Risk factors for cholera transmission in Haiti during inter-peak periods: insights to improve current control strategies from two case-control studies.

Two community-based density case-control studies were performed to assess risk factors for cholera transmission during inter-peak periods of the ongoing epidemic in two Haitian urban settings, Gonaives and Carrefour. The strongest associations were: close contact with cholera patients (sharing latrines, visiting cholera patients, helping someone with diarrhoea), eating food from street vendors and washing dishes with untreated water. Protective factors were: drinking chlorinated water, receiving prevention messages via television, church or training sessions, and high household socioeconomic level. These findings suggest that, in addition to contaminated water, factors related to direct and indirect inter-human contact play an important role in cholera transmission during inter-peak periods. In order to reduce cholera transmission in Haiti intensive preventive measures such as hygiene promotion and awareness campaigns should be implemented during inter-peak lulls, when prevention activities are typically scaled back.

Use of Lot Quality Assurance Sampling (LQAS) to estimate vaccination coverage helps guide future vaccination efforts.

Inadequate evaluation of vaccine coverage after mass vaccination campaigns, such as used in national measles control programmes, can lead to inappropriate public health responses. Overestimation of vaccination coverage may leave populations at risk, whilst underestimation can lead to unnecessary catch-up campaigns. The problem is more complex in large urban areas where vaccination coverage may be heterogeneous and the programme may have to be fine-tuned at the level of geographic subunits. Lack of accurate population figures in many contexts further complicates accurate vaccination coverage estimates. During the evaluation of a mass vaccination campaign carried out in N'Djamena, the capital of Chad, Lot Quality Assurance Sampling was used to estimate vaccination coverage. Using this method, vaccination coverage could be evaluated within smaller geographic areas of the city as well as for the entire city. Despite the lack of accurate population data by neighbourhood, the results of the survey showed heterogeneity of vaccination coverage within the city. These differences would not have been identified using a more traditional method. The results can be used to target areas of low vaccination coverage during follow-up vaccination activities.

Unacceptably high mortality related to measles epidemics in Niger, Nigeria, and Chad.

BACKGROUND: Despite the comprehensive World Health Organization (WHO)/United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) measles mortality-reduction strategy and the Measles Initiative, a partnership of international organizations supporting measles mortality reduction in Africa, certain high-burden countries continue to face recurrent epidemics. To our knowledge, few recent studies have documented measles mortality in sub-Saharan Africa. The objective of our study was to investigate measles mortality in three recent epidemics in Niamey (Niger), N'Djamena (Chad), and Adamawa State (Nigeria). METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted three exhaustive household retrospective mortality surveys in one neighbourhood of each of the three affected areas: Boukoki, Niamey, Niger (April 2004, n = 26,795); Moursal, N'Djamena, Chad (June 2005, n = 21,812); and Dong District, Adamawa State, Nigeria (April 2005, n = 16,249), where n is the total surveyed population in each of the respective areas. Study populations included all persons resident for at least 2 wk prior to the study, a duration encompassing the measles incubation period. Heads of households provided information on measles cases, clinical outcomes up to 30 d after rash onset, and health-seeking behaviour during the epidemic. Measles cases and deaths were ascertained using standard WHO surveillance-case definitions. Our main outcome measures were measles attack rates (ARs) and case fatality ratios (CFRs) by age group, and descriptions of measles complications and health-seeking behaviour. Measles ARs were the highest in children under 5 y old (under 5 y): 17.1% in Boukoki, 17.2% in Moursal, and 24.3% in Dong District. CFRs in under 5-y-olds were 4.6%, 4.0%, and 10.8% in Boukoki, Moursal, and Dong District, respectively. In all sites, more than half of measles cases in children aged under 5 y experienced acute respiratory infection and/or diarrhoea in the 30 d following rash onset. Of measles cases, it was reported that 85.7% (979/1,142) of patients visited a health-care facility within 30 d after rash onset in Boukoki, 73.5% (519/706) in Moursal, and 52.8% (603/1,142) in Dong District. CONCLUSIONS: Children in these countries still face unacceptably high mortality from a completely preventable disease. While the successes of measles mortality-reduction strategies and progress observed in measles control in other countries of the region are laudable and evident, they should not overshadow the need for intensive efforts in countries that have just begun implementation of the WHO/UNICEF comprehensive strategy.

Ceftriaxone as effective as long-acting chloramphenicol in short-course treatment of meningococcal meningitis during epidemics: a randomised non-inferiority study.

BACKGROUND: In sub-Saharan Africa in the 1990s, more than 600,000 people had epidemic meningococcal meningitis, of whom 10% died. The current recommended treatment by WHO is short-course long-acting oily chloramphenicol. Continuation of the production of this drug is uncertain, so simple alternatives need to be found. We assessed whether the efficacy of single-dose treatment of ceftriaxone was non-inferior to that of oily chloramphenicol for epidemic meningococcal meningitis. METHODS: In 2003, we undertook a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial in nine health-care facilities in Niger. Participants with suspected disease who were older than 2 months were randomly assigned to receive either chloramphenicol or ceftriaxone. Primary outcome was treatment failure (defined as death or clinical failure) at 72 h, measured with intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses. FINDINGS: Of 510 individuals with suspected disease, 247 received ceftriaxone, 256 received chloramphenicol, and seven were lost to follow-up. The treatment failure rate at 72 h for the intention-to-treat analysis was 9% (22 patients) for both drug groups (risk difference 0.3%, 90% CI -3.8 to 4.5). Case fatality rates and clinical failure rates were equivalent in both treatment groups (14 [6%] ceftriaxone vs 12 [5%] chloramphenicol). Results were also similar for both treatment groups in individuals with confirmed meningitis caused by Neisseria meningitidis. No adverse side-effects were reported. INTERPRETATION: Single-dose ceftriaxone provides an alternative treatment for epidemic meningococcal meningitis--its efficacy, ease of use, and low cost favour its use. National and international health partners should consider ceftriaxone as an alternative first-line treatment to chloramphenicol for epidemic meningococcal meningitis.