IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pntd00/0002465.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

First Outbreak Response Using an Oral Cholera Vaccine in Africa: Vaccine Coverage, Acceptability and Surveillance of Adverse Events, Guinea, 2012

Author

Listed:
  • Francisco J Luquero
  • Lise Grout
  • Iza Ciglenecki
  • Keita Sakoba
  • Bala Traore
  • Melat Heile
  • Alpha Amadou Dialo
  • Christian Itama
  • Micaela Serafini
  • Dominique Legros
  • Rebecca F Grais

Abstract

Background: Despite World Health Organization (WHO) prequalification of two safe and effective oral cholera vaccines (OCV), concerns about the acceptability, potential diversion of resources, cost and feasibility of implementing timely campaigns has discouraged their use. In 2012, the Ministry of Health of Guinea, with the support of Médecins Sans Frontières organized the first mass vaccination campaign using a two-dose OCV (Shanchol) as an additional control measure to respond to the on-going nationwide epidemic. Overall, 316,250 vaccines were delivered. Here, we present the results of vaccination coverage, acceptability and surveillance of adverse events. Methodology/Principal Findings: We performed a cross-sectional cluster survey and implemented adverse event surveillance. The study population included individuals older than 12 months, eligible for vaccination, and residing in the areas targeted for vaccination (Forécariah and Boffa, Guinea). Data sources were household interviews with verification by vaccination card and notifications of adverse events from surveillance at vaccination posts and health centres. In total 5,248 people were included in the survey, 3,993 in Boffa and 1,255 in Forécariah. Overall, 89.4% [95%CI:86.4–91.8%] and 87.7% [95%CI:84.2–90.6%] were vaccinated during the first round and 79.8% [95%CI:75.6–83.4%] and 82.9% [95%CI:76.6–87.7%] during the second round in Boffa and Forécariah respectively. The two dose vaccine coverage (including card and oral reporting) was 75.8% [95%CI: 71.2–75.9%] in Boffa and 75.9% [95%CI: 69.8–80.9%] in Forécariah respectively. Vaccination coverage was higher in children. The main reason for non-vaccination was absence. No severe adverse events were notified. Conclusions/Significance: The well-accepted mass vaccination campaign reached high coverage in a remote area with a mobile population. Although OCV should not be foreseen as the long-term solution for global cholera control, they should be integrated as an additional tool into the response. Author Summary: Two safe and effective oral cholera vaccines are recommended by the World Health Organization for cholera prevention and control; however, concerns about the acceptability, potential diversion of resources, cost and feasibility of implementing timely campaigns has discouraged their use. In 2012, the Ministry of Health of Guinea, with the support of Médecins Sans Frontières, organized the first mass vaccination campaign using a two-dose oral cholera vaccine (Shanchol) as an additional control measure to respond to an on-going nationwide epidemic. This was also the first time that Shanchol was used in a mass vaccination campaign on the African continent. High coverage was reached within a few weeks, and the campaigns were well accepted by the population. Synergies between different axes in cholera control interventions should be pursued as described here, and although oral cholera vaccines should not be foreseen as the long-term solution for global cholera control, they should be integrated as an additional tool into the outbreak response strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Francisco J Luquero & Lise Grout & Iza Ciglenecki & Keita Sakoba & Bala Traore & Melat Heile & Alpha Amadou Dialo & Christian Itama & Micaela Serafini & Dominique Legros & Rebecca F Grais, 2013. "First Outbreak Response Using an Oral Cholera Vaccine in Africa: Vaccine Coverage, Acceptability and Surveillance of Adverse Events, Guinea, 2012," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(10), pages 1-9, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0002465
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0002465
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0002465
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0002465&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pntd.0002465?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0002465. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosntds (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.