Background The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted routine measles immunisation and supplementary immunisation activities (SIAs) in most countries including Kenya. We assessed the risk of measles outbreaks during the pandemic in Kenya as a case study for the African Region. Methods Combining measles serological data, local contact patterns, and vaccination coverage into a cohort model, we predicted the age-adjusted population immunity in Kenya and estimated the probability of outbreaks when contact-reducing COVID-19 interventions are lifted. We considered various scenarios for reduced measles vaccination coverage from April 2020. Results In February 2020, when a scheduled SIA was postponed, population immunity was close to the herd immunity threshold and the probability of a large outbreak was 34% (8–54). As the COVID-19 contact restrictions are nearly fully eased, from December 2020, the probability of a large measles outbreak will increase to 38% (19–54), 46% (30–59), and 54% (43–64) assuming a 15%, 50%, and 100% reduction in measles vaccination coverage. By December 2021, this risk increases further to 43% (25–56), 54% (43–63), and 67% (59–72) for the same coverage scenarios respectively. However, the increased risk of a measles outbreak following the lifting of all restrictions can be overcome by conducting a SIA with ≥ 95% coverage in under-fives. Conclusion While contact restrictions sufficient for SAR-CoV-2 control temporarily reduce measles transmissibility and the risk of an outbreak from a measles immunity gap, this risk rises rapidly once these restrictions are lifted. Implementing delayed SIAs will be critical for prevention of measles outbreaks given the roll-back of contact restrictions in Kenya.
Background The RTS,S/ASO1E malaria vaccine is being piloted in three countries—Ghana, Kenya, and Malawi—as part of a coordinated evaluation led by the World Health Organization, with support from global partners. This study estimates the costs of continuing malaria vaccination upon completion of the pilot evaluation to inform decision-making and planning around potential further use of the vaccine in pilot areas. Methods We used an activity-based costing approach to estimate the incremental costs of continuing to deliver four doses of RTS,S/ASO1E through the existing Expanded Program on Immunization platform, from each government’s perspective. The RTS,S/ASO1E pilot introduction plans were reviewed and adapted to identify activities for costing. Key informant interviews with representatives from Ministries of Health (MOH) were conducted to inform the activities, resource requirements, and assumptions that, in turn, inform the analysis. Both financial and economic costs per dose, cost of delivery per dose, and cost per fully vaccinated child (FVC) are estimated and reported in 2017 USD units. Results At a vaccine price of $5 per dose and assuming the vaccine is donor-funded, our estimated incremental financial costs range from $1.70 (Kenya) to $2.44 (Malawi) per dose, $0.23 (Malawi) to $0.71 (Kenya) per dose delivered (excluding procurement add-on costs), and $11.50 (Ghana) to $13.69 (Malawi) per FVC. Estimates of economic costs per dose are between three and five times higher than financial costs. Variations in activities used for costing, procurement add-on costs, unit costs of per diems, and allowances contributed to differences in cost estimates across countries. Conclusion Cost estimates in this analysis are meant to inform country decision-makers as they face the question of whether to continue malaria vaccination, should the intervention receive a positive recommendation for broader use. Additionally, important cost drivers for vaccine delivery are highlighted, some of which might be influenced by global and country-specific financing and existing procurement mechanisms. This analysis also adds to the evidence available on vaccine delivery costs for products delivered outside the standard immunization schedule.
Background In November 2016, the Kenya National Vaccines and Immunization Programme conducted an assessment of missed opportunities for vaccination (MOV) using the World Health Organization (WHO) MOV methodology. A MOV includes any contact with health services during which an eligible individual does not receive all the vaccine doses for which he or she is eligible.
IntroductionTo achieve measles elimination, two doses of measles-containing vaccine (MCV) are provided through routine immunization services or vaccination campaigns. In May 2016, Kenya conducted a measles-rubella (MR) vaccination campaign targeting 19 million children aged 9 months–14 years, with a goal of achieving ≥95% coverage. We conducted a post-campaign cluster survey to estimate national coverage and classify coverage in Kenya’s 47 counties.MethodsThe stratified multi-stage cluster survey included data from 20,011 children in 8,253 households sampled using the recently revised World Health Organization coverage survey methodology (2015). Point estimates and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) of national campaign coverage were calculated, accounting for study design. County vaccination coverage was classified as ‘pass,’ ‘fail,’ or ‘intermediate,’ using one-sided hypothesis tests against a 95% threshold.ResultsEstimated national MR campaign coverage was 95% (95% CI: 94%-96%). Coverage differed significantly (p < 0.05) by child’s school attendance, mother’s education, household wealth, and other factors. In classifying coverage, 20 counties passed (≥95%), two failed (<95%), and 25 were intermediate (unable to classify either way). Reported campaign awareness among caretakers was 92%. After the 2016 MR campaign, an estimated 93% (95% CI: 92%–94%) of children aged 9 months to 14 years had received ≥2 MCV doses; 6% (95% CI: 6%–7%) had 1 MCV dose; and 0.7% (95% CI: 0.6%–0.9%) remained unvaccinated.ConclusionsKenya reached the MR campaign target of 95% vaccination coverage, representing a substantial achievement towards increasing population immunity. High campaign awareness reflected the comprehensive social mobilization strategy implemented in Kenya and supports the importance of including strong communications platforms in future vaccination campaigns. In counties with sub-optimal MR campaign coverage, further efforts are needed to increase MCV coverage to achieve the national goal of measles elimination by 2020.
IntroductionThe high burden of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection in young children disproportionately occurs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The PROUD (Preventing RespiratOry syncytial virUs in unDerdeveloped countries) Taskforce of 24 RSV worldwide experts assessed key needs for RSV prevention in LMICs, including vaccine and newer preventive measures.MethodsA global, survey-based study was undertaken in 2021. An online questionnaire was developed following three meetings of the Taskforce panellists wherein factors related to RSV infection, its prevention and management were identified using iterative questioning. Each factor was scored, by non-panellists interested in RSV, on a scale of zero (very-low-relevance) to 100 (very-high-relevance) within two scenarios: (1) Current and (2) Future expectations for RSV management.ResultsNinety questionnaires were completed: 70 by respondents (71.4% physicians; 27.1% researchers/scientists) from 16 LMICs and 20 from nine high-income (HI) countries (90.0% physicians; 5.0% researchers/scientists), as a reference group. Within LMICs, RSV awareness was perceived to be low, and management was not prioritised. Of the 100 factors scored, those related to improved diagnosis particularly access to affordable point-of-care diagnostics, disease burden data generation, clinical and general education, prompt access to new interventions, and engagement with policymakers/payers were identified of paramount importance. There was a strong need for clinical education and local data generation in the lowest economies, whereas upper-middle income countries were more closely aligned with HI countries in terms of current RSV service provision.ConclusionSeven key actions for improving RSV prevention and management in LMICs are proposed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.