Joshua Longbottom1,2, Charles Wamboga3, Paul R Bessell4, Steve J Torr1, Michelle C Stanton1. 1. Department of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom. 2. Centre for Health Informatics, Computing and Statistics, Lancaster Medical School, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom. 3. Ministry of Health, Kampala, Uganda. 4. Epi Interventions, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Surveillance is an essential component of global programs to eliminate infectious diseases and avert epidemics of (re-)emerging diseases. As the numbers of cases decline, costs of treatment and control diminish but those for surveillance remain high even after the 'last' case. Reducing surveillance may risk missing persistent or (re-)emerging foci of disease. Here, we use a simulation-based approach to determine the minimal number of passive surveillance sites required to ensure maximum coverage of a population at-risk (PAR) of an infectious disease. METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: For this study, we use Gambian human African trypanosomiasis (g-HAT) in north-western Uganda, a neglected tropical disease (NTD) which has been reduced to historically low levels (<1000 cases/year globally), as an example. To quantify travel time to diagnostic facilities, a proxy for surveillance coverage, we produced a high spatial-resolution resistance surface and performed cost-distance analyses. We simulated travel time for the PAR with different numbers (1-170) and locations (170,000 total placement combinations) of diagnostic facilities, quantifying the percentage of the PAR within 1h and 5h travel of the facilities, as per in-country targets. Our simulations indicate that a 70% reduction (51/170) in diagnostic centres still exceeded minimal targets of coverage even for remote populations, with >95% of a total PAR of ~3million individuals living ≤1h from a diagnostic centre, and we demonstrate an approach to best place these facilities, informing a minimal impact scale back. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight that surveillance of g-HAT in north-western Uganda can be scaled back without substantially reducing coverage of the PAR. The methodology described can contribute to cost-effective and equable strategies for the surveillance of NTDs and other infectious diseases approaching elimination or (re-)emergence.
BACKGROUND: Surveillance is an essential component of global programs to eliminate infectious diseases and avert epidemics of (re-)emerging diseases. As the numbers of cases decline, costs of treatment and control diminish but those for surveillance remain high even after the 'last' case. Reducing surveillance may risk missing persistent or (re-)emerging foci of disease. Here, we use a simulation-based approach to determine the minimal number of passive surveillance sites required to ensure maximum coverage of a population at-risk (PAR) of an infectious disease. METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: For this study, we use Gambian human African trypanosomiasis (g-HAT) in north-western Uganda, a neglected tropical disease (NTD) which has been reduced to historically low levels (<1000 cases/year globally), as an example. To quantify travel time to diagnostic facilities, a proxy for surveillance coverage, we produced a high spatial-resolution resistance surface and performed cost-distance analyses. We simulated travel time for the PAR with different numbers (1-170) and locations (170,000 total placement combinations) of diagnostic facilities, quantifying the percentage of the PAR within 1h and 5h travel of the facilities, as per in-country targets. Our simulations indicate that a 70% reduction (51/170) in diagnostic centres still exceeded minimal targets of coverage even for remote populations, with >95% of a total PAR of ~3million individuals living ≤1h from a diagnostic centre, and we demonstrate an approach to best place these facilities, informing a minimal impact scale back. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight that surveillance of g-HAT in north-western Uganda can be scaled back without substantially reducing coverage of the PAR. The methodology described can contribute to cost-effective and equable strategies for the surveillance of NTDs and other infectious diseases approaching elimination or (re-)emergence.
Authors: Pere P Simarro; Giuliano Cecchi; José R Franco; Massimo Paone; Abdoulaye Diarra; José Antonio Ruiz-Postigo; Eric M Fèvre; Raffaele C Mattioli; Jean G Jannin Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis Date: 2012-10-25
Authors: Francesco Checchi; Andrew P Cox; François Chappuis; Gerardo Priotto; Daniel Chandramohan; Daniel T Haydon Journal: Parasit Vectors Date: 2012-08-07 Impact factor: 3.876
Authors: Victor A Alegana; Jim A Wright; Uusiku Pentrina; Abdisalan M Noor; Robert W Snow; Peter M Atkinson Journal: Int J Health Geogr Date: 2012-02-15 Impact factor: 3.918
Authors: Joseph Mathu Ndung'u; Alain Boulangé; Albert Picado; Albert Mugenyi; Allan Mortensen; Andrew Hope; Brahim Guihini Mollo; Bruno Bucheton; Charles Wamboga; Charles Waiswa; Dramane Kaba; Enock Matovu; Fabrice Courtin; Gala Garrod; Geoffrey Gimonneau; Georgina V Bingham; Hassane Mahamat Hassane; Inaki Tirados; Isabel Saldanha; Jacques Kabore; Jean-Baptiste Rayaisse; Jean-Mathieu Bart; Jessica Lingley; Johan Esterhuizen; Joshua Longbottom; Justin Pulford; Lingue Kouakou; Lassina Sanogo; Lucas Cunningham; Mamadou Camara; Mathurin Koffi; Michelle Stanton; Mike Lehane; Moise Saa Kagbadouno; Oumou Camara; Paul Bessell; Peka Mallaye; Philippe Solano; Richard Selby; Sophie Dunkley; Steve Torr; Sylvain Biéler; Veerle Lejon; Vincent Jamonneau; Wilfried Yoni; Zachary Katz Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis Date: 2020-11-12
Authors: Charles Wamboga; Enock Matovu; Paul Richard Bessell; Albert Picado; Sylvain Biéler; Joseph Mathu Ndung'u Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-10-12 Impact factor: 3.240