Gabriel Alcoba1,2,3, Carlos Ochoa2,4, Sara Babo Martins2, Rafael Ruiz de Castañeda2, Isabelle Bolon2, Franck Wanda5, Eric Comte5, Manish Subedi6, Bhupendra Shah6, Anup Ghimire6, Etienne Gignoux7, Francisco Luquero7, Armand Seraphin Nkwescheu8, Sanjib Kumar Sharma6, François Chappuis1,9, Nicolas Ray2,4. 1. Division of Tropical and Humanitarian Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals (HUG), Geneva, Switzerland. 2. Institute of Global Health (IGH), Department of Community Health and Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland. 3. Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), Geneva, Switzerland. 4. Institute for Environmental Sciences (ISE), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland. 5. Centre International de Recherche, d'Enseignement et de Soins en Milieu Tropical (CIRES), Akonolinga, Cameroon. 6. B.P. Koirala Institute of Health Sciences (BPKIHS), Dharan, Nepal. 7. Epicentre, Médecins Sans Frontières, Geneva, Switzerland/ Paris, France. 8. Cameroon Society of Epidemiology (CaSE), and Faculty of Medicine and Biomedical Science, University of Yaoundé 1, Yaoundé, Cameroon. 9. Department of Community Health and Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Worldwide, it is estimated that snakes bite 4.5-5.4 million people annually, 2.7 million of which are envenomed, and 81,000-138,000 die. The World Health Organization reported these estimates and recognized the scarcity of large-scale, community-based, epidemiological data. In this context, we developed the "Snake-Byte" project that aims at (i) quantifying and mapping the impact of snakebite on human and animal health, and on livelihoods, (ii) developing predictive models for medical, ecological and economic indicators, and (iii) analyzing geographic accessibility to healthcare. This paper exclusively describes the methodology we developed to collect large-scale primary data on snakebite in humans and animals in two hyper-endemic countries, Cameroon and Nepal. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We compared available methods on snakebite epidemiology and on multi-cluster survey development. Then, in line with those findings, we developed an original study methodology based on a multi-cluster random survey, enhanced by geospatial, One Health, and health economics components. Using a minimum hypothesized snakebite national incidence of 100/100,000/year and optimizing design effect, confidence level, and non-response margin, we calculated a sample of 61,000 people per country. This represented 11,700 households in Cameroon and 13,800 in Nepal. The random selection with probability proportional to size generated 250 clusters from all Cameroonian regions and all Nepalese Terai districts. Our household selection methodology combined spatial randomization and selection via high-resolution satellite images. After ethical approval in Switerland (CCER), Nepal (BPKIHS), and Cameroon (CNERSH), and informed written consent, our e-questionnaires included geolocated baseline demographic and socio-economic characteristics, snakebite clinical features and outcomes, healthcare expenditure, animal ownership, animal outcomes, snake identification, and service accessibility. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: This novel transdisciplinary survey methodology was subsequently used to collect countrywide snakebite envenoming data in Nepal and Cameroon. District-level incidence data should help health authorities to channel antivenom and healthcare allocation. This methodology, or parts thereof, could be easily adapted to other countries and to other Neglected Tropical Diseases.
BACKGROUND: Worldwide, it is estimated that snakes bite 4.5-5.4 million people annually, 2.7 million of which are envenomed, and 81,000-138,000 die. The World Health Organization reported these estimates and recognized the scarcity of large-scale, community-based, epidemiological data. In this context, we developed the "Snake-Byte" project that aims at (i) quantifying and mapping the impact of snakebite on human and animal health, and on livelihoods, (ii) developing predictive models for medical, ecological and economic indicators, and (iii) analyzing geographic accessibility to healthcare. This paper exclusively describes the methodology we developed to collect large-scale primary data on snakebite in humans and animals in two hyper-endemic countries, Cameroon and Nepal. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We compared available methods on snakebite epidemiology and on multi-cluster survey development. Then, in line with those findings, we developed an original study methodology based on a multi-cluster random survey, enhanced by geospatial, One Health, and health economics components. Using a minimum hypothesized snakebite national incidence of 100/100,000/year and optimizing design effect, confidence level, and non-response margin, we calculated a sample of 61,000 people per country. This represented 11,700 households in Cameroon and 13,800 in Nepal. The random selection with probability proportional to size generated 250 clusters from all Cameroonian regions and all Nepalese Terai districts. Our household selection methodology combined spatial randomization and selection via high-resolution satellite images. After ethical approval in Switerland (CCER), Nepal (BPKIHS), and Cameroon (CNERSH), and informed written consent, our e-questionnaires included geolocated baseline demographic and socio-economic characteristics, snakebite clinical features and outcomes, healthcare expenditure, animal ownership, animal outcomes, snake identification, and service accessibility. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: This novel transdisciplinary survey methodology was subsequently used to collect countrywide snakebite envenoming data in Nepal and Cameroon. District-level incidence data should help health authorities to channel antivenom and healthcare allocation. This methodology, or parts thereof, could be easily adapted to other countries and to other Neglected Tropical Diseases.
Authors: Jodi L Vanden Eng; Adam Wolkon; Anatoly S Frolov; Dianne J Terlouw; M James Eliades; Kodjo Morgah; Vincent Takpa; Aboudou Dare; Yao K Sodahlon; Yao Doumanou; William A Hawley; Allen W Hightower Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Eric M Fèvre; William A de Glanville; Lian F Thomas; Elizabeth A J Cook; Samuel Kariuki; Claire N Wamae Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2017-06-30 Impact factor: 3.090
Authors: Guillermo A García; Dianna E B Hergott; Wonder P Phiri; Megan Perry; Jordan Smith; Jose Osa Osa Nfumu; Jeremías Nzamio; Godwin Fuseini; Thomas Stabler; Matilde Riloha Rivas; Immo Kleinschmidt; Christopher Schwabe; Carlos A Guerra Journal: Malar J Date: 2019-08-22 Impact factor: 2.979
Authors: Nathan C Lo; Sam Heft-Neal; Jean T Coulibaly; Leslie Leonard; Eran Bendavid; David G Addiss Journal: Lancet Glob Health Date: 2019-09-23 Impact factor: 26.763
Authors: Carlos Ochoa; Marta Pittavino; Sara Babo Martins; Gabriel Alcoba; Isabelle Bolon; Rafael Ruiz de Castañeda; Stéphane Joost; Sanjib Kumar Sharma; François Chappuis; Nicolas Ray Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-12-13 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Isabelle Bolon; Sara Babo Martins; Carlos Ochoa; Gabriel Alcoba; María Herrera; Henri Magloire Bofia Boyogueno; Barun Kumar Sharma; Manish Subedi; Bhupendra Shah; Franck Wanda; Sanjib Kumar Sharma; Armand Seraphin Nkwescheu; Nicolas Ray; François Chappuis; Rafael Ruiz de Castañeda Journal: Toxicon X Date: 2021-06-05