Key message 2: diabetes and its consequences are costly to patients and economies We estimate that, in 2015, the overall cost of diabetes in sub-Saharan Africa was US$19•45 billion or 1•2% of cumulative gross domestic product (GDP). Around $10•81 billion (55•6%) of this cost arose from direct costs, which included expenditure on diabetes treatment (eg, medication, hospital stays, and treatment of complications), with out-of-pocket expenditure likely to exceed 50% of the overall health expenditure in many countries. We estimate that the total cost will increase to between $35•33 billion (1•1% of GDP) and $59•32 billion (1•8% of GDP) by 2030. Putting in place systems to prevent, detect, and manage hyperglycaemia and its consequences is therefore warranted from a health economics perspective. Key message 3: health systems in countries in sub-Saharan Africa are unable to cope with the current burden of diabetes and its complications By use of information from WHO Service Availability Readiness Assessment surveys and World Bank Service Delivery Indicator surveys and the local knowledge of Commissioners, we found inadequacies at all levels of the health system required to provide adequate management for diabetes and its associated risk factors and sequelae. We found inadequate availability of simple equipment for diagnosis and monitoring, a lack of sufficiently knowledgable health-care providers, insufficient availability of treatments, a dearth of locally appropriate guidelines, and few disease registries. These inadequacies result in a substantial dropoff of patients along the diabetes care cascade, with many patients going undiagnosed and with those who are diagnosed not receiving the advice and drugs they need. We also noted scarce facilities to manage the microvascular and macro vascular complications of diabetes. Additionally, despite calls for adding the care of diabetes and other cardiovascular risk factors onto existing infectious disease programmes (such as those for HIV), we found little evidence that such combined programmes are successful at improving outcomes.

Introduction: Rwanda has made significant advancements in medical and economic development over the last 20 years and has emerged as a leader in healthcare in the East African region. The COVID-19 pandemic, which reached Rwanda in March 2020, presented new and unique challenges for infectious disease control. The objective of this paper is to characterize Rwanda’s domestic response to the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic and highlight effective strategies so that other countries, including high and middle-income countries, can learn from its innovative initiatives. Methods: Government publications describing Rwanda’s healthcare capacity were first consulted to obtain the country’s baseline context. Next, official government and healthcare system communications, including case counts, prevention and screening protocols, treatment facility practices, and behavioral guidelines for the public, were read thoroughly to understand the course of the pandemic in Rwanda and the specific measures in the response. Results: As of 31 December 2020, Rwanda has recorded 8,383 cumulative COVID-19 cases, 6,542 recoveries, and 92 deaths since the first case on 14 March 2020. The Ministry of Health, Rwanda Biomedical Centre, and the Epidemic and Surveillance Response division have collaborated on preparative measures since the pandemic began in January 2020. The formation of a Joint Task Force in early March led to the Coronavirus National Preparedness and Response Plan, an extensive six-month plan that established a national incident management system and detailed four phases of a comprehensive national response. Notable strategies have included disseminating public information through drones, robots for screening and inpatient care, and official communications through social media platforms to combat misinformation and mobilize a cohesive response from the population. Conclusion: Rwanda’s government and healthcare system has responded to the COVID-19 pandemic with innovative interventions to prevent and contain the virus. Importantly, the response has utilized adaptive and innovative technology and robust risk communication and community engagement to deliver an effective response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

To date, the practice of global emergency medicine (GEM) has involved being “on the ground” supporting in‐country training of local learners, conducting research, and providing clinical care. This face‐to‐face interaction has been understood as critically important for developing partnerships and building trust. The COVID‐19 pandemic has brought significant uncertainty worldwide, including international travel restrictions of indeterminate permanence. Following the 2020 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine meeting, the Global Emergency Medicine Academy (GEMA) sought to enhance collective understanding of best practices in GEM training with a focus on multidirectional education and remote collaboration in the setting of COVID‐19. GEMA members led an initiative to outline thematic areas deemed most pertinent to the continued implementation of impactful GEM programming within the physical and technologic confines of a pandemic. Eighteen GEM practitioners were divided into four workgroups to focus on the following themes: advances in technology, valuation, climate impacts, skill translation, research/scholastic projects, and future challenges. Several opportunities were identified: broadened availability of technology such as video conferencing, Internet, and smartphones; online learning; reduced costs of cloud storage and printing; reduced carbon footprint; and strengthened local leadership. Skills and knowledge bases of GEM practitioners, including practicing in resource‐poor settings and allocation of scarce resources, are translatable domestically. The COVID‐19 pandemic has accelerated a paradigm shift in the practice of GEM, identifying a previously underrecognized potential to both strengthen partnerships and increase accessibility. This time of change has provided an opportunity to enhance multidirectional education and remote collaboration to improve global health equity.