| Literature DB >> 27842567 |
Guy-Roger Kamga1,2,3, Fanny N Dissak-Delon4,5,6, Hugues C Nana-Djeunga5,7, Benjamin D Biholong4, Stephen Mbigha-Ghogomu8, Jacob Souopgui6, Honorat G M Zoure9, Michel Boussinesq10, Joseph Kamgno5,7, Annie Robert11.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: After more than a decade of community-directed treatment with ivermectin (CDTI) in Centre and Littoral Regions of Cameroon, onchocerciasis endemicity was still high in some communities according to the 2011 epidemiological evaluations. Some corrective measures were undertaken to improve the CDTI process and therefore reduce the burden of the disease. The objective of the present study was to assess the progress made towards the elimination of onchocerciasis in the Centre 1 and Littoral 2 CDTI projects where the worst performances were found in 2011. To this end, a cross-sectional survey was conducted in April 2015 in eight communities in two health districts (HD), Bafia in Centre 1 and Yabassi in Littoral 2, chosen because assessed at baseline and in 2011. All volunteers living for at least five years in the community, aged five years or more, underwent clinical and parasitological examinations. Individual compliance to ivermectin treatment was also assessed. Analyses of data were weighted proportionally to age and gender distribution in the population.Entities:
Keywords: Bafia; Cameroon; Elimination; Ivermectin; Onchocerciasis; Persistence; Yabassi
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27842567 PMCID: PMC5109673 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-016-1868-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Onchocerciasis burden in four communities of Bafia health district at baseline and during the 2011 survey, after 11 years of CDTI
| Village | Baseline data (1991–1993) | Follow-up survey (2011) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Weighted mf prevalence (%) | CMFL (mf/ss) |
| Weighted mf prevalence (%) | CMFL (mf/ss) | |
| Tsékané | 150 | 90.8 | 20.84 | 204 | 47.1 | 1.44 |
| Balamba II | 167 | 83.7 | 26.40 | 212 | 61.0 | 4.72 |
| Ngongol I | 129 | 92.8 | 90.31 | 237 | 64.0 | 2.54 |
| Biatsota | 150 | 94.0 | 114.50 | 227 | 67.6 | 3.26 |
Abbreviations: N number examined, mf microfilaria, CMFL community microfilarial load (microfilariae/skin snip)
Onchocerciasis burden in four communities of Yabassi health district at baseline and during the 2011 survey
| Village | Baseline data (1999) | Follow-up survey (2011) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Weighted mf prevalence (%) | CMFL (mf/ss) |
| Weighted mf prevalence (%) | CMFL (mf/ss) | |
| Bonadissake | 58 | 79.3 | 20.4 | |||
| Ndogpoo | 39 | 87.2 | 24.2 | |||
| Nkongmalan | 84 | 92.2 | 28.5 | |||
| Bodiman | 81 | 90.1 | 26.5 | 112 | 65.2 | 2.96 |
Abbreviations: N number examined, mf microfilaria, CMFL community microfilarial load (microfilariae/skin snip)
Fig. 1Map of Cameroon showing the study areas and communities surveyed
Fig. 2Therapeutic coverage in Centre 1 and Littoral 2 CDTI projects
Parasitological load and clinical signs of onchocerciasis within each community in the present survey of 2015
| District and community | Microfilaridermia examination | Clinical examination weighted prevalence (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Weighted prevalence (%) | CMFL (mf/ss) | Status | Nodule | Cutaneous sign | |
| Bafia | ||||||
| Balamba II | 138 | 24.4 | 0.51 | Hypoendemic | 3.6 | 1.1 |
| Biatsota | 94 | 45.8 | 1.04 | Mesoendemic | 37.4 | 7.0 |
| Ngongol I | 186 | 57.0 | 1.62 | Mesoendemic | 23.9 | 1.5 |
| Tsékané | 96 | 26.4 | 0.31 | Hypoendemic | 7.2 | 3.0 |
| Total | 514 | 41.6 | Mesoendemic | 18.1 | 2.3 | |
| Yabassi | ||||||
| Bodiman | 64 | 59.3 | 1.39 | Mesoendemic | 3.7 | 2.8 |
| Bonadissake | 41 | 12.3 | 0.48 | Hypoendemic | 1.6 | 22.4 |
| Ndogpoo | 80 | 46.7 | 1.10 | Mesoendemic | 1.5 | 10.9 |
| Nkongmalan | 57 | 47.7 | 1.74 | Mesoendemic | 3.5 | 4.6 |
| Total | 242 | 43.8 | Mesoendemic | 2.7 | 9.3 | |
Abbreviations: N number examined, mf microfilaria, CMFL community microfilarial load (microfilariae/skin snip)
Microfilaria and nodule status across age groups in the present survey of 2015
| District | Age categories (years) | Microfilaria status | Nodule status | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Mf+ ( | Weighted prevalence (%)a | Weighted mean ± SD of mf in carriers | Nod+ ( | Weighted prevalence (%)a | Weighted mean ± SD of nodules in carriers | ||
| Bafia | 5–9 | 56 | 19 | 34.0 | 20.5 ± 27.7 | 9 | 16.1 | 1.7 ± 0.7 |
| 10–19 | 94 | 47 | 50.0 | 24.9 ± 47.6 | 9 | 9.6 | 2.2 ± 1.4 | |
| 20–29 | 76 | 32 | 41.5 | 10.9 ± 22.4 | 12 | 14.9 | 2.1 ± 1.1 | |
| 30–39 | 70 | 28 | 40.0 | 13.8 ± 24.0 | 23 | 32.5 | 2.6 ± 2.1 | |
| 40–49 | 69 | 24 | 34.7 | 13.5 ± 24.6 | 21 | 30.4 | 2.6 ± 2.3 | |
| 50–59 | 70 | 26 | 37.2 | 6.6 ± 9.3 | 17 | 24.5 | 2.8 ± 2.0 | |
| 60+ | 79 | 20 | 25.4 | 7.6 ± 12.5 | 24 | 30.0 | 2.5 ± 2.6 | |
| Total | 514 | 196 | 41.6 | 17.9 ± 35.5 | 115 | 18.1 | 2.4 ± 1.8 | |
| Yabassi | 5–9 | 0 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| 10–19 | 14 | 7 | 50.0 | 21.4 ± 21.3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 20–29 | 35 | 13 | 36.6 | 16.5 ± 29.3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 30–39 | 47 | 23 | 48.9 | 16.1 ± 26.5 | 1 | 2.1 | 1 | |
| 40–49 | 48 | 17 | 35.4 | 5.1 ± 6.9 | 3 | 6.3 | 1.7 ± 0.6 | |
| 50–59 | 51 | 28 | 54.9 | 11.2 ± 19.4 | 4 | 8.0 | 2 ± 0.8 | |
| 60+ | 47 | 21 | 44.7 | 7.3 ± 12.5 | 2 | 4.1 | 2.5 ± 0.7 | |
| Total | 242 | 109 | 43.8 | 14.2 ± 22.6 | 10 | 2.7 | 1.8 ± 0.7 | |
Abbreviations: N number examined, mf microfilaria, Mf+ (n) number with microfilaria positive skin snip, Nod+ (n) number of nodule carriers, SD standard deviation
aIn each age category, the indices were adjusted on sex; in the total populations, indices were adjusted on sex and age
Fig. 3Comparison of weighted microfilaridermia prevalences at baseline, 1991, with follow-up surveys in 2011 and 2015, in the communities surveyed in the Bafia health district
Fig. 4Comparison of community microfilarial load at baseline, 1991, with follow-up surveys in 2011 and 2015, in the communities surveyed in the Bafia health district. Abbreviations: mf, microfilaria; ss, skin snip
Fig. 5Comparison of weighted microfilaridermia prevalences at baseline, 1999, with follow-up surveys in 2015, in the communities surveyed in the Yabassi health district
Fig. 6Comparison of community microfilarial load at baseline, 1999, with follow-up surveys in 2015, in the communities surveyed in the Yabassi health district. Abbreviations: mf, microfilaria; ss, skin snip
Fig. 7Distribution of nodules according to the anatomical localization in carriers
Fig. 8Proportion of participants according to ivermectin treatment in the Bafia health district
Fig. 9Proportion of participants according to ivermectin treatment in the Yabassi health district
Fig. 10Arithmetic mean of microfilaria per skin snip according to the number of ivermectin treatment taken during the last five years among carriers in Bafia and Yabassi health districts