Search

Background: Cholera remains a public health threat for low- and middle-income countries, particularly in Asia and Africa. Shanchol™, an inactivated oral cholera vaccine (OCV) is currently in use globally. OCV and oral poliovirus vaccines (OPV) could be administered concomitantly, but the immunogenicity and safety of coadministration among children aged 1-3 years is unknown., Methods: We undertook an open-label, randomized, controlled, inequality trial in Dhaka city, Bangladesh. Healthy children aged 1-3 years were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: bivalent OPV (bOPV)-alone, OCV-alone, or combined bOPV + OCV and received vaccines on the day of enrollment and 28 days later. Blood samples were collected on the day of enrollment, day 28, and day 56. Serum poliovirus neutralizing antibodies and vibriocidal antibodies against Vibrio cholerae O1 were assessed using microneutralization assays., Results: A total of 579 children aged 1‒3 years were recruited, 193 children per group. More than 90% of the children completed visits at day 56. Few adverse events following immunization were recorded and were equivalent among study arms. On day 28, 60% (90% confidence interval: 53%-67%) and 54% (46%-61%) of participants with co-administration of bOPV + OCV responded to polioviruses type 1 and 3, respectively, compared to 55% (47%-62%) and 46% (38%-53%) in the bOPV-only group. Additionally, >50% of participants showed a ≥4-fold increase in vibriocidal antibody titer responses on day 28, comparable to the responses observed in OCV-only arm., Conclusions: Co-administration of bOPV and OCV is safe and effective in children aged 1-3 years and can be cost-beneficial., Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03581734)., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

Background: Cholera is a major public health concern in displaced-person camps, which often contend with overcrowding and scarcity of resources. Maela, the largest and longest-standing refugee camp in Thailand, located along the Thai-Burmese border, experienced four cholera outbreaks between 2005 and 2010. In 2013, a cholera vaccine campaign was implemented in the camp. To assist in the evaluation of the campaign and planning for subsequent campaigns, we developed a mathematical model of cholera in Maela., Methods: We formulated a Susceptible-Infectious-Water-Recovered-based transmission model and estimated parameters using incidence data from 2010. We next evaluated the reduction in cases conferred by several immunization strategies, varying timing, effectiveness, and resources (i.e., vaccine availability). After the vaccine campaign, we generated case forecasts for the next year, to inform on-the-ground decision-making regarding whether a booster campaign was needed., Results: We found that preexposure vaccination can substantially reduce the risk of cholera even when <50% of the population is given the full two-dose series. Additionally, the preferred number of doses per person should be considered in the context of one vs. two dose effectiveness and vaccine availability. For reactive vaccination, a trade-off between timing and effectiveness was revealed, indicating that it may be beneficial to give one dose to more people rather than two doses to fewer people, given that a two-dose schedule would incur a delay in administration of the second dose. Forecasting using realistic coverage levels predicted that there was no need for a booster campaign in 2014 (consistent with our predictions, there was not a cholera epidemic in 2014)., Conclusions: Our analyses suggest that vaccination in conjunction with ongoing water sanitation and hygiene efforts provides an effective strategy for controlling cholera outbreaks in refugee camps. Effective preexposure vaccination depends on timing and effectiveness. If a camp is facing an outbreak, delayed distribution of vaccines can substantially alter the effectiveness of reactive vaccination, suggesting that quick distribution of vaccines may be more important than ensuring every individual receives both vaccine doses. Overall, this analysis illustrates how mathematical models can be applied in public health practice, to assist in evaluating alternative intervention strategies and inform decision-making.

Introduction: In 2014, an oral cholera vaccine (OCV) campaign targeting 185,314 persons aged ≥1 years was conducted in 3 departments via fixed post and door-to-door strategies. This was the first use of the global OCV stockpile in Haiti., Methods: We conducted a multi-stage cluster survey to assess departmental OCV coverage. Target population estimates were projected from the 2003 Haiti population census with adjustments for population growth and estimated proportion of pregnant women. In the three departments, we sampled 30/106 enumeration areas (EAs) in Artibonite, 30/244 EAs in Centre, and 20/29 EAs in Ouest; 20 households were systematically sampled in each EA. Household and individual interviews using a standard questionnaire were conducted in each selected household; data on OCV receipt were obtained from vaccination card or verbal report. We calculated OCV campaign coverage estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) accounting for survey design., Results: Overall two-dose OCV coverage was 70% (95% CI: 60, 79), 63% (95% CI: 55, 71), and 44% (95% CI: 35, 53) in Artibonite, Centre, and Ouest, respectively. Two-dose coverage was higher in the 1-4 years age group than among those ≥ 15 years in Artibonite (difference: 11%; 95% CI: 5%, 17%) and Ouest (difference: 12%; 95% CI: 3, 20). A higher percentage of children aged 5-14 years received both recommended doses than did those ≥ 15 years (Artibonite: 14% (95% CI: 8%, 19%) difference; Centre: 11% difference (95% CI: 5%, 17%); Ouest: 10% difference (95% CI: 2%, 17%). The most common reason for not receiving any OCV dose was being absent during the campaign or not having heard about vaccination activities., Conclusions: While coverage estimates in Artibonite and Centre were comparable with other OCV campaigns in Haiti and elsewhere, inadequate social mobilization and outdated population estimates might have contributed to lower coverage in Ouest., (Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Countries must be prepared to respond to public health threats associated with emergencies, such as natural disasters, sociopolitical conflicts, or uncontrolled disease outbreaks. Rapid vaccination of populations vulnerable to epidemic-prone vaccine-preventable diseases is a major component of emergency response. Emergency vaccination planning presents challenges, including how to predict resource needs, expand vaccine availability during global shortages, and address regulatory barriers to deliver new products. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention supports countries to plan, implement, and evaluate emergency vaccination response. We describe work of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in collaboration with global partners to support emergency vaccination against cholera, typhoid, yellow fever, and Ebola, diseases for which a new vaccine or vaccine formulation has played a major role in response. Lessons learned will help countries prepare for future emergencies. Integration of vaccination with emergency response augments global health security through reducing disease burden, saving lives, and preventing spread across international borders.

Background: Killed whole-cell oral cholera vaccines (kOCVs) are becoming a standard cholera control and prevention tool. However, vaccine efficacy and direct effectiveness estimates have varied, with differences in study design, location, follow-up duration, and vaccine composition posing challenges for public health decision making. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to generate average estimates of kOCV efficacy and direct effectiveness from the available literature., Methods: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Review Library on July 9, 2016, and ISI Web of Science on July 11, 2016, for randomised controlled trials and observational studies that reported estimates of direct protection against medically attended confirmed cholera conferred by kOCVs. We included studies published on any date in English, Spanish, French, or Chinese. We extracted from the published reports the primary efficacy and effectiveness estimates from each study and also estimates according to number of vaccine doses, duration, and age group. The main study outcome was average efficacy and direct effectiveness of two kOCV doses, which we estimated with random-effect models. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42016048232., Findings: Seven trials (with 695 patients with cholera) and six observational studies (217 patients with cholera) met the inclusion criteria, with an average two-dose efficacy of 58% (95% CI 42-69, I 2 =58%) and effectiveness of 76% (62-85, I 2 =0). Average two-dose efficacy in children younger than 5 years (30% [95% CI 15-42], I 2 =0%) was lower than in those 5 years or older (64% [58-70], I 2 =0%; p<0·0001). Two-dose efficacy estimates of kOCV were similar during the first 2 years after vaccination, with estimates of 56% (95% CI 42-66, I 2 =45%) in the first year and 59% (49-67, I 2 =0) in the second year. The efficacy reduced to 39% (13 to 57, I 2 =48%) in the third year, and 26% (-46 to 63, I 2 =74%) in the fourth year., Interpretation: Two kOCV doses provide protection against cholera for at least 3 years. One kOCV dose provides at least short-term protection, which has important implications for outbreak management. kOCVs are effective tools for cholera control., Funding: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation., (Copyright This is an Open Access article published under the CC BY 3.0 IGO license which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In any use of this article, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organisation, products, or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article's original URL.)

During November-December 2015, as part of the 2015 cholera outbreak response in Iraq, the Iraqi Ministry of Health targeted ≈255,000 displaced persons >1 year of age with 2 doses of oral cholera vaccine (OCV). All persons who received vaccines were living in selected refugee camps, internally displaced persons camps, and collective centers. We conducted a multistage cluster survey to obtain OCV coverage estimates in 10 governorates that were targeted during the campaign. In total, 1,226 household and 5,007 individual interviews were conducted. Overall, 2-dose OCV coverage in the targeted camps was 87% (95% CI 85%-89%). Two-dose OCV coverage in the 3 northern governorates (91%; 95% CI 87%-94%) was higher than that in the 7 southern and central governorates (80%; 95% CI 77%-82%). The experience in Iraq demonstrates that OCV campaigns can be successfully implemented as part of a comprehensive response to cholera outbreaks among high-risk populations in conflict settings.

Oral cholera vaccines (OCVs) are relatively new public health interventions, and limited data exist on the potential impact of OCV use on traditional cholera prevention and control measures-safe water, sanitation and hygiene (WaSH). To assess OCV acceptability and knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAPs) regarding cholera and WaSH, we conducted cross-sectional surveys, 1 month before (baseline) and 3 and 12 months after (first and second follow-up) a preemptive OCV campaign in Maela, a long-standing refugee camp on the Thailand-Burma border. We randomly selected households for the surveys, and administered questionnaires to female heads of households. In total, 271 (77%), 187 (81%), and 199 (85%) households were included in the baseline, first and second follow-up surveys, respectively. Anticipated OCV acceptability was 97% at baseline, and 91% and 85% of household members were reported to have received 1 and 2 OCV doses at first follow-up. Compared with baseline, statistically significant differences (95% Wald confidence interval not overlapping zero) were noted at first and second follow-up among the proportions of respondents who correctly identified two or more means of cholera prevention (62% versus 78% and 80%), reported boiling or treating drinking water (19% versus 44% and 69%), and washing hands with soap (66% versus 77% and 85%); a significant difference was also observed in the proportion of households with soap available at handwashing areas (84% versus 90% and 95%), consistent with reported behaviors. No significant difference was noted in the proportion of households testing positive for Escherichia coli in stored household drinking water at second follow-up (39% versus 49% and 34%). Overall, we observed some positive, and no negative changes in cholera- and WaSH-related KAPs after an OCV campaign in Maela refugee camp. OCV campaigns may provide opportunities to reinforce beneficial WaSH-related KAPs for comprehensive cholera prevention and control., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

In 2013, the Government of Haiti implemented its first oral cholera vaccine (OCV) campaign in Petite Anse, an urban setting, and Cerca Carvajal, a rural commune. We conducted and compared responses to two independent cross-sectional knowledge and practices household surveys pre- (N = 297) and post- (N = 302) OCV campaign in Petite Anse. No significant differences in knowledge about causes, symptoms, and prevention of cholera were noted. Compared with precampaign respondents, fewer postcampaign respondents reported treating (66% versus 27%, P < 0.001) and covering (96% versus 89%, P = 0.02) their drinking water. Compared with precampaign, postcampaign survey household observations showed increased availability of soap (16.2% versus 34.5%, P = 0.001) and handwashing stations (14.7% versus 30.1%, P = 0.01), but no significant changes in handwashing practices were reported. Although there was no change in knowledge, significant decreases in water treatment practices necessary for cholera and other diarrheal diseases prevention were noted in the postcampaign survey. Future OCV campaigns in Haiti should be used as an opportunity to emphasize the importance of maintaining good water, sanitation, and hygiene practices, and include a comprehensive, integrated approach for cholera control., (© The American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.)

Background: In response to a 2011 cholera outbreak in Papua New Guinea, the Government of the Solomon Islands initiated a cholera prevention program which included cholera disease prevention and treatment messaging, community meetings, and a pre-emptive cholera vaccination campaign targeting 11,000 children aged 1-15 years in selected communities in Choiseul and Western Provinces., Methodology and Principal Findings: We conducted a post-vaccination campaign, household-level survey about knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding diarrhea and cholera in areas targeted and not targeted for cholera vaccination. Respondents in vaccinated areas were more likely to have received cholera education in the previous 6 months (33% v. 9%; p = 0.04), to know signs and symptoms (64% vs. 22%; p = 0.02) and treatment (96% vs. 50%; p = 0.02) of cholera, and to be aware of cholera vaccine (48% vs. 14%; p = 0.02). There were no differences in water, sanitation, and hygiene practices., Conclusions: This pre-emptive OCV campaign in a cholera-naïve community provided a unique opportunity to assess household-level knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding diarrhea, cholera, and water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH). Our findings suggest that education provided during the vaccination campaign may have reinforced earlier mass messaging about cholera and diarrheal disease in vaccinated communities., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: During 2005-2012, surveillance in Maela refugee camp, Thailand, identified four cholera outbreaks, with rates up to 10.7 cases per 1000 refugees. In 2013, the Thailand Ministry of Public Health sponsored a two-dose oral cholera vaccine (OCV) campaign for the approximately 46,000 refugees living in Maela., Methods: We enumerated the target population (refugees living in Maela who are ≥1 year old and not pregnant) in a census three months before the campaign and issued barcoded OCV cards to each individual. We conducted the campaign using a fixed-post strategy during two eight-day rounds plus one two-day round for persons who had missed their second dose and recorded vaccine status for each individual. To identify factors associated with no vaccination (versus at least one dose) and those associated with adverse events following immunization (AEFI), we used separate marginal log-binomial regression models with robust variance estimates to account for household clustering., Results: A total of 63,057 OCV doses were administered to a target population of 43,485 refugees. An estimated 35,399 (81%) refugees received at least one dose and 27,658 (64%) received two doses. A total of 993 additional doses (1.5%) were wasted including 297 that were spat out. Only 0.05% of refugees, mostly children, could not be vaccinated due to repeated spitting. Characteristics associated with no vaccination (versus at least one dose) included age ≥15 years (versus 1-14 years), Karen ethnicity (versus any other ethnicity) and, only among adults 15-64 years old, male sex. Passive surveillance identified 84 refugees who experienced 108 AEFI including three serious but coincidental events. The most frequent AEFI were nausea (49%), dizziness (38%), and fever (30%). Overall, AEFI were more prevalent among young children and older adults., Conclusions: Our results suggest that mass vaccination in refugee camps with a two-dose OCV is readily achievable and AEFI are few., (Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

In 2013, the first government-led oral cholera vaccination (OCV) campaign in Haiti was implemented in Petite Anse and Cerca Carvajal. To evaluate vaccination coverage, barriers to vaccination, and adverse events following vaccination, we conducted a cluster survey. We enrolled 1,121 persons from Petite Anse and 809 persons from Cerca Carvajal, categorized by 3 age groups (1-4, 5-14, >15 years). Two-dose OCV coverage was 62.5% in Petite Anse and 76.8% in Cerca Carvajal. Two-dose coverage was lowest among persons >15 years of age. In Cerca Carvajal, coverage was significantly lower for male than female respondents (69% vs. 85%; p<0.001). No major adverse events were reported. The main reason for nonvaccination was absence during the campaign. Vaccination coverage after this campaign was acceptable and comparable to that resulting from campaigns implemented by nongovernmental organizations. Future campaigns should be tailored to reach adults who are not available during daytime hours.

Background: In response to recurrent cholera outbreaks in Nyanza Province, Kenya, a local nongovernmental organization assisted the Ministry of Health by providing cholera education activities to some cholera-affected communities. We evaluated the impact on cholera prevention knowledge and practices., Methods: In November-December 2008, we conducted a cross-sectional household survey and tested stored water for chlorine in 6 cholera-affected enumeration areas (intervention-EAs) where response activities had occurred between March-September 2008, and 6 comparison-EAs with no known reports of cholera outbreaks or response activities., Results: We enrolled 358 individuals from intervention-EAs and 365 from comparison-EAs. Overall, >80% knew cholera symptoms and over 60% knew that water treatment prevented diarrhea; <20% had chlorine residual in stored water. More intervention-EA respondents than comparison-EA respondents recalled a cholera outbreak in their community (52% vs 19%, P < .0001), and of those, 51% versus 39%, respectively, had attended a cholera response event. Detectable chlorine residuals in stored water were found in a higher percentage of intervention-EA and comparison-EA event attendees (21% and 25%, respectively) than nonattendees (17% and 8%, respectively)., Conclusions: There was a gap between knowledge and practice of water treatment as a cholera preventive measure. Cholera event attendance may have modestly motivated increased household water treatment.

Oral cholera vaccines (OCVs) have been recommended in cholera-endemic settings and preemptively during outbreaks and complex emergencies. However, experience and guidelines for reactive use after an outbreak has started are limited. In 2010, after over a century without epidemic cholera, an outbreak was reported in Haiti after an earthquake. As intensive nonvaccine cholera control measures were initiated, the feasibility of OCV use was considered. We reviewed OCV characteristics and recommendations for their use and assessed global vaccine availability and capacity to implement a vaccination campaign. Real-time modeling was conducted to estimate vaccine impact. Ultimately, cholera vaccination was not implemented because of limited vaccine availability, complex logistical and operational challenges of a multidose regimen, and obstacles to conducting a campaign in a setting with population displacement and civil unrest. Use of OCVs is an option for cholera control; guidelines for their appropriate use in epidemic and emergency settings are urgently needed.

Oral cholera vaccination (OCV) campaigns are increasingly used to prevent cholera outbreaks; however, little is known about their cost-effectiveness in refugee camps. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of a pre-emptive OCV campaign in the Maela refugee camp in Thailand, where outbreaks occurred with an annual incidence rate (IR) of up to 10.7 cases per 1000. Data were collected via health sector records and interviews and household interviews. In the base-case scenario comparing the OCV campaign with no campaign, we estimated the campaign effect on the cholera IR and case fatality rate (CFR: 0.09%) from a static cohort model and calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for the outcomes of death, disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), and cases averted. In sensitivity analyses, we varied the CFR and IR. The household economic cost of illness was USD 21, and the health sector economic cost of illness was USD 51 per case. The OCV campaign economic cost was USD 289,561, 42% attributable to vaccine costs and 58% to service delivery costs. In our base case, the incremental cost was USD 1.9 million per death averted, USD 1745 per case averted, and USD 69,892 per DALY averted. Sensitivity analyses that increased the CFR to 0.35% or the IR to 10.4 cases per 1000 resulted in a cost per DALY of USD 15,666. The low multi-year average CFR and incidence of the cholera outbreaks in the Maela camp were key factors associated with the high cost per DALY averted. However, the sensitivity analyses indicated higher cost-effectiveness in a setting with a higher CFR or cholera incidence, indicating when to consider campaign use to reduce the outbreak risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]