The modeling assessment of World Vision’s Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Program in Southern Africa countries, Malawi, Mozambique, and Zambia: analyses using Lives Saved Tool

Background: Since 2010, the humanitarian aid organization World Vision has implemented a community-based water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) program in 76 area development programs (ADPs) for a total target population of 2,831,535 in three Southern Africa countries: Malawi, Mozambique, and Zambia. Methods: This study was conducted using the Lives Saved Tool (LiST) to analyze the isolated impact of World Vision WASH interventions on child morbidity and mortality during the four-year implementation period from 2010 to 2014. The combined effects of WASH interventions – improved water source, home water connection, improved sanitation, handwashing with soap, hygienic disposal of children’s stools – were analyzed through LiST. Results: It showed that 917 to 929 children under five years of age were saved from death caused by diarrhea, pneumonia, meningitis, or measles between 2010 and 2014. WASH interventions led to a 131% mean increase in the percentage of under-five lives saved, alongside a 4.47% mean decrease in under-five mortality rates across the three countries. In addition, 809,552 cases of diarrhea among 541,935 children under the age of five were prevented. Conclusions: LiST acted as an effective tool for conducting the quantitative modeling assessment of the program retrospectively at a subnational level. World Vision WASH interventions in Malawi, Mozambique, and Zambia successfully saved children’s lives, and various approaches to WASH for the future program are necessary to reach the goal of preventing all three cases of diarrhea per child each year by 2020

Effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of a single annual professional intervention for the prevention of childhood dental caries in a remote rural Indigenous community

Background The aim of the study is to reduce the high prevalence of tooth decay in children in a remote, rural Indigenous community in Australia, by application of a single annual dental preventive intervention. The study seeks to (1) assess the effectiveness of an annual oral health preventive intervention in slowing the incidence of dental caries in children in this community, (2) identify the mediating role of known risk factors for dental caries and (3) assess the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of the intervention. Methods/design The intervention is novel in that most dental preventive interventions require regular re-application, which is not possible in resource constrained communities. While tooth decay is preventable, self-care and healthy habits are lacking in these communities, placing more emphasis on health services to deliver an effective dental preventive intervention. Importantly, the study will assess cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness for broader implementation across similar communities in Australia and internationally. Discussion There is an urgent need to reduce the burden of dental decay in these communities, by implementing effective, cost-effective, feasible and sustainable dental prevention programs. Expected outcomes of this study include improved oral and general health of children within the community; an understanding of the costs associated with the intervention provided, and its comparison with the costs of allowing new lesions to develop, with associated treatment costs. Findings should be generalisable to similar communities around the world. The research is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), registration number ACTRN12615000693527; date of registration: 3rd July 2015

The Jamaica asthma and allergies national prevalence survey: rationale and methods

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Asthma is a significant public health problem in the Caribbean. Prevalence surveys using standardized measures of asthma provide valid prevalence estimates to facilitate regional and international comparisons and monitoring of trends. This paper describes methods used in the Jamaica Asthma and Allergies National Prevalence Survey, challenges associated with this survey and strategies used to overcome these challenges.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>An island wide, cross-sectional, community-based survey of asthma, asthma symptoms and allergies was done among adults and children using the European Community Respiratory Health Survey Questionnaire for adults and the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Children. Stratified multi-stage cluster sampling was used to select 2, 163 adults aged 18 years and older and 2, 017 children aged 2-17 years for the survey. The Kish selection table was used to select one adult and one child per household. Data analysis accounted for sampling design and prevalence estimates were weighted to produce national estimates.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The Jamaica Asthma and Allergies National Prevalence Survey is the first population- based survey in the Caribbean to determine the prevalence of asthma and allergies both in adults and children using standardized methods. With response rates exceeding 80% in both groups, this approach facilitated cost-effective gathering of high quality asthma prevalence data that will facilitate international and regional comparison and monitoring of asthma prevalence trends. Another unique feature of this study was the partnership with the Ministry of Health in Jamaica, which ensured the collection of data relevant for decision-making to facilitate the uptake of research evidence. The findings of this study will provide important data on the burden of asthma and allergies in Jamaica and contribute to evidence-informed planning of comprehensive asthma management and education programs.</p

Lives saved with vaccination for 10 pathogens across 112 countries in a pre-COVID-19 world.

BackgroundVaccination is one of the most effective public health interventions. We investigate the impact of vaccination activities for Haemophilus influenzae type b, hepatitis B, human papillomavirus, Japanese encephalitis, measles, Neisseria meningitidis serogroup A, rotavirus, rubella, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and yellow fever over the years 2000-2030 across 112 countries.MethodsTwenty-one mathematical models estimated disease burden using standardised demographic and immunisation data. Impact was attributed to the year of vaccination through vaccine-activity-stratified impact ratios.ResultsWe estimate 97 (95%CrI[80, 120]) million deaths would be averted due to vaccination activities over 2000-2030, with 50 (95%CrI[41, 62]) million deaths averted by activities between 2000 and 2019. For children under-5 born between 2000 and 2030, we estimate 52 (95%CrI[41, 69]) million more deaths would occur over their lifetimes without vaccination against these diseases.ConclusionsThis study represents the largest assessment of vaccine impact before COVID-19-related disruptions and provides motivation for sustaining and improving global vaccination coverage in the future.FundingVIMC is jointly funded by Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) (BMGF grant number: OPP1157270 / INV-009125). Funding from Gavi is channelled via VIMC to the Consortium's modelling groups (VIMC-funded institutions represented in this paper: Imperial College London, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, Public Health England, Johns Hopkins University, The Pennsylvania State University, Center for Disease Analysis Foundation, Kaiser Permanente Washington, University of Cambridge, University of Notre Dame, Harvard University, Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers, Emory University, National University of Singapore). Funding from BMGF was used for salaries of the Consortium secretariat (authors represented here: TBH, MJ, XL, SE-L, JT, KW, NMF, KAMG); and channelled via VIMC for travel and subsistence costs of all Consortium members (all authors). We also acknowledge funding from the UK Medical Research Council and Department for International Development, which supported aspects of VIMC's work (MRC grant number: MR/R015600/1).JHH acknowledges funding from National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship; Richard and Peggy Notebaert Premier Fellowship from the University of Notre Dame. BAL acknowledges funding from NIH/NIGMS (grant number R01 GM124280) and NIH/NIAID (grant number R01 AI112970). The Lives Saved Tool (LiST) receives funding support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.This paper was compiled by all coauthors, including two coauthors from Gavi. Other funders had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report. All authors had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication

Adjunctive rifampicin for Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (ARREST): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia is a common cause of severe community-acquired and hospital-acquired infection worldwide. We tested the hypothesis that adjunctive rifampicin would reduce bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death, by enhancing early S aureus killing, sterilising infected foci and blood faster, and reducing risks of dissemination and metastatic infection. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adults (≥18 years) with S aureus bacteraemia who had received ≤96 h of active antibiotic therapy were recruited from 29 UK hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequential randomisation list to receive 2 weeks of adjunctive rifampicin (600 mg or 900 mg per day according to weight, oral or intravenous) versus identical placebo, together with standard antibiotic therapy. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Patients, investigators, and those caring for the patients were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was time to bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death (all-cause), from randomisation to 12 weeks, adjudicated by an independent review committee masked to the treatment. Analysis was intention to treat. This trial was registered, number ISRCTN37666216, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between Dec 10, 2012, and Oct 25, 2016, 758 eligible participants were randomly assigned: 370 to rifampicin and 388 to placebo. 485 (64%) participants had community-acquired S aureus infections, and 132 (17%) had nosocomial S aureus infections. 47 (6%) had meticillin-resistant infections. 301 (40%) participants had an initial deep infection focus. Standard antibiotics were given for 29 (IQR 18-45) days; 619 (82%) participants received flucloxacillin. By week 12, 62 (17%) of participants who received rifampicin versus 71 (18%) who received placebo experienced treatment failure or disease recurrence, or died (absolute risk difference -1·4%, 95% CI -7·0 to 4·3; hazard ratio 0·96, 0·68-1·35, p=0·81). From randomisation to 12 weeks, no evidence of differences in serious (p=0·17) or grade 3-4 (p=0·36) adverse events were observed; however, 63 (17%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 39 (10%) in the placebo group had antibiotic or trial drug-modifying adverse events (p=0·004), and 24 (6%) versus six (2%) had drug interactions (p=0·0005). INTERPRETATION: Adjunctive rifampicin provided no overall benefit over standard antibiotic therapy in adults with S aureus bacteraemia. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment