Bett B, Henning J, Abdu P, Okike I, Poole J, Young J, Randolph T F, Perry B D
International Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya.
Transbound Emerg Dis. 2014 Feb;61(1):60-8. doi: 10.1111/tbed.12003. Epub 2012 Aug 27.
We quantified the between-village transmission rate, β (the rate of transmission of H5N1 HPAI virus per effective contact), and the reproductive number, Re (the average number of outbreaks caused by one infectious village during its entire infectious period), of H5N1 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus in Nigeria using outbreak data collected between December 2005 and July 2008. We classified the outbreaks into two phases to assess the effectiveness of the control measures implemented. Phase 1 (December 2005-October 2006) represents the period when the Federal Government of Nigeria managed the HPAI surveillance and response measures, while Phase 2 (November 2006-July 2008) represents the time during which the Nigeria Avian Influenza Control and Human Pandemic Preparedness project (NAICP), funded by a World Bank credit of US$ 50 million, had taken over the management of most of the interventions. We used a total of 204 outbreaks from 176 villages that occurred in 78 local government areas of 25 states. The compartmental susceptible-infectious model was used as the analytical tool. Means and 95% percentile confidence intervals were obtained using bootstrapping techniques. The overall mean β (assuming a duration of infectiousness, T, of 12 days) was 0.07/day (95% percentile confidence interval: 0.06-0.09). The first and second phases of the epidemic had comparable β estimates of 0.06/day (0.04-0.09) and 0.08/day (0.06-0.10), respectively. The Re of the virus associated with these β and T estimates was 0.9 (0.7-1.1); the first and second phases of the epidemic had Re of 0.84 (0.5-1.2) and 0.9 (0.6-1.2), respectively. We conclude that the intervention measures implemented in the second phase of the epidemic had comparable effects to those implemented during the first phase and that the Re of the epidemic was low, indicating that the Nigeria H5N1 HPAI epidemic was unstable.
我们利用2005年12月至2008年7月期间收集的疫情数据,对尼日利亚H5N1高致病性禽流感(HPAI)病毒的村间传播率β(每有效接触中H5N1 HPAI病毒的传播率)和繁殖数Re(一个感染村在其整个感染期内引起的疫情平均数量)进行了量化。我们将疫情分为两个阶段,以评估所实施控制措施的有效性。第一阶段(2005年12月至2006年10月)代表尼日利亚联邦政府管理HPAI监测和应对措施的时期,而第二阶段(2006年11月至2008年7月)代表由世界银行5000万美元信贷资助的尼日利亚禽流感控制和人类大流行防范项目(NAICP)接管大部分干预措施管理的时期。我们总共使用了来自25个州78个地方政府辖区内176个村庄的204起疫情。采用分区易感-感染模型作为分析工具。使用自抽样技术获得均值和95%百分位数置信区间。总体平均β(假设感染持续时间T为12天)为0.07/天(95%百分位数置信区间:0.06 - 0.09)。疫情的第一阶段和第二阶段的β估计值相当,分别为0.06/天(0.04 - 0.09)和0.08/天(0.06 - 0.10)。与这些β和T估计值相关的病毒Re为0.9(0.7 - 1.1);疫情的第一阶段和第二阶段的Re分别为0.84(0.5 - 1.2)和0.9(0.6 - 1.2)。我们得出结论,疫情第二阶段实施的干预措施与第一阶段实施的措施效果相当,且疫情的Re较低,表明尼日利亚H5N1 HPAI疫情不稳定。