Introduction: Humanitarian crises, often characterized by mass displacement, armed conflicts, and natural disasters, may increase the risk of infectious disease outbreaks, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). These crises exacerbate the vulnerability of already fragile healthcare systems, limiting access to essential resources and further compromising public health. This systematic review aims to evaluate the strategies and interventions implemented in LMICs to prevent and manage infectious diseases during humanitarian crises from 2018 to 2023. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across databases, including Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science, following the SPIDER framework to identify relevant studies. The review included studies published between 2018 and 2023 that focused on the prevention and management of infectious diseases in LMICs during humanitarian crises. The quality of the studies was assessed via the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist. Results: Eleven results were identified from 1,415 unique articles, addressing different interventions for infectious disease control, including vaccination campaigns, epidemiologic surveillance, and integrated health services. Gang violence in Haiti and Cyclone Kenneth in Mozambique have fueled cholera outbreaks, tackled through surveillance, case management, improved WaSH services, and vaccination. In Thailand, mathematical models optimized cholera vaccination in refugee camps. At Kumbh Mela in India, targeted surveillance prevented disease spread. The Philippines improved disaster response with point-of-care testing. Yemen’s malaria surveillance integration was recommended. Uganda’s multihazard plan supported the Ebola and refugee crises. In South Sudan, integrated immunization increased coverage. Despite conflicts, Nigeria’s measles efforts faced challenges, but SARS-CoV-2 vaccination improved through visual communication. Conclusion: These interventions highlight the importance of diverse, targeted, and collaborative responses to address complex health crises without relying on unsustainable investments. They emphasize safeguarding the right to health, even in the face of challenging sociopolitical conditions, crises, or natural disasters.
Zotti et al. (Sun,) studied this question.