Ghana implemented various mitigating policies in response to the COVID-19 outbreak. This study examined the effectiveness of these policies to contribute to the ongoing discussions on proactive and pre-emptive interventions for similar future outbreaks.  A mix of qualitative and quantitative methods were used for the analysis. Data were drawn from multiple sources, including peer-reviewed and grey literature, and academic experts from Ghanaian universities. The data from the literature informed a questionnaire that was sent to independent academic experts to explore their opinions on whether the policies met their intended objectives. The experts’ opinions were collected on a 5-point Likert scale and from an open-ended question using an online data collection platform, Qualtrics. The data were evaluated using narrative synthesis, descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. We identified and evaluated eight key COVID-19 policy responses in Ghana: (1) partial lockdown of epicentres; (2) COVID-19 public awareness campaigns; (3) ban on public gatherings; (4) COVID-19 vaccination; (5) border closures; (6) entry border COVID-19 screening; (7) incentives for healthcare workers (HCWs); and (8) the Ghana Alleviation and Revitalisation of Enterprises Support (GCARES). Two policies - the COVID-19 awareness campaigns and border closure - effectively improved public awareness of COVID-19 and helped to reduce COVID-19 case importation (median score ≥4).  Ghana’s COVID-19 public awareness campaigns and border closure policies could serve as a valuable model for informing proactive interventions to address future infectious disease outbreaks.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The College of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (CHMLS) Research Ethics Committee, the committee overseeing all research protocols in Brunel University - the affiliation of all the authors in this study, approved this study to be conducted. The Ethics Reference Number is 39763-LR-Nov/2022- 42491-4.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

The data accessed from the experts and analysed in this study is publicly available at Figshare and is available from: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.22640203.v1 All data included in the literature review are contained in the manuscript

https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.22640203.v1