthcare workers (HCWs) at 324 healthcare facilities (HCFs) were enrolled from different levels of care and types. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Standardised HCW and HCF questionnaires assessed COVID-19-related exposures and IPC measures and descriptive analyses were conducted overall and by country and HCF. Partial proportional odds models were used to assess factors associated with HCW compliance to hand hygiene and mask wearing.
resultsAmong 324 HCFs, the reported presence of IPC programmes ranged from 51.4% (n=111) at primary non-hospitals to 83.3% (n=18) at tertiary HCFs. More than half reported no patient or HCW screening (57.4%, n=186). Only 19.8% (n=64) reported handrub at point of care in every room. Among 6749 enrolled HCWs, 54.0% were working in high-risk patient care. More HCWs reported sufficient availability of masks (62.7%, n=4231) compared with respirators (28.5%, n=1926). HCW compliance with hand hygiene and mask wearing, respectively, was improved by presence of an IPC programme (OR: 1.3, 95% CI 1.2 to 1.5; OR: 1.4, 95% CI 1.2 to 1.6), IPC training received by the HCW (OR: 1.5, 95% CI 1.3 to 1.7; OR: 1.3, 95% CI 1.2 to 1.5) and availability of handrub and masks, respectively (OR: 5.9, 95% CI 4.1 to 8.4; OR: 2.3, 95% CI 2.0 to 2.7).
conclusionsWe conducted a large survey including HCFs across levels of care and type in urban and rural regions in sub-Saharan Africa. Critical gaps in IPC programmes and access to IPC equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic hindered HCW compliance with recommended IPC practices. To improve general infection control and pandemic preparedness in low-resource settings, continued focus on strengthening IPC programmes and ensuring access to materials/equipment is essential.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.