Field Epidemiology and Laboratory Training Programs in sub-Saharan Africa from 2004 to 2010: need, the process, and prospects

As of 2010 sub-Saharan Africa had approximately 865 million inhabitants living with numerous public health challenges. Several public health initiatives [e.g., the United States (US) President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief and the US President’s Malaria Initiative] have been very successful at reducing mortality from priority diseases. A competently trained public health workforce that can operate multi-disease surveillance and response systems is necessary to build upon and sustain these successes and to address other public health problems. Sub-Saharan Africa appears to have weathered the recent global economic downturn remarkably well and its increasing middle class may soon demand stronger public health systems to protect communities. The Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) program of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been the backbone of public health surveillance and response in the US during its 60 years of existence. EIS has been adapted internationally to create the Field Epidemiology Training Program (FETP) in several countries. In the 1990s CDC and the Rockefeller Foundation collaborated with the Uganda and Zimbabwe ministries of health and local universities to create 2-year Public Health Schools Without Walls (PHSWOWs) which were based on the FETP model. In 2004 the FETP model was further adapted to create the Field Epidemiology and Laboratory Training Program (FELTP) in Kenya to conduct joint competencybased training for field epidemiologists and public health laboratory scientists providing a master’s degree to participants upon completion. The FELTP model has been implemented in several additional countries in sub-Saharan Africa. By the end of 2010 these 10 FELTPs and two PHSWOWs covered 613 million of the 865 million people in sub-Saharan Africa and had enrolled 743 public health professionals. We describe the process that we used to develop 10 FELTPs covering 15 countries in sub-Saharan Africa from 2004 to 2010 as a strategy to develop a locally trained public health workforce that can operate multi-disease surveillance and response systems.Key words: Field epidemiology, laboratory management, multi-disease surveillance and response systems, public health workforce capacity buildin

Field Evaluation of Calypte’s AWARE™ Blood Serum Plasma (BSP) and Oral Mucosal Transudate (OMT) Rapid Tests for Detecting Antibodies to HIV-1 and 2 in Plasma and Oral Fluid

As programs to prevent and care for HIV-infected persons are scaled-up in Africa, there is the need for continuous evaluation of the performance of test kits that could best support these programs. The present study evaluated the sensitivity, specificity, ease of use, and cost of AWARE ™ Blood Serum Plasma (BSP) and Oral Mucosal Transudate (OMT) Rapid HIV-1/2 test kits using real-time and archived samples of HIV-infected persons from Cameroon. Matched whole blood and OMT specimens were collected prospectively from HIV-positive and HIV-negative persons from different regions of Cameroon and tested using the AWARE ™ BSP and OMT test kits, respectively. These results were compared to the gold standard that included a combination of Determine HIV-1/2 and Enzygnost HIV-1/2. The BSP Rapid test kit was further evaluated using well characterized panels of HIV-2 and HIV-1 group O samples. Cost and end-user analysis of the OMT test kit was done by comparing its actual cost, consumables, safety, bench time and manipulation with other test kits. Of the 732 matched samples, 412 (56.3%) and 320 (43.7%) were from females and males, respectively. Of these samples, 23 (3.1%) gave discordant results between Determine HIV-1/2 and Enzygnost HIV1/2 and were excluded from the analysis. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of the AWARE™ BSP were 100%. The AWARE™ OMT had 98.8% sensitivity, 98.9% specificity, 98.0% PPV and 99.4% NPV. The results of a well-characterized archived panel of HIV-2 (n=7) and HIV-1 group O (n=3) samples using the AWARE™ BSP Rapid test kit gave 100% concordance. Total per patient cost of the AWARE OMT rapid test kit was US$4.72 compared to a mean cost of US$7.33 ± 0.11 for the other test kits. Both the AWARE™ BSP and OMT Rapid test kits demonstrated high sensitivities and specificities on all samples tested and were well adapted for use in resource-constrained settings with high HIV heterogeneity such as Cameroon. The AWARE ™ HIV-1/2 OMT Rapid test kit appears to be the cheapest, safest and easiest to use compared with other available test kits