The 2013–2016 Ebola outbreak in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone was the worst in history with over 28 000 cases and 11 000 deaths. Here we examine the psychosocial consequences of the epidemic. Ebola is a traumatic illness both in terms of symptom severity and mortality rates. Those affected are likely to experience psychological effects due to the traumatic course of the infection, fear of death and experience of witnessing others dying. Survivors can also experience psychosocial consequences due to feelings of shame or guilt (e.g. from transmitting infection to others) and stigmatization or blame from their communities. At the community level, a cyclical pattern of fear occurs, with a loss of trust in health services and stigma, resulting in disruptions of community interactions and community break down. Health systems in affected countries were severely disrupted and overstretched by the outbreak and their capacities were significantly reduced as almost 900 health-care workers were infected with Ebola and more than 500 died. The outbreak resulted in an increased need for health services, reduced quality of life and economic productivity and social system break down. It is essential that the global response to the outbreak considers both acute and long-term psychosocial needs of individuals and communities. Response efforts should involve communities to address psychosocial need, to rebuild health systems and trust and to limit stigma. The severity of this epidemic and its long-lasting repercussions should spur investment in and development of health systems.

Background As a result of financial barriers to the utilization of Maternal and Child Health (MCH) services, the Government of Sierra Leone launched the Free Health Care Initiative (FHCI) in 2010. This study aimed to examine the impact of the FHCI on wealth related inequity in the utilization of three MCH services. Methods We analysed data from 2008 to 2013 Sierra Leone Demographic Health Surveys (SLDHS) using 2008 SLDHS as a baseline. Seven thousand three hundred seventy-four and 16,658 women of reproductive age were interviewed in the 2008 and 2013 SLDHS respectively. We employed a binomial logistic regression to evaluate wealth related inequity in the utilization of institutional delivery. Concentration curves and indices were used to measure the inequity in the utilization of antenatal care (ANC) visits and postnatal care (PNC) reviews. Test of significance was performed for the difference in odds and concentration indexes obtained for the 2008 and 2013 SLDHS. Results There was an overall improvement in the utilization of MCH services following the FHCI with a 30% increase in institutional delivery rate, 24% increment in more than four focused ANC visits and 33% increment in complete PNC reviews. Wealth related inequity in institutional delivery has increased but to the advantage of the rich, highly educated, and urban residents. Results of the inequity statistics demonstrate that PNC reviews were more equally distributed in 2008 than ANC visits, and, in 2013, the poorest respondents ranked by wealth index utilized more PNC reviews than their richest counterparts. For ANC visits, the change in concentration index was from 0.008331[95% CI (0.008188, 0.008474)] in 2008 to − 0.002263 [95% CI (− 0.002322, − 0.002204)] in 2013. The change in concentration index for PNC reviews was from − 0.001732 [95% CI (− 0.001746, − 0.001718)] in 2008 to − 0.001771 [95% CI (− 0.001779, − 0.001763)] in 2013. All changes were significant ( p value < 0.001). Conclusion The FHCI appears to be improving access to and utilization of MCH services, narrowing the inequity in ANC visits and PNC reviews, but is insufficient in addressing wealth- related inequity that exists for institutional deliveries. If Sierra Leone is to realize a significant reduction in maternal and child mortality rates, it needs to strengthen the effective implementation of FHCI considering incorporating a sector wide approach (SWAp) or a “Health in all Policy” framework to reach the less educated, rural residents and ensuring culturally sensitive quality services. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4181-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

IntroductionVery little is known about possible clinical sequelae that may persist after resolution of acute COVID-19. A recent longitudinal cohort from Italy including 143 patients followed up after hospitalisation with COVID-19 reported that 87% had at least one ongoing symptom at 60-day follow-up. Early indications suggest that patients with COVID-19 may need even more psychological support than typical intensive care unit patients. The assessment of risk factors for longer term consequences requires a longitudinal study linked to data on pre-existing conditions and care received during the acute phase of illness. The primary aim of this study is to characterise physical and psychosocial sequelae in patients post-COVID-19 hospital discharge.Methods and analysisThis is an international open-access prospective, observational multisite study. This protocol is linked with the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infection Consortium (ISARIC) and the WHO’s Clinical Characterisation Protocol, which includes patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 during hospitalisation. This protocol will follow-up a subset of patients with confirmed COVID-19 using standardised surveys to measure longer term physical and psychosocial sequelae. The data will be linked with the acute phase data. Statistical analyses will be undertaken to characterise groups most likely to be affected by sequelae of COVID-19. The open-access follow-up survey can be used as a data collection tool by other follow-up studies, to facilitate data harmonisation and to identify subsets of patients for further in-depth follow-up. The outcomes of this study will inform strategies to prevent long-term consequences; inform clinical management, interventional studies, rehabilitation and public health management to reduce overall morbidity; and improve long-term outcomes of COVID-19.Ethics and disseminationThe protocol and survey are open access to enable low-resourced sites to join the study to facilitate global standardised, longitudinal data collection. Ethical approval has been given by sites in Colombia, Ghana, Italy, Norway, Russia, the UK and South Africa. New sites are welcome to join this collaborative study at any time. Sites interested in adopting the protocol as it is or in an adapted version are responsible for ensuring that local sponsorship and ethical approvals in place as appropriate. The tools are available on the ISARIC website (www.isaric.org).Protocol registration numberosf.io/c5rw3/Protocol version3 August 2020EuroQol ID37035.

No abstract

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: RPCGA-YRI-21003.