Dataset Information

Delayed second dose of oral cholera vaccine administered before high-risk period for cholera transmission: Cholera control strategy in Lusaka, 2016.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In April 2016, an emergency vaccination campaign using one dose of Oral Cholera Vaccine (OCV) was organized in response to a cholera outbreak that started in Lusaka in February 2016. In December 2016, a second round of vaccination was conducted, with the objective of increasing the duration of protection, before the high-risk period for cholera transmission. We assessed vaccination coverage for the first and second rounds of the OCV campaign.

Methods

Vaccination coverage was estimated after each round from a sample selected from targeted-areas for vaccination using a cross-sectional survey in to establish the vaccination status of the individuals recruited. The study population included all individuals older than 12 months residing in the areas targeted for vaccination. We interviewed 505 randomly selected individuals after the first round and 442 after the second round. Vaccination status was ascertained either by vaccination card or verbal reporting. Households were selected using spatial random sampling.

Results

The vaccination coverage with two doses was 58.1% (25/43; 95%CI: 42.1-72.9) in children 1-5 years old, 59.5% (69/116; 95%CI: 49.9-68.5) in children 5-15 years old and 19.9% (56/281; 95%CI: 15.4-25.1) in adults above 15 years old. The overall dropout rate was 10.9% (95%CI: 8.1-14.1). Overall, 69.9% (n = 309/442; 95%CI: 65.4-74.1) reported to have received at least one OCV dose.

Conclusions

The areas at highest risk of suffering cholera outbreaks were targeted for vaccination obtaining relatively high vaccine coverage after each round. However, the long delay between doses in areas subject to considerable population movement resulted in many individuals receiving only one OCV dose. Additional vaccination campaigns may be required to sustain protection over time in case of persistence of risk. Further evidence is needed to establish a maximum optimal interval time of a delayed second dose and variations in different settings.

SUBMITTER: Ferreras E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6716633 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Delayed second dose of oral cholera vaccine administered before high-risk period for cholera transmission: Cholera control strategy in Lusaka, 2016.

Ferreras Eva E Matapo Belem B Chizema-Kawesha Elizabeth E Chewe Orbrie O Mzyece Hannah H Blake Alexandre A Moonde Loveness L Zulu Gideon G Poncin Marc M Sinyange Nyambe N Kasese-Chanda Nancy N Phiri Caroline C Malama Kennedy K Mukonka Victor V Cohuet Sandra S Uzzeni Florent F Ciglenecki Iza I Danovaro-Holliday M Carolina MC Luquero Francisco J FJ Pezzoli Lorenzo L

PloS one 20190830 8

<h4>Background</h4>In April 2016, an emergency vaccination campaign using one dose of Oral Cholera Vaccine (OCV) was organized in response to a cholera outbreak that started in Lusaka in February 2016. In December 2016, a second round of vaccination was conducted, with the objective of increasing the duration of protection, before the high-risk period for cholera transmission. We assessed vaccination coverage for the first and second rounds of the OCV campaign.<h4>Methods</h4>Vaccination coverag ...[more]

PMID: 31469853

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite advance in science and technology for prevention, detection and treatment of cholera, this infectious disease remains a major public health problem in many countries in sub-Saharan Africa, Uganda inclusive. The aim of this study was to identify cholera hotspots in Uganda to guide the development of a roadmap for prevention, control and elimination of cholera in the country.Methodology/principle findingsWe obtained district level confirmed cholera outbreak data from 2011 to 2016 from the Ministry of Health, Uganda. Population and rainfall data were obtained from the Uganda Bureau of Statistics, and water, sanitation and hygiene data from the Ministry of Water and Environment. A spatial scan test was performed to identify the significantly high risk clusters. Cholera hotspots were defined as districts whose center fell within a significantly high risk cluster or where a significantly high risk cluster was completely superimposed onto a district. A zero-inflated negative binomial regression model was employed to identify the district level risk factors for cholera. In total 11,030 cases of cholera were reported during the 6-year period. 37(33%) of 112 districts reported cholera outbreaks in one of the six years, and 20 (18%) districts experienced cholera at least twice in those years. We identified 22 districts as high risk for cholera, of which 13 were near a border of Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), while 9 districts were near a border of Kenya. The relative risk of having cholera inside the high-risk districts (hotspots) were 2 to 22 times higher than elsewhere in the country. In total, 7 million people were within cholera hotspots. The negative binomial component of the ZINB model shows people living near a lake or the Nile river were at increased risk for cholera (incidence rate ratio, IRR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.97 to 0.99, p < .01); people living near the border of DRC/Kenya or higher incidence rate in the neighboring districts were increased risk for cholera in a district (IRR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.98 to 1.00, p = .02 and IRR = 1.02, 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.03, p < .01, respectively). The zero inflated component of the ZINB model yielded shorter distance to Kenya or DRC border, higher incidence rate in the neighboring districts, and higher annual rainfall in the district were associated with the risk of having cholera in the district.Conclusions/significanceThe study identified cholera hotspots during the period 2011-2016. The people located near the international borders, internationally shared lakes and river Nile were at higher risk for cholera outbreaks than elsewhere in the country. Targeting cholera interventions to these locations could prevent and ultimately eliminate cholera in Uganda.

Project description:IntroductionIn 2016, for the very first time, the Ministry of Health in Zambia implemented a reactive outbreak response to control the spread of cholera and vaccinated at-risk populations with a single dose of Shancol-an oral cholera vaccine (OCV). This study aimed to assess the costs of cholera illness and determine the cost-effectiveness of the 2016 vaccination campaign.MethodologyFrom April to June 2017, we conducted a retrospective cost and cost-effectiveness analysis in three peri-urban areas of Lusaka. To estimate costs of illness from a household perspective, a systematic random sample of 189 in-patients confirmed with V. cholera were identified from Cholera Treatment Centre registers and interviewed for out-of-pocket costs. Vaccine delivery and health systems costs were extracted from financial records at the District Health Office and health facilities. The cost of cholera treatment was derived by multiplying the subsidized cost of drugs by the quantity administered to patients during hospitalisation. The cost-effectiveness analysis measured incremental cost-effectiveness ratio-cost per case averted, cost per life saved and cost per DALY averted-for a single dose OCV.ResultsThe mean cost per administered vaccine was US$1.72. Treatment costs per hospitalized episode were US$14.49-US$18.03 for patients ≤15 years old and US$17.66-US$35.16 for older patients. Whereas households incurred costs on non-medical items such as communication, beverages, food and transport during illness, a large proportion of medical costs were borne by the health system. Assuming vaccine effectiveness of 88.9% and 63%, a life expectancy of 62 years and Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita of US$1,500, the costs per case averted were estimated US$369-US$532. Costs per life year saved ranged from US$18,515-US$27,976. The total cost per DALY averted was estimated between US$698-US$1,006 for patients ≤15 years old and US$666-US$1,000 for older patients.ConclusionOur study determined that reactive vaccination campaign with a single dose of Shancol for cholera control in densely populated areas of Lusaka was cost-effective.

Dataset Information

Delayed second dose of oral cholera vaccine administered before high-risk period for cholera transmission: Cholera control strategy in Lusaka, 2016.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Delayed second dose of oral cholera vaccine administered before high-risk period for cholera transmission: Cholera control strategy in Lusaka, 2016.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets