Search

Background: Several studies have shown that inactivated, whole-cell oral cholera vaccines (OCVs) confer both direct protection on vaccinees and herd protection on populations. Because our earlier cluster-randomized effectiveness trial (CRT) in urban Bangladesh failed to detect OCV herd protection, we reanalysed the trial to assess whether herd effects were masked in our original analysis.Methods: A total of 267 270 persons were randomized to 90 approximately equal-sized clusters. In 60 clusters persons aged 1 year and older were eligible to receive OCV and in 30 clusters persons received no intervention and served as controls. We analysed OCV protection against severely dehydrating cholera for the entire clusters, as in our original analysis, and for subclusters consisting of residents of innermost households. We hypothesized that if OCV herd protection was attenuated by cholera transmission into the clusters from the outside in this densely populated setting, herd protection would be most evident in the innermost households.Results: During 2 years of follow-up of all residents of the clusters, total protection (protection of OCV recipients relative to control residents) was 58% [95% confidence interval (CI): 43%, 70%; P<0.0001], indirect protection (protection of non-OCV recipients in OCV clusters relative to control participants) was 16% (95% CI: -20%, 41%; P=0.35) and overall OCV protection (protection of all residents in the OCV clusters relative to control residents) was 46% (95% CI: 30%, 59%; P<0.0001). Analyses of the inner 75% and 50% households of the clusters showed similar findings. However, total protection was 75% (95% CI: 50%, 87%, P<0.0001), indirect protection 52% (95% CI: -9%, 79%; P=0.08) and overall protection 72% (95% CI: 49%, 84%; P<0.0001) for the innermost 25% households.Conclusion: Consistent with past studies, substantial OCV herd protective effects were identified, but were unmasked only by analysing innermost households of the clusters. Caution is needed in defining clusters for analysis of vaccine herd effects in CRTs of vaccines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: : Cholera remains a serious public health threat in Asia, Africa and in parts of the Americas. Three World health Organization (WHO) pre-qualified oral cholera vaccines are now available but their supply is limited, so current supplies must be administered strategically. This requires an improved understanding of disease transmission and control strategies.Methods: : We used demographics and disease surveillance data collected from 1991 to 2000 in Matlab, Bangladesh, to estimate the spatial and temporal extent of the zone of increased risk around cholera cases. Specifically, we compare the cholera incidence among individuals living close to cholera cases with that among individuals living close to those without medically-attended cholera in this rural endemic setting.Results: : Those living within 50 m of a confirmed cholera case had 36 times (95% confidence interval: 23-56) the risk of becoming a cholera case in the first 3 days (after case presentation) compared with risk elsewhere in the community. The relative risk gradually declined in space and time, but remained significantly high up to 450 me away within 3 days of case presentation, and up to 150 m away within 23 days from the date of presentation of the case.Conclusion: : These findings suggest that, if conducted rapidly, vaccinating individuals living close to a case (ring vaccination) could be an efficient and effective strategy to target vaccine to a high-risk population in an endemic setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Information on the impact of hygiene interventions on severe outcomes is limited. As a pre-specified secondary outcome of a cluster-randomized controlled trial among >400 000 low-income residents in Dhaka, Bangladesh, we examined the impact of cholera vaccination plus a behaviour change intervention on diarrhoea-associated hospitalization.Methods: Ninety neighbourhood clusters were randomly allocated into three areas: cholera-vaccine-only; vaccine-plus-behaviour-change (promotion of hand-washing with soap plus drinking water chlorination); and control. Study follow-up continued for 2 years after intervention began. We calculated cluster-adjusted diarrhoea-associated hospitalization rates using data we collected from nearby hospitals, and 6-monthly census data of all trial households.Results: A total of 429 995 people contributed 500 700 person-years of data (average follow-up 1.13 years). Vaccine coverage was 58% at the start of analysis but continued to drop due to population migration. In the vaccine-plus-behaviour-change area, water plus soap was present at 45% of hand-washing stations; 4% of households had detectable chlorine in stored drinking water. Hospitalization rates were similar across the study areas [events/1000 person-years, 95% confidence interval (CI), cholera-vaccine-only: 9.4 (95% CI: 8.3-10.6); vaccine-plus-behaviour-change: 9.6 (95% CI: 8.3-11.1); control: 9.7 (95% CI: 8.3-11.6)]. Cholera cases accounted for 7% of total number of diarrhoea-associated hospitalizations.Conclusions: Neither cholera vaccination alone nor cholera vaccination combined with behaviour-change intervention efforts measurably reduced diarrhoea-associated hospitalization in this highly mobile population, during a time when cholera accounted for a small fraction of diarrhoea episodes. Affordable community-level interventions that prevent infection from multiple pathogens by reliably separating faeces from the environment, food and water, with minimal behavioural demands on impoverished communities, remain an important area for research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]