Aim:We investigated the nature and frequency of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) associated with oral polio vaccines (OPV) in the general population in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo (DR Congo). Methods: The DR Congo National Pharmacovigilance Centre organized active AEFI surveillance during mass immunization campaigns for the general population from March to June 2011. A patient individual case safety report was used as a questionnaire and addressed to pupils and students from high schools and universities who had any adverse events after OPV administration. We used the preferred term from the WHO Adverse Reaction Terminology for AEFI designation. Here is presented the results of the second step of the mass immunization campaign. Results: A total of 767 patients reported AEFI during the second step. Sex distribution shows that 512 (66.8%) students were females, while 255 (33.2%) were males, giving a female/male ratio 2 : 1. The average age was 16.865.19 years (ranged: 6-35.5 years). Each person reported a mean of 1.3360.6 AEFI. The average AEFI onset duration was 1.7461.16 days post-vaccination, ranging from 1 to 9 days. Headache (22.4%), abdominal pain (17.2%), fever (11.7%), diarrhea (9.9%), and asthenia (7.5%) were the common symptoms. Paralysis and asthma-like reactions were rare and serious adverse events in this study. The most affected systems were gastro-intestinal (33.5%) and nervous system (29.3%). Rechallenge was positive for 173 persons (22.6%). Conclusion: OPV-related AEFIs are not uncommon, although it is under-reported. Active AEFI surveillance during mass immunization campaigns is very important and may help to detect rare and serious adverse events. Further investigation will be important to identify risk of AEFI with OPV in adults and is warranted to elucidate the cause of this association in the Congolese environment.
BackgroundMalaria the first causes of death from parasitic infection worldwide. Interventions to reduce the burden of malaria have produced a tremendous drop in malaria morbidity and mortality. However, progress is slower in DRC, which shares with Nigeria 39% of deaths related to malaria globally. Inappropriate use of drugs may be one of the factors of this below-average performance. The aim of this study was to describe the use of drugs in the management of uncomplicated malaria in public health facilities in DRC.MethodsA drug use study was carried out in DRC from January to March 2014. In each of the former 11 provinces of DRC, one Rural Health Centre, one Urban Health Centre and one General Hospital were selected. In each of them, 100 patient’s files containing prescription of anti-malarials from January to December 2013 were randomly selected. Among them, all of the files with diagnosis of uncomplicated malaria were included in this study. Prescribed anti-malarials, co-prescribed drugs and their indications were collected. Descriptive analyses were performed.ResultsA total of 2300 files out of 3300 (69.7%) concerned uncomplicated malaria and were included in analysis. Malaria treatment was initiated after a positive RDT or microscopy in 51.5% of cases, upon suspicion without requesting biological confirmation in 37% and despite negative results in 11%. Twenty-nine (29) different treatment regimens were used. The drugs recommended by the National Malaria Control Programme were used in 54.3% of cases (artesunate–amodiaquine 37.4% or artemether–lumefantrine 16.9%). The second most used anti-malarial was quinine (32.4%). Apart from anti-malarials, an average of 3.1 drugs per patient were prescribed, among which antibiotics (67.9%), analgesics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAIDs) (all abbreviations to be explicated on first use) (70.6%), vitamins (29.1%), anaemia drugs, including blood transfusion (9.1%) and corticosteroids (5.7%), In 51.4% of cases there was no indication for the concomitant medication.ConclusionManagement of uncomplicated malaria in DRC is characterized by a low adherence to treatment policy, numerous treatment regimens, and abundant concomitant medication potentially harmful to the patient. This may contribute to the low performance of DRC in malaria control. Determinant of this irrational use of drugs need to be assessed in order to formulate and implement efficient corrective measures.
Implementation of pharmacovigilance (PV) systems in resource-limited countries is a real endeavor. Despite country- and continent-specific challenges, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) has been able to develop one of the most active PV systems in the sub-Saharan Africa. The World Health Organization (WHO) regional Office identified the DRC experience to set up a PV system for antimalarial drugs safety monitoring as a ‘best practice’ that needed to be documented in order to help DRC improve its PV system and to be scaled up in other African countries. In response to the WHO request, a best practices and bottlenecks analysis was conducted in 2015. This analysis was updated in 2018 in the light of the minimum requirements of the WHO to set up a PV system taking into account other guidance for PV systems. The following themes were retained for analysis: (1) creation of the national PV center; (2) implementation of PV in the health system; (3) data collection and analysis; (4) collaboration with public health programs; (5) collaboration with the National Regulatory Authority. Lessons learnt from the DRC experience show that it is possible to implement PV systems in order to promote patients’ safety in resource limited sub-Saharan African countries with no guaranteed funding. The ability of national PV centers to collaborate with Public health stakeholders, including public health authorities at all levels as well as public health programs, and to use existing health information systems are considered the main key to success and may substantially reduce the cost of PV activities.
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.