Targeted Measles Outbreak Response Vaccination in the Context of Measles Control and Elimination: Experiences from South Sudan
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17140/EPOJ-1-105Keywords:
Measles, Outbreak, World Health Organization (WHO), Vaccination, South SudanAbstract
Introduction: Measles elimination interventions in South Sudan have relied on mass campaigns due to reoccurring humanitarian crisis over decades. This paper examines the effects of targeted measles vaccinations on efforts at eliminating measles in the country.
Methods: Time trend and an analytical cross-sectional design were applied on South Sudan Measles case-based surveillance dataset 2011-2015. Logistic regression of IgM positive cases against vaccination status and adjusted for age and unknown vaccination status were used to determine the likelihood of reduced risk of measles at 95% CI.
Results: Routine immunization, follow-up and outbreak response coverage for measles vaccination over the period were sub-optimal. Even though the proportion of confirmed measles cases among vaccinated population was irregular ranging 14.2% to 61.9% within the period reviewed, measles vaccination generally reduced the risk of the disease in the population by 30% (odds 0.7, 95% CI 0.4, 1.0) from 2011-2015. A trend analysis showed that the likelihood of reduction of measles burden varied per year, but a higher reduction of risk was observed in 2015 (odds 0.05 (95% CI <0.01, 0.35) preceded by follow-up campaigns. Adjusting for age and unknown vaccination status, there were no statistically significant difference for the trends of odds, however the significant decrease in odds in 2015 (OR 0.01 (95% CI [0.01, 0.35]) R2 0.45) is due to a unit change in age.
Conclusions: Targeted measles outbreak vaccinations generally reduce the burden of measles however the extent of reduction is more reflected in a year following a mass measles campaign as compared to outbreak response vaccination. Thus measles follow-up campaigns are necessary for sustained measles control and elimination.
References
Perry RT, Halsey NA. The clinical significance of mea-sles: a review. J Infect Dis. 2004; 189 Suppl 1: S4-S16. doi: 10.1086/377712
Griffin DE, Lin WH, Pan CH. Measles virus, immune control, and persistence. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2012; 36(3): 649-662. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6976.2012.00330.x
World Health Organization. Measles vaccines: WHO position paper. Weekly epidemiological record. 2009; 84(35): 349-360. Web site. http://www.who.int/wer/2009/wer8435.pdf?ua=1. Ac-cessed February 7, 2016.
Simons E , Mort M, Dabbagh A, Strebel P, Wolfson L. Stra-tegic planning for measles control: using data to inform optimal vaccination strategies. J Infect Dis. 2011; 204Suppl 1: S28-S34. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jir095
World Health Organization. Global measles and rubella, stra-tegic plan: 2012-2020. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Or-ganization; 2012: 1-44. Web site. http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstr eam/10665/44855/1/9789241503396_eng.pdf. Accessed Febru-ary 7, 2016.
who/cds/csr/isr/99.1. WHO guidelines for epidemic prepared-ness and response to measles outbreaks. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1999: 1-51. Web site. http://www. who.int/csr/resources/publications/measles/whocdscsrisr991. pdf. Accessed February 7, 2016.
Doshi RH, Shidi C, Mulumba A, et al. The effect of immuni-zation on measles incidence in the Democratic Republic of Con-go: Results from a model of surveillance data. Vaccine. 2015; 33(48): 6786-6792. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.10.020
Wang X, Boulton ML, Montgomery JP, et al. The epidemi-ology of measles in Tianjin, China, 2005-2014. Vaccine. 2015; 33(46): 6186-6191. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.10.008
Verma R, Khanna P, Bairwa M, Chawla S, Prinja S, Rajput M. Introduction of a second dose of measles in national immuniza-tion program in India: a major step towards eradication. Hum Vaccin. 2011; 7(10): 1109-1011. doi: 10.4161/hv.7.10.16890
Nedeljković J, Rakić Adrović S, Tasić G, et al. Resurgence of measles in Serbia 2010-2011 highlights the need for supplemen-tary immunization activities. Epidemiol Infect. 2015; 144(5): 1121-1128. doi: 10.1017/S0950268815002277
Scobie HM, Ilunga BK, Mulumba A, et al. Antecedent causes of a measles resurgence in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Pan Afr Med J. 2015; 21: 30. doi: 10.11604/ pamj.2015.21.30.6335
Babigumira JB, Levin A, Burgess C, et al. Assessing the cost-effectiveness of measles elimination in Uganda: local im-pact of a global eradication program. J Infect Dis. 2011; 204 Suppl 1: S116-S123. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jir132
Fowotade A, Okonko IO, Nwabuisi C, Bakare RA, Fadeyi A, Adu FD. Measles vaccine potency and sero-conversion rates among infants receiving measles immunization in Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria. J Immunoassay Immunochem. 2015; 36(2): 195- 209. doi: 10.1080/15321819.2014.920713
Simons E, Ferrari M, Fricks J, et al. Assessment of the 2010 global measles mortality reduction goal: results from a model of surveillance data. Lancet. 2012; 379(9832): 2173-2178. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60522-4
Nanyunja M, Lewis RF, Makumbi I, et al. Impact of Mass Measles Campaigns among Children Less Than 5 Years Old in Uganda. J Infect Dis. 2003; 187 Suppl 1: S63-S68. doi: 10.1086/368026
Shibeshi ME, Masresha BG, Smit SB, et al. Measles re-surgence in southern Africa: challenges to measles elimina-tion. Vaccine. 2014; 32(16): 1798-1807. doi: 10.1016/j.vac-cine.2014.01.089
Breakwell L, Moturi E, Helgenberger L, et al. Measles Out-break Associated with Vaccine Failure in Adults — Federated States of Micronesia, February–August 2014. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR)-CDC. 2015; 64(38): 1088- 1093. Web site. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ mm6438a7.htm. Accessed February 7, 2016.
Levin A, Burgess C, Garrison LP Jr, et al. Global eradication of measles: an epidemiologic and economic evaluation. J Infect Dis. 2011; 204 Suppl 1: S98-S106. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jir096
Hyde TB, Dayan GH, Langidrik JR, et al. Measles outbreak in the Republic of the Marshall Islands, 2003. Int J Epidemiol. 2006; 35: 299-306. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyi222
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All content published in Epidemiology (EOJ) is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows anyone to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the work — including for commercial purposes — provided appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and source.
