Explore the vast range of titles available.

Borno state in north-eastern Nigeria is the epicentre of the >10 years’ insurgency activities that have affected the region since 2009, resulting in the destruction of health facilities, killing of health workers, massive population displacement and lack of access to populations to provide health services. This article demonstrates how the involvement of community informants from insecure areas (CIIA) to conduct polio surveillance in security-challenged settlements of Borno state contributed to the expansion of polio surveillance reach beyond polio vaccination reach. In each of the 19 security compromised Local Government areas (LGAs) with community informants from insecure areas, Android phones enabled with Vaccination Tracking System (VTS) technology and Open Data Kit (ODK) mobile application were provided to capture geo-coordinates as evidence (geo evidence) for polio surveillance activity conducted. These geo evidence captured were uploaded and mapped to show insecure settlements reached with polio surveillance and those yet to be reached. A total of 3183 security compromised settlements were reached for polio surveillance between March 2018 and October 2019 with valid geo evidence, 542 of these security-compromised settlements had not been previously reached by any other intervention for polio surveillance or polio vaccination. The capturing of geo-coordinates as a proxy indicator of polio surveillance activity conducted by informants provided significant evidence of settlements reached for sustained polio surveillance even when a case of Acute Flaccid Paralysis (AFP) had not been reported from these settlements. Using the geo evidence captured by CIIA in insecure settlements, we have demonstrated the expansion of polio surveillance reach beyond polio vaccination reach in Borno state.

Background Owing to crowded and unsanitary conditions, internally displaced persons (IDPs) have an increased risk of COVID-19 infection. Adoption of COVID-19 preventive measures among this population is premised on accurate information, adequate knowledge, and risk perception. We assessed COVID-19 knowledge and risk perception and investigated the association between risk perception and COVID-19 preventive measures, including vaccination among IDPs in Northeast Nigeria. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study during July–December 2022 and sampled 2,175 IDPs using stratified sampling. We utilized a 12-point assessment tool to evaluate COVID-19 knowledge. Participants who scored ≥ 6 points were considered to have adequate knowledge. We used a 30-item Risk Behavior Diagnosis Scale to assess COVID-19 risk perception and evaluated each item on a 5-point Likert scale. Participants were divided into risk perception categories by the median of Likert scale scores. We performed weighted logistic regression analysis to identify factors associated with risk perception. Pearson’s chi-squared with Rao-Scott adjustment was used to determine the relationship between risk perception and COVID-19 preventive measures. Results Of 2,175 participants, 55.7% were 18–39 years old, 70.9% were females, and 81.7% had no formal education. Among the IDPs, 32.0% (95% CI: 28.8 – 35.0) were considered to have adequate COVID-19 knowledge, and 51.3% (95% CI: 47.8 – 54.8) perceived COVID-19 risk as high. Moreover, 46.3% (95% CI: 42.8 – 50.0) had received one dose of COVID-19 vaccine, and 33.1% (95% CI: 29.8 – 36.0) received two doses. Adequate knowledge (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) = 2.10, [95% CI: 1.46 – 3.03]) and post-primary education (AOR = 3.20, [95% CI: 1.59 – 6.46]) were associated with risk perception. Furthermore, high risk perception was significantly associated with wearing face masks (χ 2  = 106.32, p -value < .001), practicing hand hygiene (χ 2  = 162.24, p -value < .001), physical distancing (χ 2  = 60.84, p -value < .001) and vaccination uptake (χ 2  = 46.85, p -value < .001). Conclusions This study revealed gaps in COVID-19 knowledge, risk perception, and vaccination uptake but demonstrated a significant relationship between risk perception and COVID-19 preventive practices. Health education and risk communication should be intensified to improve knowledge, elicit stronger risk perception, and enhance COVID-19 preventive practices.

Background Currently, over two million persons are internally displaced because of the complex humanitarian emergency in Nigeria’s northeast region. Due to crowded and unsanitary living conditions, the risk of communicable disease transmission, morbidity, and mortality among this population is high. This study explored patterns and factors associated with health-seeking among internally displaced persons (IDPs) in northeast Nigeria to inform and strengthen disease surveillance and response activities. Methods In a cross-sectional study conducted during June–October 2022, we employed stratified sampling technique to select 2,373 IDPs from 12 IDPs camps. A semi-structured tool was used to collect data on health-seeking patterns, socio-demographics, households, and IDPs camps characteristics. We classified health-seeking patterns into three outcome categories: ‘facility care’ (reference category), ‘non-facility care’ (patent medicine vendors, chemists, traditional healers, religious centers), and ‘home care/no care’. We performed complex survey data analysis and obtained weighted statistical estimates. Univariate analysis was conducted to describe respondents’ characteristics and health-seeking patterns. We fitted weighted multivariable multinomial logistic regression models to identify factors associated with health-seeking patterns. Results Of 2,373 respondents, 71.8% were 18 to 39 years old, 78.1% were females, and 81.0% had no formal education. Among the respondents, 75.7% (95% CI: 72.9–78.6) sought ‘facility care’, 11.1% (95% CI: 9.1–13.1) sought ‘non-facility care’, while 13.2% (95% CI: 10.9–15.4) practiced ‘home care/no care’. Respondents who perceived illness was severe (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) = 0.15, [95% CI: 0.08–0.30]) and resided in officially-recognized camps (AOR = 0.26, [95% CI: 0.17–0.39]) were less likely to seek ‘non-facility care’ compared to ‘facility care’. Similarly, respondents who resided in officially-recognized camps (AOR = 0.58, [95% CI: 0.36–0.92]), and received disease surveillance information (AOR = 0.42, [95% CI: 0.26–0.67) were less likely to practice ‘home care/no care’ rather than seek ‘facility care’. Conclusions This population exhibited heterogeneous patterns of health-seeking at facility and non-facility centers. Perception of illness severity and camps’ status were major factors associated with health-seeking. To enhance surveillance, non-facility care providers should be systematically integrated into the surveillance network while ramping up risk communication to shape perception of illness severity, prioritizing unofficial camps.