| Literature DB >> 32260252 |
Luong Thi Nguyen1,2, Huy Xuan Le3, Dong Thanh Nguyen4, Ha Quang Ho4, Ting-Wu Chuang1,5.
Abstract
Dengue fever is an important arboviral disease in many countries. Its incidence has increased during the last decade in central Vietnam. Most dengue studies in Vietnam focused on the northern area (Hanoi) and southern regions but not on central Vietnam. Dengue transmission dynamics and relevant environmental risk factors in central Vietnam are not understood. This study aimed to evaluate spatiotemporal patterns of dengue fever in central Vietnam and effects of climatic factors and abundance of mosquitoes on its transmission. Dengue and mosquito surveillance data were obtained from the Department of Vector Control and Border Quarantine at Nha Trang Pasteur Institute. Geographic Information System and satellite remote sensing techniques were used to perform spatiotemporal analyses and to develop climate models using generalized additive models. During 2005-2018, 230,458 dengue cases were reported in central Vietnam. Da Nang and Khanh Hoa were two major hotspots in the study area. The final models indicated the important role of Indian Ocean Dipole, multivariate El Niño-Southern Oscillation index, and vector index in dengue transmission in both regions. Regional climatic variables and mosquito population may drive dengue transmission in central Vietnam. These findings provide important information for developing an early dengue warning system in central Vietnam.Entities:
Keywords: El Niño-Southern Oscillation index; Indian Ocean Dipole; central Vietnam; dengue fever; vector index
Year: 2020 PMID: 32260252 PMCID: PMC7177405 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17072453
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1The eleven provinces in central Vietnam included in this study.
Figure A1Annual dengue incidence (per 100,000) in central Vietnam between 2005 and 2018.
Figure 2Percentage of dengue cases in central Vietnam among children under the age of 15 years.
Figure 3Spatial and temporal patterns in the incidence of dengue in central Vietnam between 2011 and 2018.
Figure 4Monthly dengue incidence rate (per 10,000) and vector indices in Da Nang (a) and Khanh Hoa (b) between 2014 and 2018 (density index (DI) and house infestation index (HIF) were excluded because DI had a very low value during the study period and HIF did not correlate with dengue transmission in the study areas). IR—incidence rate; BI—Breteau index; CI—container index; HI—house index.
Climate variables in Da Nang and Khanh Hoa, 2014–2018.
| Variable | Area | Median (IQR) | Mean (SD) | Min | Max |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DTM | Da Nang | 28.44 (4.7) | 28.09 (3.2) | 21.3 | 33.36 |
| Khanh Hoa | 29.26 (4.5) | 28.73 (2.8) | 22.89 | 33.08 | |
| NTM | Da Nang | 21.52 (4.6) | 20.67 (3.1) | 13.08 | 25.44 |
| Khanh Hoa | 20.3 (4.7) | 20.52 (2.2) | 15.95 | 23.77 | |
| MTM | Da Nang | 25.3 (4.2) | 24.59 (2.9) | 18.45 | 29.33 |
| Khanh Hoa | 25.24 (3.3) | 24.61 (2.4) | 18.9 | 28.55 | |
| Rainfall | Da Nang | 16.21 (48.3) | 49.86 (102.2) | 0 | 563.65 |
| Khanh Hoa | 4.09 (12.9) | 19.32 (43.4) | 0 | 239.32 |
DTM—daytime temperature; IQR—interquartile range; NTM—nighttime temperature; MTM—mean temperature; SD—standard deviation.
Monthly climatic variables in Da Nang and Khanh Hoa, 2014–2018
| Month | Da Nang | Khanh Hoa | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DTM | NTM | MTM | Rainfall | DTM | NTM | MTM | Rainfall | |
| Jan | 23.15 | 16.44 | 20.17 | 16.69 | 24.57 | 17.27 | 20.87 | 5.99 |
| Feb | 25.83 | 17.39 | 21.6 | 5.98 | 26.37 | 18.06 | 22.15 | 4.15 |
| Mar | 28.44 | 20.8 | 24.71 | 11.23 | 29.53 | 20.13 | 24.97 | 4.33 |
| Apr | 31.08 | 22.01 | 26.45 | 6.66 | 31.46 | 22.14 | 26.81 | 1.51 |
| May | 31.47 | 23.34 | 27.57 | 20.95 | 31.6 | 22.71 | 27.14 | 6.58 |
| Jun | 31.57 | 24.16 | 28.21 | 23.82 | 31.06 | 22.84 | 27.04 | 0.66 |
| Jul | 29.73 | 23.54 | 27.15 | 14.34 | 30.9 | 22.72 | 26.59 | 4.48 |
| Aug | 30.76 | 23.1 | 26.66 | 36.36 | 31.18 | 22.26 | 26.31 | 3.08 |
| Sep | 29.17 | 22.37 | 25.74 | 39.45 | 29.58 | 21.45 | 25.48 | 24.99 |
| Oct | 26.22 | 20.59 | 23.7 | 114.96 | 27.85 | 19.9 | 23.78 | 94.93 |
| Nov | 25.71 | 19.32 | 22.62 | 268.54 | 26.19 | 19.54 | 23.3 | 71.63 |
| Dec | 24 | 14.93 | 20.51 | 39.34 | 24.47 | 17.25 | 20.9 | 9.45 |
DTM—daytime temperature; NTM—nighttime temperature; MTM—mean temperature.
Generalized additive model (GAM) models of climate variables and dengue incidence in Da Nang and Khanh Hoa
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 5 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Province/Variable | Coefficient | Coefficient | Coefficient | Coefficient | Coefficient | |||||
|
| ||||||||||
| NTM | 1.293 | 0.06 | 1.443 | 0.076 | 1.001 | 0.0065 | 1.001 | 0.172 | ||
| Rainfall (lag, 2) | 2.414 | 0.0028 | 2.409 | 0.0033 | 2.265 | 0.0094 | 2.442 | <0.001 | ||
| IOD | 2.654 | 0.0018 | 2.908 | <0.001 | 2.377 | 0.022 | 1.489 | 0.018 | ||
| MEI (lag, 1) | 3.123 | 0.0043 | 2.929 | 0.0194 | 3.349 | <0.001 | 2.425 | 0.068 | ||
| AIC | 405.873 | 408.094 | 415.94 | 425.219 | 414.171 | |||||
| ∆AIC | 2.221 | 10.067 | 19.346 | 8.298 | ||||||
|
| ||||||||||
| DTM | 1 | 0.0031 | 1.429 | 0.004 | 1.988 | 0.002 | 1 | 0.0119 | ||
| Rainfall | 1.715 | 0.033 | 1.888 | 0.018 | 1 | 0.0028 | 1.033 | 0.277 | ||
| IOD (lag, 1) | 2.821 | <0.001 | 2.702 | <0.001 | 2.93 | <0.001 | 3.011 | <0.001 | ||
| MEI | 3.187 | <0.001 | 3.503 | <0.001 | 3.313 | <0.001 | 3.063 | <0.001 | ||
| AIC | 333.38 | 339.45 | 337.19 | 356.86 | 370.78 | |||||
| ∆AIC | 6.07 | 3.81 | 23.48 | 37.4 | ||||||
AIC—Akaike’s information criterion; IOD—Indian Ocean Dipole; MEI—multivariate ENSO index; DTM—daytime temperature; NTM—nighttime temperature.
Figure 5Importance of model parameters (Table 2) in Da Nang and Khanh Hoa. IOD—Indian Ocean Dipole; MEI—multivariate ENSO index; DTM—daytime temperature; NTM—nighttime temperature; AIC—Akaike information criterion.
GAM models of climate, mosquito index, and dengue incidence in Da Nang and Khanh Hoa
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Province/Variable | Coefficient | Coefficient | Coefficient | Coefficient | ||||
|
| ||||||||
| IOD (lag, 1) | 2.676 | 0.0152 | 2.817 | 0.0298 | 2.205 | 0.001 | ||
| MEI | 3.455 | 0.0071 | 3.416 | 0.0243 | 3.178 | <0.001 | ||
| CI (lag, 3) | 2.968 | 0.0094 | 1.955 | 0.0094 | 3.107 | <0.001 | ||
| AIC | 294.2421 | 300.8429 | 309.1359 | 411.4024 | ||||
| ∆AIC | 6.6008 | 14.8938 | 117.1603 | |||||
|
| ||||||||
| IOD (lag, 1) | 2.203 | <0.001 | 1.901 | <0.001 | 2.877 | <0.001 | ||
| MEI | 3.188 | <0.001 | 3.218 | <0.001 | 3.682 | <0.001 | ||
| CI (lag, 1) | 1 | <0.001 | 2.865 | <0.001 | 1 | 0.001 | ||
| AIC | 245.8264 | 258.581 | 273.5994 | 343.5945 | ||||
| ∆AIC | 12.7546 | 27.773 | 97.7681 | |||||
AIC—Akaike’s information criterion; CI—container index; IOD—Indian Ocean Dipole; MEI—multivariate ENSO index.
Figure 6Importance of model parameters (Table 3) in Da Nang and Khanh Hoa. IOD—Indian Ocean Dipole; MEI—multivariate ENSO index; CI—Container Index; AIC—Akaike information criterion.