Dataset Information

Oral cholera vaccine coverage during a preventive door-to-door mass vaccination campaign in Nampula, Mozambique.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In addition to improving water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) measures and optimal case management, the introduction of Oral cholera vaccine (OCV) is a complementary strategy for cholera prevention and control for vulnerable population groups. In October 2016, the Mozambique Ministry of Health implemented a mass vaccination campaign using a two-dose regimen of the Shanchol™ OCV in six high-risk neighborhoods of Nampula city, in Northern Mozambique. Overall 193,403 people were targeted by the campaign, which used a door-to-door strategy. During campaign follow-up, a population survey was conducted to assess: (1) OCV coverage; (2) frequency of adverse events following immunization; (3) vaccine acceptability and (4) reasons for non-vaccination.

Methodology/principal findings

In the absence of a household listing and clear administrative neighborhood delimitations, we used geospatial technology to select households from satellite images and used the support of community leaders. One person per household was randomly selected for interview. In total, 636 individuals were enrolled in the survey. The overall vaccination coverage with at least one dose (including card and oral reporting) was 69.5% (95%CI: 51.2-88.2) and the two-dose coverage was 51.2% (95%CI: 37.9-64.3). The campaign was well accepted. Among the 185 non-vaccinated individuals, 83 (44.6%) did not take the vaccine because they were absent when the vaccination team visited their houses. Among the 451 vaccinated individuals, 47 (10%) reported minor and non-specific complaints, and 78 (17.3%) mentioned they did not receive any information before the campaign.

Conclusions/significance

In spite of overall coverage being slightly lower than expected, the use of a mobile door-to-door strategy remains a viable option even in densely-populated urban settings. Our results suggest that campaigns can be successfully implemented and well accepted in Mozambique in non-emergency contexts in order to prevent cholera outbreaks. These findings are encouraging and complement the previous Mozambican experience related to OCV.

SUBMITTER: Sema Baltazar C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6169854 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Oral cholera vaccine coverage during a preventive door-to-door mass vaccination campaign in Nampula, Mozambique.

Semá Baltazar Cynthia C Rafael Florentina F Langa José Paulo M JPM Chicumbe Sergio S Cavailler Philippe P Gessner Bradford D BD Pezzoli Lorenzo L Barata Américo A Zaina Dores D Inguane Dortéia L DL Mengel Martin A MA Munier Aline A

PloS one 20181003 10

<h4>Background</h4>In addition to improving water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) measures and optimal case management, the introduction of Oral cholera vaccine (OCV) is a complementary strategy for cholera prevention and control for vulnerable population groups. In October 2016, the Mozambique Ministry of Health implemented a mass vaccination campaign using a two-dose regimen of the Shanchol™ OCV in six high-risk neighborhoods of Nampula city, in Northern Mozambique. Overall 193,403 people were ...[more]

PMID: 30281604

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction Mozambique suffers from regular floods along its principal river basins and periodic cyclones that resulted in several cholera epidemics during the last decades. Cholera outbreaks in the recent 5 years affected particularly the northern provinces of the country including Nampula and Niassa provinces. A pre-emptive oral cholera vaccine (OCV) mass vaccination campaign was conducted in Cuamba District, Niassa Province, and the feasibility, costs, and vaccination coverage assessed. Methods WHO prequalified OCV (Euvichol-Plus), a killed whole-cell bivalent vaccine containing Vibrio cholerae O1 (classical and El Tor) and O139, was administered in two doses with a 15-day interval during 7–31 August 2018, targeting around 180 000 people aged above 1 year in Cuamba District. Microplanning, community sensitisation, and training of local public health professionals and field enumerators were conducted. Feasibility and costs of vaccination were assessed using CholTool. Vaccination coverage and barriers were assessed through community surveys. Results The administrative coverage of the first and second rounds of the campaign were 98.9% (194 581) and 98.8% (194 325), respectively, based on the available population data that estimated total 196 652 inhabitants in the target area. The vaccination coverage survey exhibited 75.9% (±2.2%) and 68.5% (±3.3%) coverage for the first and second rounds, respectively. Overall, 60.4% (±3.4%) of the target population received full two doses of OCV. Barriers to vaccination included incompatibility between working hours and campaign time. No severe adverse events were notified. The total financial cost per dose delivered was US$0.60 without vaccine cost and US$1.98 including vaccine costs. Conclusion The pre-emptive OCV mass vaccination campaign in remote setting in Mozambique was feasible with reasonable full-dose vaccination coverage to confer sufficient herd immunity for at least the next 3 to 5 years. The delivery cost estimate indicates that the OCV campaign is affordable as it is comparable with Gavi’s operational support for vaccination campaigns.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Recent research in two cholera-endemic communities of Zanzibar has shown that a majority (?94%) of the adult population was willing to receive free oral cholera vaccines (OCVs). Since OCV uptake in the 2009 campaign reached only ?50% in these communities, an evaluation of social and cultural factors and of barriers was conducted to understand this difference for future cholera control planning. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A random sample of 367 adult peri-urban and rural community residents (46.6% immunized vs. 53.4% unimmunized) was studied with a semi-structured interview that inquired about social and cultural features of cholera depicted in a vignette and barriers to OCV uptake. Symptoms (rectal pain, loose skin only in rural community) and perceived causes (uncovered food, contact with contaminated water) specific for severe diarrhea were associated with uptake. Purchasing drugs from pharmacies to stop diarrhea and vomiting was negatively associated with uptake. Increasing household size, age and previous enteric illness episode were positively related to uptake, the latter only at the rural site. The most prominent barrier to uptake was competing obligations or priorities (reported by 74.5%, identified as most important barrier by 49.5%). Next most prominent barriers were lacking information about the campaign (29.6%, 12.2%), sickness (14.3%, 13.3%) and fear of possible vaccine side effects (15.3%, 5.6%). The majority of unvaccinated respondents requested repetition of the vaccination with free OCVs. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Factors associated with uptake indicated a positive impact of the vaccination campaign and of sensitization activities on vaccine acceptance behavior. Unlike communities opposed to cholera control or settings where public confidence in vaccines is lacking, identified barriers to uptake indicated a good campaign implementation and trust in the health system. Despite prospects and demand for repeating the vaccination, local decision-makers should reconsider how careful logistical arrangements may improve community coverage and thus effectiveness of vaccination campaigns.

Project description:BackgroundThe World Health Organization (WHO) recommends oral cholera vaccines (OCVs) as a supplementary tool to conventional prevention of cholera. Dukoral, a killed whole-cell two-dose OCV, was used in a mass vaccination campaign in 2009 in Zanzibar. Public and private costs of illness (COI) due to endemic cholera and costs of the mass vaccination campaign were estimated to assess the cost-effectiveness of OCV for this particular campaign from both the health care provider and the societal perspective.Methodology/principal findingsPublic and private COI were obtained from interviews with local experts, with patients from three outbreaks and from reports and record review. Cost data for the vaccination campaign were collected based on actual expenditure and planned budget data. A static cohort of 50,000 individuals was examined, including herd protection. Primary outcome measures were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) per death, per case and per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted. One-way sensitivity and threshold analyses were conducted. The ICER was evaluated with regard to WHO criteria for cost-effectiveness. Base-case ICERs were USD 750,000 per death averted, USD 6,000 per case averted and USD 30,000 per DALY averted, without differences between the health care provider and the societal perspective. Threshold analyses using Shanchol and assuming high incidence and case-fatality rate indicated that the purchase price per course would have to be as low as USD 1.2 to render the mass vaccination campaign cost-effective from a health care provider perspective (societal perspective: USD 1.3).Conclusions/significanceBased on empirical and site-specific cost and effectiveness data from Zanzibar, the 2009 mass vaccination campaign was cost-ineffective mainly due to the relatively high OCV purchase price and a relatively low incidence. However, mass vaccination campaigns in Zanzibar to control endemic cholera may meet criteria for cost-effectiveness under certain circumstances, especially in high-incidence areas and at OCV prices below USD 1.3.

Project description:IntroductionSince 2010, WHO has recommended oral cholera vaccines as an additional strategy for cholera control. During a cholera episode, pregnant women are at high risk of complications, and the risk of fetal death has been reported to be 2-36%. Due to a lack of safety data, pregnant women have been excluded from most cholera vaccination campaigns. In 2012, reactive campaigns using the bivalent killed whole-cell oral cholera vaccine (BivWC), included all people living in the targeted areas aged ≥ 1 year regardless of pregnancy status, were implemented in Guinea. We aimed to determine whether there was a difference in pregnancy outcomes between vaccinated and non-vaccinated pregnant women.Methods and findingsFrom 11 November to 4 December 2013, we conducted a retrospective cohort study in Boffa prefecture among women who were pregnant in 2012 during or after the vaccination campaign. The primary outcome was pregnancy loss, as reported by the mother, and fetal malformations, after clinical examination. Primary exposure was the intake of the BivWC vaccine (Shanchol) during pregnancy, as determined by a vaccination card or oral history. We compared the risk of pregnancy loss between vaccinated and non-vaccinated women through binomial regression analysis. A total of 2,494 pregnancies were included in the analysis. The crude incidence of pregnancy loss was 3.7% (95%CI 2.7-4.8) for fetuses exposed to BivWC vaccine and 2.6% (0.7-4.5) for non-exposed fetuses. The incidence of malformation was 0.6% (0.1-1.0) and 1.2% (0.0-2.5) in BivWC-exposed and non-exposed fetuses, respectively. In both crude and adjusted analyses, fetal exposure to BivWC was not significantly associated with pregnancy loss (adjusted risk ratio (aRR = 1.09 [95%CI: 0.5-2.25], p = 0.818) or malformations (aRR = 0.50 [95%CI: 0.13-1.91], p = 0.314).ConclusionsIn this large retrospective cohort study, we found no association between fetal exposure to BivWC and risk of pregnancy loss or malformation. Despite the weaknesses of a retrospective design, we can conclude that if a risk exists, it is very low. Additional prospective studies are warranted to add to the evidence base on OCV use during pregnancy. Pregnant women are particularly vulnerable during cholera episodes and should be included in vaccination campaigns when the risk of cholera is high, such as during outbreaks.

Project description:BackgroundMonitoring and Evaluation (M&E) is essential in ensuring population's access to immunization. Surveys are part of this M&E approach but its timing limits the use of its results to improve the coverage of the evaluated campaign. An oral cholera vaccination campaign was organized in a health district of the Far North region of Cameroon and involved an innovative M&E approach. The aim of this project was to assess the feasibility and effect of using recommendations of a community-based immunization and communication coverage survey conducted after the first round of an OCV campaign on the coverage of the second-round of the campaign.MethodsTwo community-based surveys were included in the M&E plan and conducted at the end of each of the campaign rounds. Data were collected by trained and closely supervised surveyors and reported using smartphones. Key results of the first-round survey were disseminated to campaign implementing team prior to the second round. The two rounds of the pre-emptive campaign were organized by the Cameroon Ministry of Public Health and partners with a two-week interval in the Mogode Health District of the Far North region of Cameroon in May and June 2017.ResultsOf 120 targeted clusters, 119 (99.1%) and 117 (97.5%) were reached for the first and second rounds respectively. Among the Mogode population eligible for vaccination, the immunization coverage based on evidence (card or finger mark) were estimated at 81.0% in the first round and increased to 88.8% in the second round (X2=69.0 and p <0.00). For the second round, we estimated 80.1% and 4.3% of persons who were administered 2 doses and 1 dose of OCV with evidence respectively, and 3.8% of persons who have not been vaccinated. The distribution of campaign communication coverage per health area was shared with the campaign coordination team for better planning of the second round campaign activities.ConclusionsIt is feasible to plan and implement coverage survey after first round OCV campaign and use its results for the better planning of the second round. For the present study, this is associated to the improvement of OCV coverage in the second-round vaccination. If this is persistent in other contexts, it may apply to improve coverage of any health campaign that is organized in more than one round.

Dataset Information

Oral cholera vaccine coverage during a preventive door-to-door mass vaccination campaign in Nampula, Mozambique.

Background

Methodology/principal findings

Conclusions/significance

Publications

Oral cholera vaccine coverage during a preventive door-to-door mass vaccination campaign in Nampula, Mozambique.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets