Haiti launches vaccination campaign against cholera after much debate
London.BMJ (online) (Impact Factor: 17.45). 04/2012; 344(apr16 1):e2748. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.e2748
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The number of cholera vaccine doses required for immunity is a constraint during epidemic cholera. Protective immunity following one dose of multiple Vibrio cholerae (Vc) colonization factors (Inaba LPS El Tor, TcpA, TcpF, and CBP-A) has not been directly tested even though individual Vc colonization factors are the protective antigens. Inaba LPS consistently induced vibriocidal and protective antibodies at low doses. A LPS booster, regardless of dose, induced highly protective secondary sera. Vc protein immunogens emulsified in adjuvant were variably immunogenic. CBP-A was proficient at inducing high IgG serum titers compared with TcpA or TcpF. After one immunization, TcpA or TcpF antisera protected only when the toxin co-regulated pilus operon of the challenge Vc was induced by AKI culture conditions. CBP-A was not consistently able to induce protection independent of the challenge Vc culture conditions. These results reveal the need to understand how best to leverage the 'right' Vc immunogens to obtain durable immunity after one dose of a cholera subunit vaccine. The dominance of the protective anti-LPS antibody response over other Vc antigen antibody response needs to be controlled to find other protective antigens that can add to anti-LPS antibody-based immunity.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background: Service provider costs for vaccine delivery have been well documented; however, vaccine recipients' costs have drawn less attention. This research explores the private household out-of-pocket and opportunity costs incurred to receive free oral cholera vaccine during a mass vaccination campaign in rural Odisha, India. Methods: Following a government-driven oral cholera mass vaccination campaign targeting population over one year of age, a questionnaire-based cross-sectional survey was conducted to estimate private household costs among vaccine recipients. The questionnaire captured travel costs as well as time and wage loss for self and accompanying persons. The productivity loss was estimated using three methods: self-reported, government defined minimum daily wages and gross domestic product per capita in Odisha. Findings: On average, families were located 282.7 (SD = 254.5) meters from the nearest vaccination booths. Most family members either walked or bicycled to the vaccination sites and spent on average 26.5 minutes on travel and 15.7 minutes on waiting. Depending upon the methodology, the estimated productivity loss due to potential foregone income ranged from $0.15 to $0.29 per dose of cholera vaccine received. The private household cost of receiving oral cholera vaccine constituted 24.6% to 38.0% of overall vaccine delivery costs. Interpretation: The private household costs resulting from productivity loss for receiving a free oral cholera vaccine is a substantial proportion of overall vaccine delivery cost and may influence vaccine uptake. Policy makers and program managers need to recognize the importance of private costs and consider how to balance programmatic delivery costs with private household costs to receive vaccines.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.