77 research outputs found

    Key issues in the persistence of poliomyelitis in Nigeria: a case-control study

    Get PDF
    Background The completion of poliomyelitis eradication is a global emergency for public health. In 2012, more than 50% of the world’s cases occurred in Nigeria following an unanticipated surge in incidence. We aimed to quantitatively analyse the key factors sustaining transmission of poliomyelitis in Nigeria and to calculate clinical effi cacy estimates for the oral poliovirus vaccines (OPV) currently in use. Methods We used acute fl accid paralysis (AFP) surveillance data from Nigeria collected between January, 2001, and December, 2012, to estimate the clinical effi cacies of all four OPVs in use and combined this with vaccination coverage to estimate the eff ect of the introduction of monovalent and bivalent OPV on vaccine-induced serotype-specifi c population immunity. Vaccine effi cacy was determined using a case-control study with CIs based on bootstrap resampling. Vaccine effi cacy was also estimated separately for north and south Nigeria, by age of the children, and by year. Detailed 60-day follow-up data were collected from children with confi rmed poliomyelitis and were used to assess correlates of vaccine status. We also quantitatively assessed the epidemiology of poliomyelitis and programme performance and considered the reasons for the high vaccine refusal rate along with risk factors for a given local government area reporting a case. Findings Against serotype 1, both monovalent OPV (median 32·1%, 95% CI 26·1–38·1) and bivalent OPV (29·5%, 20·1–38·4) had higher clinical effi cacy than trivalent OPV (19·4%, 16·1–22·8). Corresponding data for serotype 3 were 43·2% (23·1–61·1) and 23·8% (5·3–44·9) compared with 18·0% (14·1–22·1). Combined with increases in coverage, this factor has boosted population immunity in children younger than age 36 months to a record high (64–69% against serotypes 1 and 3). Vaccine effi cacy in northern states was estimated to be signifi cantly lower than in southern states (p≀0·05). The proportion of cases refusing vaccination decreased from 37–72% in 2008 to 21–51% in 2012 for routine and supplementary immunisation, and most caregivers cited ignorance of either vaccine importance or availability as the main reason for missing routine vaccinations (32·1% and 29·6% of cases, respectively). Multiple regression analyses highlighted associations between the age of the mother, availability of OPV at health facilities, and the primary source of health information and the probability of receiving OPV (all p<0·05). Interpretation Although high refusal rates, low OPV campaign awareness, and heterogeneous population immunity continued to support poliomyelitis transmission in Nigeria at the end of 2012, overall population immunity had improved due to new OPV formulations and improvements in programme delivery.Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Vaccine Modeling Initiative, Royal Society.Introduction In May, 2012, after more than 20 years of mass vaccination campaigns, the 65t

    The effect of mass immunisation campaigns and new oral poliovirus vaccines on the incidence of poliomyelitis in Pakistan and Afghanistan, 2001–11: a retrospective analysis

    Get PDF
    SummaryBackgroundPakistan and Afghanistan are two of the three remaining countries yet to interrupt wild-type poliovirus transmission. The increasing incidence of poliomyelitis in these countries during 2010–11 led the Executive Board of WHO in January, 2012, to declare polio eradication a “programmatic emergency for global public health”. We aimed to establish why incidence is rising in these countries despite programme innovations including the introduction of new vaccines.MethodsWe did a matched case-control analysis based on a database of 46 977 children aged 0–14 years with onset of acute flaccid paralysis between Jan 1, 2001, and Dec 31, 2011. The vaccination history of children with poliomyelitis was compared with that of children with acute flaccid paralysis due to other causes to estimate the clinical effectiveness of oral poliovirus vaccines (OPVs) in Afghanistan and Pakistan by conditional logistic regression. We estimated vaccine coverage and serotype-specific vaccine-induced population immunity in children aged 0–2 years and assessed their association with the incidence of poliomyelitis over time in seven regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan.FindingsBetween Jan 1, 2001, and Dec 31, 2011, there were 883 cases of serotype 1 poliomyelitis (710 in Pakistan and 173 in Afghanistan) and 272 cases of poliomyelitis serotype 3 (216 in Pakistan and 56 in Afghanistan). The estimated clinical effectiveness of a dose of trivalent OPV against serotype 1 poliomyelitis was 12·5% (95% CI 5·6–18·8) compared with 34·5% (16·1–48·9) for monovalent OPV (p=0·007) and 23·4% (10·4–34·6) for bivalent OPV (p=0·067). Bivalent OPV was non-inferior compared with monovalent OPV (p=0·21). Vaccination coverage decreased during 2006–11 in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), Balochistan, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in Pakistan and in southern Afghanistan. Although partially mitigated by the use of more effective vaccines, these decreases in coverage resulted in lower vaccine-induced population immunity to poliovirus serotype 1 in FATA and Balochistan and associated increases in the incidence of poliomyelitis.InterpretationThe effectiveness of bivalent OPV is comparable with monovalent OPV and can therefore be used in eradicating serotype 1 poliomyelitis whilst minimising the risks of serotype 3 outbreaks. However, decreases in vaccination coverage in parts of Pakistan and southern Afghanistan have severely limited the effect of this vaccine.FundingPoliovirus Research subcommittee of WHO, Royal Society, and Medical Research Council

    How absolute is zero? An evaluation of historical and current definitions of malaria elimination

    Get PDF
    Decisions to eliminate malaria from all or part of a country involve a complex set of factors, and this complexity is compounded by ambiguity surrounding some of the key terminology, most notably "control" and "elimination." It is impossible to forecast resource and operational requirements accurately if endpoints have not been defined clearly, yet even during the Global Malaria Eradication Program, debate raged over the precise definition of "eradication." Analogous deliberations regarding the meaning of "elimination" and "control" are basically nonexistent today despite these terms' core importance to programme planning. To advance the contemporary debate about these issues, this paper presents a historical review of commonly used terms, including control, elimination, and eradication, to help contextualize current understanding of these concepts. The review has been supported by analysis of the underlying mathematical concepts on which these definitions are based through simple branching process models that describe the proliferation of malaria cases following importation. Through this analysis, the importance of pragmatic definitions that are useful for providing malaria control and elimination programmes with a practical set of strategic milestones is emphasized, and it is argued that current conceptions of elimination in particular fail to achieve these requirements. To provide all countries with precise targets, new conceptual definitions are suggested to more precisely describe the old goals of "control" - here more exactly named "controlled low-endemic malaria" - and "elimination." Additionally, it is argued that a third state, called "controlled non-endemic malaria," is required to describe the epidemiological condition in which endemic transmission has been interrupted, but malaria resulting from onwards transmission from imported infections continues to occur at a sufficiently high level that elimination has not been achieved. Finally, guidelines are discussed for deriving the separate operational definitions and metrics that will be required to make these concepts relevant, measurable, and achievable for a particular environment

    The Neutron star Interior Composition Explorer (NICER): design and development

    Get PDF

    Feasibility study of mitigation and suppression strategies for controlling COVID-19 outbreaks in London and Wuhan

    Get PDF
    Recent outbreaks of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led a global pandemic cross the world. Most countries took two main interventions: suppression like immediate lockdown cities at epicenter or mitigation that slows down but not stopping epidemic for reducing peak healthcare demand. Both strategies have their apparent merits and limitations; it becomes extremely hard to conduct one intervention as the most feasible way to all countries. Targeting at this problem, this paper conducted a feasibility study by defining a mathematical model named SEMCR, it extended traditional SEIR (Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Recovered) model by adding two key features: a direct connection between Exposed and Recovered populations, and separating infections into mild and critical cases. It defined parameters to classify two stages of COVID-19 control: active contain by isolation of cases and contacts, passive contain by suppression or mitigation. The model was fitted and evaluated with public dataset containing daily number of confirmed active cases including Wuhan and London during January 2020 and March 2020. The simulated results showed that 1) Immediate suppression taken in Wuhan significantly reduced the total exposed and infectious populations, but it has to be consistently maintained at least 90 days (by the middle of April 2020). Its success heavily relied on sufficiently external support from other places of China. This mode was not suitable to other countries that have no sufficient health resources. 2) In London, it is possible to take a hybrid intervention of suppression and mitigation for every 2 or 3 weeks over a longer period to balance the total infections and economic loss. While the total infectious populations in this scenario would be possibly 2 times than the one taking suppression, economic loss and recovery of London would be less affected. 3) Both in Wuhan and London cases, one important issue of fitting practical data was that there were a large portion (probably 62.9% in Wuhan) of self-recovered populations that were asymptomatic or mild symptomatic. These people might think they have been healthy at home and did not go to hospital for COVID-19 tests. Early release of intervention intensity potentially increased a risk of the second outbreak

    Global health goals: lessons from the worldwide effort to eradicate poliomyelitis.

    No full text
    The Global Polio Eradication Initiative was launched in 1988. Assessment of the politics, production, financing, and economics of this international effort has suggested six lessons that might be pertinent to the pursuit of other global health goals. First, such goals should be based on technically sound strategies with proven operational feasibility in a large geographical area. Second, before launching an initiative, an informed collective decision must be negotiated and agreed in an appropriate international forum to keep to a minimum long-term risks in financing and implementation. Third, if substantial community engagement is envisaged, efficient deployment of sufficient resources at that level necessitates a defined, time-limited input by the community within a properly managed partnership. Fourth, although the so-called fair-share concept is arguably the best way to finance such goals, its limitations must be recognised early and alternative strategies developed for settings where it does not work. Fifth, international health goals must be designed and pursued within existing health systems if they are to secure and sustain broad support. Finally, countries, regions, or populations most likely to delay the achievement of a global health goal should be identified at the outset to ensure provision of sufficient resources and attention. The greatest threats to poliomyelitis eradication are a financing gap of US 210 million dollars and difficulties in strategy implementation in at most five countries

    Eradicating polio.

    Get PDF
    • 

    corecore