International Livestock Research Institute, P.O. Box 30709, 00100 Nairobi, Kenya; University of Reading, Whiteknights, P.O. Box 217, Reading, Berkshire RG6 6AH, UK.
International Livestock Research Institute, P.O. Box 30709, 00100 Nairobi, Kenya.
Prev Vet Med. 2014 Aug 1;115(3-4):143-56. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2014.03.029. Epub 2014 Apr 5.
CBPP is an important transboundary disease in sub-Saharan Africa whose control is urgent. Participatory data collection involving 52 focus group discussions in 37 village clusters and key informant interviews, a cross-sectional study involving 232 households and a post-vaccination follow up involving 203 households was carried out in 2006-2007 in Narok South district of Kenya. This was to investigate knowledge, attitudes, perceptions and practices (KAPP) associated with control of CBPP as well as the adverse post-vaccination reactions in animals in order to advice the control policy. The community perceived trans-boundary CBPP threat to their cattle. They had traditional disease coping mechanisms and were conversant with CBPP prevention and control with 49.8% (95%CI: 42.8-56.7%) giving priority to CBPP control. However, 12.9% (95%CI: 9.0-18.1%) of pastoralists had no knowledge of any prevention method and 10.0% (95%CI: 6.5-14.7%) would not know what to do or would do nothing in the event of an outbreak. Although 43.5% (95%CI: 37.1-50.2%) of pastoralists were treating CBPP cases with antimicrobials, 62.5% (95%CI: 52.1-71.7%) of them doubted the effectiveness of the treatments. Pastoralists perceived vaccination to be the solution to CBPP but vaccination was irregular due to unavailability of the vaccine. Vaccination was mainly to control outbreaks rather than preventive and exhibited adverse post-vaccination reactions among 70.4% (95%CI: 63.6-76.5%) of herds and 3.8% (95%CI: 3.5-4.2%) of animals. Consequently, nearly 25.2% (95%CI: 18.5-33.2%) of pastoralists may resist subsequent vaccinations against CBPP. Pastoralists preferred CBPP vaccination at certain times of the year and that it is combined with other vaccinations. In conclusion, pastoralists were not fully aware of the preventive measures and interventions and post-vaccination reactions may discourage subsequent CBPP vaccinations. Consequently there is need for monitoring and management of post vaccination reactions and awareness creation on CBPP prevention and interventions and their merits and demerits. CBPP vaccine was largely unavailable to the pastoralists and the preference of the pastoralists was for vaccination at specified times and vaccine combinations which makes it necessary to avail the vaccine in conformity with the pastoralists preferences. In addition, planning vaccinations should involve pastoralists and neighbouring countries. As the results cannot be generalized, further studies on CBPP control methods and their effectiveness are recommended.
牛传染性胸膜肺炎是撒哈拉以南非洲地区的一种重要的跨界疾病,其控制迫在眉睫。2006 年至 2007 年,在肯尼亚纳罗克南部地区开展了一项参与式数据收集工作,涉及 52 个焦点小组讨论和 37 个村庄集群以及关键知情人访谈,一项涉及 232 户家庭的横断面研究和一项涉及 203 户家庭的疫苗接种后随访。该研究旨在调查与牛传染性胸膜肺炎控制相关的知识、态度、看法和做法(KAPP)以及动物接种后的不良反应,以便为控制政策提供建议。社区认为跨界牛传染性胸膜肺炎对他们的牛群构成威胁。他们有传统的疾病应对机制,对牛传染性胸膜肺炎的预防和控制较为熟悉,49.8%(95%置信区间:42.8-56.7%)的人优先考虑牛传染性胸膜肺炎的控制。然而,12.9%(95%置信区间:9.0-18.1%)的牧民对任何预防方法都一无所知,10.0%(95%置信区间:6.5-14.7%)的牧民在疫情爆发时不知道该做什么或会无所作为。尽管 43.5%(95%置信区间:37.1-50.2%)的牧民在用抗生素治疗牛传染性胸膜肺炎病例,但 62.5%(95%置信区间:52.1-71.7%)的牧民对治疗效果表示怀疑。牧民认为接种疫苗是控制牛传染性胸膜肺炎的方法,但由于疫苗供应不足,接种工作并不规律。接种疫苗主要是为了控制疫情爆发,而不是预防,在 70.4%(95%置信区间:63.6-76.5%)的畜群和 3.8%(95%置信区间:3.5-4.2%)的动物中出现了接种后的不良反应。因此,近 25.2%(95%置信区间:18.5-33.2%)的牧民可能会抵制随后的牛传染性胸膜肺炎疫苗接种。牧民更喜欢在一年中的特定时间接种牛传染性胸膜肺炎疫苗,并且希望与其他疫苗结合使用。总之,牧民对预防措施和干预措施以及接种后的不良反应了解不足,这可能会影响他们对后续牛传染性胸膜肺炎疫苗接种的意愿。因此,有必要对牛传染性胸膜肺炎的预防和干预措施及其优缺点进行监测和管理,并提高对其的认识。牛传染性胸膜肺炎疫苗对牧民来说基本上是无法获得的,而牧民的偏好是在特定时间和疫苗组合下进行接种,这使得有必要按照牧民的偏好提供疫苗。此外,接种疫苗的计划应包括牧民和邻国。由于研究结果不能推广,建议进一步研究牛传染性胸膜肺炎的控制方法及其有效性。