Ebola Virus Disease Preparedness and Awareness in Nigeria
This paper provides a systematic and critical review of peer-reviewed, scholarly, and governmental literature on the Ebola virus disease (EVD) with the dual purpose of developing a public awareness resource for Nigerian citizens and identifying gaps in emergency management scholarship. The review covers the etiology and transmission of the disease, its symptoms and diagnostic challenges, current palliative treatment strategies, and the critical role of timely and accurate public information in containing outbreaks. Special attention is given to Nigeria's 2014 Ebola response, including the country's successful community health worker mobilization and contact-tracing campaign in Lagos. The paper concludes by emphasizing that no single intervention is sufficient and that coordinated public education, surveillance, and community engagement are essential components of an effective preparedness strategy.
- Introduction: Problem statement, study purpose, and rationale
- Overview of the Ebola Virus Disease: Causes, transmission routes, and emergency management implications
- Symptoms, Diagnosis, and Treatment: Symptom onset, diagnostic tools, and palliative care
- Importance of Timely and Accurate Public Information: Media coverage, misinformation, and public panic lessons
- Emergency Management Strategies for Ebola in Nigeria: Nigeria's 2014 response, contact tracing, and community outreach
- Conclusion: Summary of findings and recommendations for preparedness
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Grounds abstract public health concepts in concrete case evidence, particularly Nigeria's 2014 Ebola response, which gives the literature review a practical policy anchor.
- Draws on a diverse source base—CDC guidelines, WHO reports, peer-reviewed journal articles, and NGO documentation (Doctors Without Borders)—lending the argument credibility across multiple institutional perspectives.
- Maintains a clear dual purpose throughout: building a public awareness resource while simultaneously identifying research gaps, which gives the paper a coherent rhetorical direction from introduction to conclusion.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective use of authoritative institutional citation to validate epidemiological claims. Rather than relying solely on secondary analysis, the author quotes directly from CDC data, WHO incident reports, and peer-reviewed surveillance studies, then synthesizes these sources to build a layered argument about why community-level information campaigns are as medically important as clinical interventions. This technique—using primary institutional data embedded within a literature review structure—is a strong model for applied public health research papers.
Structure breakdown
The paper follows a two-chapter academic structure: Chapter One establishes the problem statement, study purpose, significance, and rationale, while Chapter Two delivers the literature review across four thematic areas—disease etiology, implications for emergency management, symptoms and diagnosis, and Nigeria-specific strategies. The Nigeria case study in the final section functions as a synthesis that ties together earlier theoretical points about information dissemination, protective protocols, and community engagement, giving the paper a conclusion-by-illustration approach.
Introduction
Statement of the Problem
In spite of increasingly aggressive efforts to identify a cure for the Ebola virus disease (Preston, 2014), outbreaks continue to occur, including an ongoing one in the Democratic Republic of the Congo — which has proven to be the most difficult to manage to date — each with the potential to escalate into a worldwide pandemic (Brown, 2015). Therefore, national and local emergency managers must develop a comprehensive understanding of the etiology of this disease, its course, and what steps should be taken in response to confirmed cases in order to contain outbreaks when they occur and to educate citizens so as to prevent the spread of rumors that can further exacerbate the virulence and lethality of the Ebola virus disease (Allam, 2014).
Purpose of the Study
The overarching purpose of this study was to provide a systematic and critical review of the relevant peer-reviewed, scholarly, and governmental literature concerning Ebola in order to develop an awareness manual for educating Nigerian citizens on the Ebola virus disease. A secondary purpose of this study was to identify any gaps in the current body of scholarship concerning optimal strategies for responding to Ebola outbreaks in order to recommend further areas of study.
Significance of the Problem
Unlike many other deadly diseases that continue to plague humankind, Ebola occupies a category almost by itself in terms of its lethality. Indeed, Ebola infections typically kill between 25% and 90% of their victims, and it is not surprising that the public generally reacts to even the mention of this disease with dread and terror (Ebola outbreak, 2019). The largest outbreak of Ebola occurred in West Africa during the period between 2014 and 2016, but the second-largest outbreak remained ongoing in the Democratic Republic of Congo despite efforts on the part of the international health care community to contain it (Ebola, 2019). Notably, the outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo was all the more significant because the country had a comprehensive preparedness plan already in place (Hancock, 2019).
While many countries of the world remain directly unaffected by Ebola, the potential for this deadly disease to spread beyond the borders of the African continent is pronounced, especially due to the ease with which people can travel long distances today (Hood, 2015). Moreover, the Ebola virus disease has been shown to cross national borders with relative ease, and its impact on the nations of Africa has been severe. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), "A total of 28,616 cases of EVD and 11,310 deaths were reported in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone. There were an additional 36 cases and 15 deaths that occurred when the outbreak spread outside of these three countries" (Ebola outbreak, 2019). The fear and dread associated with Ebola are due in large part to the fact that there is no cure for the disease and that misinformation and rumors abound concerning its effects (Ebola, 2019) — a troubling situation that directly motivates the rationale for this study.
Rationale of the Study
Developing effective responses to the Ebola virus disease requires a series of multifaceted interventions, all of which are essential for containing outbreaks (Ebola, 2019). The elements of an effective response include isolating infected victims, providing them with the best palliative care possible, and identifying new victims so that these interventions can be repeated (Ebola, 2019). Other critical elements include preventing further infections by performing safe but respectful burials of deceased victims and ensuring that affected health care facilities, ambulances, and victims' homes are decontaminated (Ebola, 2019).
While these steps can help contain an outbreak, they do not stop outbreaks from occurring in the first place. Therefore, while the search for a cure for the Ebola virus disease continues, it is vitally important for national and local emergency management teams to formulate effective response interventions to minimize the transmission of the disease — including educating citizens about Ebola to prevent the spread of misinformation that could adversely affect the ability of emergency managers to achieve this objective.
Overview of the Ebola Virus Disease
Cause of the Ebola Virus Disease
The Ebola virus disease is caused by an infection from a group of viruses included in the genus Ebolavirus — specifically the Ebola virus and the species Zaire ebolavirus (What is Ebola virus disease?, 2019). One of the more challenging aspects of Ebola is its virulence, which facilitates transmission from person to person or from animal to person. According to the CDC (2019), "Ebola virus disease is a rare and deadly disease in people and nonhuman primates. The viruses that cause Ebola are located mainly in sub-Saharan Africa. People can get Ebola through direct contact with an infected animal (bat or nonhuman primate) or a sick or dead person infected with Ebola virus" (Ebola virus disease, 2019, para. 2).
Because many people in West Africa come into regular contact with animals — including the common practice of eating so-called "bush meat" such as fruit bats, which are the only known natural reservoir for the disease — the opportunities to contract the Ebola virus disease are especially pronounced in many African nations, including Nigeria. Holakouie-Naieni and Ahmadvand (2015) report that, "Although the current epidemic of Ebola virus is propagated by human-to-human transmission, it is hypothesized that transmission from reservoir to human has likely occurred by consuming 'bush meat' or handling an infected animal" (p. 1670). At present, there are five different strains of the Ebola virus, named for the locations where they were first identified: Ivory Coast, Bundibugyo, Reston, Zaire, and Sudan (Ebola, 2019). These factors have significant implications for emergency management professionals.
Implications for Emergency Management
Because Ebola infections can be caused by contact with the bodily secretions of infected individuals, it is vitally important for first responders and health care practitioners — in fact, anyone who comes into contact with people infected by the Ebola virus disease — to wear appropriate protective clothing and gear to avoid becoming infected themselves (Ebola, 2019). It is also important to note that Ebola can be transmitted from pregnant women to their babies in utero, during delivery, or through contact with the mother's bodily fluids, including breast milk (Ebola, 2019). Emergency managers should additionally understand that the Ebola virus disease is not transmitted through water or air, nor by newly infected individuals who have not yet developed any symptoms (Ebola, 2019).
Although the majority of Ebola infection cases have occurred in remote regions of African countries, it is also important to take preventive steps when infected victims reach health care facilities. Doctors Without Borders (2019) counsels that, "During an outbreak, Ebola virus can spread quickly within health care facilities. Proper infection control in health centers is therefore vital to reduce risks for other patients, caregivers, and health workers" (para. 5). In sum, anyone coming into contact with or providing health care services to infected victims must take precautions, most particularly the use of protective clothing and gear.
References
Allam, M. F. (2014, September). Ebola hemorrhagic fever: Case fatality rate 90%? Central European Journal of Public Health, 22(3), 207–210.
Allam, M. F., & Vonka, V. (2015, March). Ebola virus disease: Temperature checks for travelers? Central European Journal of Public Health, 23(1), 84.
Brand, J. E., & Stela, D. (2014, October). Ebola is here: Knowledge, identification, and appropriate infection control are key. American Nurse Today, 9(10), 37–39.
Brown, G. (2015, Winter). Ebola in America: An epidemic or a pandemic? ABNF Journal, 26(1), 3–5.
Ebola. (2019). Doctors Without Borders. Retrieved from
Ebola outbreak. (2019). U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/history/2014-2016-outbreak/index.html
Ebola virus disease. (2019). U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/index.html
Hancock, M. (2019, September). After Ebola. African Business, 422, 56–58.
Hood, A. (2015, August). Ebola: A threat to the parameters or a threat to the peace? Melbourne Journal of International Law, 16(1), 29–33.
Lightsey, R. F. (2016, April). Fighting Ebola: An interagency collaboration paradigm. Joint Force Quarterly, 81, 62–65.
Nigeria people. (2019). CIA World Factbook. Retrieved from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ni.html
Outbreak preparedness. (2019). U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/preparedness/outbreak-preparedness.html
Patwardhan, A., & Raghunath, N. M. (2014, January). Ebola crisis in the United States: A glimpse of its larger shadow. Inquiry, 51(1), 1–5.
Perry, H. B., & Dhillon, R. S. (2016, July). Community health worker programs after the 2013–2016 Ebola outbreak. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 94(7), 551–555.
Preston, R. (2014, October 27). The Ebola wars. The New Yorker, 90(33), 42–44.
Shuaib, F., & Gunnala, R. (2014, July–September). Ebola virus disease outbreak — Nigeria. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 63(39), 867–872.
Sirleaf, M. (2018, March). Ebola does not fall from the sky: Structural violence & international responsibility. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 51(2), 477–501.
Successful Ebola responses in Nigeria, Senegal and Mali. (2016, January). World Health Organization. Retrieved from
Van Tongeron, D. R., & Hook, J. N. (2016, Summer). Ebola as an existential threat? Experimentally-primed Ebola reminders intensify national-security concerns among extrinsically religious individuals. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 44(2), 133–137.
Wigmore, R. (2016, April 1). Ebola and rumors in Sierra Leone: Contextualizing and elucidating perceptions of Ebola through rumors. Current Politics and Economics of Africa, 9(2), 191–193.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.