Analysis of Biosecurity preparedness of East African Countries with respect to Global Health Security Agenda.

Abstract

Background: Biosecurity are all precautionary measures put in place to ensure that biological materials are protected from being abused. The abuse means that these agents may be used to cause harm to humans, animals, agriculture and environment. All necessary safeguards are employed to ensure that the materials are not susceptible to theft, loss, diversion including intentional and unintentional release which can harm. The materials can either be in a research institution, hospital setting or during transport of highly infectious agents but not limited to laboratory setting. Methodology This study was a qualitative retrospective study which involved analysis of the data published online by WHO on country’s level of preparedness capacity in implementation of GHSA agenda. Eleven of the thirteen capacity areas related to biosecurity were extracted from the electronic state party self-assessment reporting tool as it is compulsory for every member to report yearly. The scores were compared between the countries and also with the WHO Africa regions average. The information was presented in charts. Results Two countries had 50% and above average score for 2018 namely Rwanda and Uganda while Kenya, Burundi and Tanzania had scores below the mark. For 2019, Tanzania, Uganda and Rwanda had scores above 50% of 52.9, 65.2 and 76.4 respectively. Kenya was the least prepared followed by Burundi by the end of year 2019. However, Kenya is more economically developed followed by Tanzania, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi respectively. Conclusion Political commitment to IHR (2005) was the greatest factor that contributed to the different levels of capacity attained by the countries followed by susceptibility to recurrent epidemics which necessitate national preparedness to rapidly and effectively respond whenever they occur. There was no observable relationship between the level of a country’s preparedness and their economic status.