Delayed second dose of oral cholera vaccine administered before high-risk period for cholera transmission: Cholera control strategy in Lusaka, 2016.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
21
02
2019
accepted:
16
06
2019
entrez:
31
8
2019
pubmed:
31
8
2019
medline:
29
2
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
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. 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. 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. 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.
Sections du résumé
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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31469853
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0219040
pii: PONE-D-19-05171
pmc: PMC6716633
doi:
Substances chimiques
Cholera Vaccines
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0219040Subventions
Organisme : World Health Organization
ID : 001
Pays : International
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Emerg Infect Dis. 2017 Jan;23(1):38-45
pubmed: 27983502
N Engl J Med. 2018 Feb 8;378(6):577-579
pubmed: 29414267
N Engl J Med. 2014 May 29;370(22):2111-20
pubmed: 24869721
Emerg Infect Dis. 2015 Jun;21(6):984-91
pubmed: 25988350
Lancet Glob Health. 2016 Nov;4(11):e856-e863
pubmed: 27765293
Wkly Epidemiol Rec. ;92(36):521-30
pubmed: 28884993
East Afr Med J. 2013 Oct;90(10):324-31
pubmed: 26862642
Vaccine. 2016 Jan 2;34(1):128-33
pubmed: 26549363
Vaccine. 2014 Sep 29;32(43):5690-5
pubmed: 25149429
N Engl J Med. 2016 May 5;374(18):1723-32
pubmed: 27144848
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2013 Oct 17;7(10):e2465
pubmed: 24147164
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017 Jun 8;11(6):e0005652
pubmed: 28594891
PLoS Med. 2015 Aug 25;12(8):e1001867
pubmed: 26305226
Lancet Infect Dis. 2017 Oct;17(10):1080-1088
pubmed: 28729167
Vaccine. 2013 Dec 9;31(51):6058-64
pubmed: 24161413
Bull World Health Organ. 2018 Feb 01;96(2):86-93
pubmed: 29403111
Int J Health Geogr. 2015 Nov 14;14:33
pubmed: 26572873