Health systems Health care settings Clinical care Health care management
Surveillance and Readiness to Respond to Public Health Events of International Concern at Three Major Nigerian Points of Entry: Capacities, Gaps and Post-Ebola Improvements
The Nigerian- Cameroun Boarder
PDF

Keywords

Surveillance; public health emergency; PHEIC; Ebola; points of entry; laboratory capacity; emergency preparedness; Nigeria; International Health Regulations

How to Cite

1.
Muhammad SU, Musa Tanko S, Usman S, Hassan A. Surveillance and Readiness to Respond to Public Health Events of International Concern at Three Major Nigerian Points of Entry: Capacities, Gaps and Post-Ebola Improvements. Keffi Hospital J. [Internet]. 2026 Sep. 7 [cited 2026 Oct. 19];1(4):1-5. Available from: https://keffihospitaljournal.fmckkonsult.org/index.php/khj/article/view/72

Abstract

Background: Surveillance and response to Public Health Events of International Concern (PHEIC) are core capacities under IHR (2005), requiring designated Points of Entry (POEs) to detect, report and respond to disease events through standardised, coordinated systems.

Objective: To assess disease surveillance, laboratory referral capacity, and PHEIC emergency preparedness at Nigeria's busiest airport, seaport and land border, and the influence of the 2014 Ebola outbreak on subsequent preparedness.

Methods: A comparative cross-sectional mixed-methods study combined a structured questionnaire (n=122; 41 airport, 41 seaport, 40 land border) with key informant interviews and focus groups at Murtala Muhammed International Airport, Apapa Seaport and the Seme land border, February-May 2017.

Results: Disease and event surveillance was not coordinated through any standard routine agreed across POEs; only the land border reported surveillance guided by a drafted contingency plan with a standard operating format. No POE possessed a laboratory facility fit to handle critical emergency cases, and unavailability of utility vehicles for transporting detected cases constrained surveillance. Simulation exercises had been conducted at air POEs, particularly post-Ebola, and quarterly at the land border, but without key equipment for proper case handling. Mostly, it was WHO or the Federal Government, rather than local surveillance, that alerted port health services to emerging threats, e.g. displaced persons entering from Cameroon.

Conclusion: Surveillance and PHEIC response readiness at Nigeria's principal POEs remain below IHR (2005) requirements: non-standardised reporting, absent laboratory capacity, and equipment-poor simulations. The post-Ebola rise in simulation activity is a meaningful but incomplete step toward the required capacity.

PDF

References

1. World Health Organization. International Health Regulations (2005), 3rd edn. Geneva: WHO; 2005.

2. World Health Organization. IHR Core Capacity Monitoring Framework. Geneva: WHO; 2016.

3. Fischer JE, Kornblet S, Katz R. International Health Regulations (2005): Surveillance and Response in an Era of Globalization. Washington DC: Stimson Center Global Health Security Program; 2011.

4. Bakari M, Kilale AM, Kiwelu A, Ndosi F. Assessment of core capacities for the implementation of the International Health Regulations (2005) at Julius Nyerere International Airport, Tanzania. Tanzan J Health Res. 2013.

5. Wamala JF, Okot C, Makumbi I, Natseri N, Kisakye A, Nanyunja M, et al. Assessment of core capacities for the International Health Regulations (2005)-Uganda, 2009. BMC Public Health. 2010;10(Suppl 1):S9.

6. World Health Organization. Joint External Evaluation of IHR Core Capacities of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Geneva: WHO; 2017.

7. Kieny MP, Evans DB, Schmets G, Kadandale S. Health-system resilience: reflections on the Ebola crisis in western Africa. Bull World Health Organ. 2014;92(12):850.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2026 Shehu Usman Muhammad, Suleiman Musa Tanko, Suleiman Usman, Abdullahi Hassan