Cost-effectiveness of One Health interventions for rabies elimination: a systematic review

The 'One Health' (OH) approach is the most promising idea in realising the global goal of eliminating canine-mediated human rabies by 2030. However, taking an OH approach to rabies elimination can mean many different things to different people. We conducted a systematic review scrutinizing economic evaluations (EEs) retrieved from MEDLINE OVID, Embase OVID, Global Health OVID, CINAHL EBSCO and ECONLIT EBSCO that used the OH approach with the intent of identifying cost-effective sets of interventions that can be combined to implement an optimal OH-based rabies elimination program and highlight key gaps in the knowledge base. Our review suggests that an optimal OH program to tackle rabies should incorporate mass dog vaccination and integrated bite case management in combination with efficient use of post-exposure prophylaxis along with a shift to a 1-week abbreviated intradermal rabies vaccine regimen in humans. We recommend that future EEs of OH interventions for rabies elimination should be performed alongside implementation research to ensure proposed interventions are feasible and adopt a wider societal perspective taking into account costs and outcomes across both the human health and animal welfare sectors. The systematic review has been registered with PROSPERO.

A global analysis of One Health Networks and the proliferation of One Health collaborations

There has been a renewed focus on threats to the human-animal-environment interface as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, and investments in One Health collaborations are expected to increase. Efforts to monitor the development of One Health Networks (OHNs) are essential to avoid duplication or misalignment of investments. This Series paper shows the global distribution of existing OHNs and assesses their collective characteristics to identify potential deficits in the ways OHNs have formed and to help increase the effectiveness of investments. We searched PubMed, Google, Google Scholar, and relevant conference websites for potential OHNs and identified 184 worldwide for further analysis. We developed four case studies to show important findings from our research and exemplify best practices in One Health operationalisation. Our findings show that, although more OHNs were formed in the past 10 years than in the preceding decade, investment in OHNs has not been equitably distributed; more OHNs are formed and headquartered in Europe than in any other region, and emerging infections and novel pathogens were the priority focus area for most OHNs, with fewer OHNs focusing on other important hazards and pressing threats to health security. We found substantial deficits in the OHNs collaboration model regarding the diversity of stakeholder and sector representation, which we argue impedes effective and equitable OHN formation and contributes to other imbalances in OHN distribution and priorities. These findings are supported by previous evidence that shows the skewed investment in One Health thus far. The increased attention to One Health after the COVID-19 pandemic is an opportunity to focus efforts and resources to areas that need them most. Analyses, such as this Series paper, should be used to establish databases and repositories of OHNs worldwide. Increased attention should then be given to understanding existing resource allocation and distribution patterns, establish more egalitarian networks that encompass the breadth of One Health issues, and serve communities most affected by emerging, re-emerging, or endemic threats at the human-animal-environment interface.

Contact tracing indicators for COVID-19: Rapid scoping review and conceptual framework

BACKGROUND

Contact tracing is one of the key interventions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic but its implementation varies widely across countries. There is little guidance on how to monitor contact tracing performance, and no systematic overview of indicators to assess contact tracing systems or conceptual framework for such indicators exists to date.

METHODS

We conducted a rapid scoping review using a systematic literature search strategy in the peer-reviewed and grey literature as well as open source online documents. We developed a conceptual framework to map indicators by type (input, process, output, outcome, impact) and thematic area (human resources, financial resources, case investigation, contact identification, contact testing, contact follow up, case isolation, contact quarantine, transmission chain interruption, incidence reduction).

RESULTS

We identified a total of 153 contact tracing indicators from 1,555 peer-reviewed studies, 894 studies from grey literature sources, and 15 sources from internet searches. Two-thirds of indicators were process indicators (102; 67%), while 48 (31%) indicators were output indicators. Only three (2%) indicators were input indicators. Indicators covered seven out of ten conceptualized thematic areas, with more than half being related to either case investigation (37; 24%) or contact identification (44; 29%). There were no indicators for the input area "financial resources", the outcome area "transmission chain interruption", and the impact area "incidence reduction".

CONCLUSIONS

Almost all identified indicators were either process or output indicators focusing on case investigation, contact identification, case isolation or contact quarantine. We identified important gaps in input, outcome and impact indicators, which constrains evidence-based assessment of contact tracing systems. A universally agreed set of indicators is needed to allow for cross-system comparisons and to improve the performance of contact tracing systems.

COVID-19 in Punjab, India: Epidemiological patterns, laboratory surveillance and contact tracing of COVID-19 cases, March-May 2020

Background

In Punjab, first COVID-19 case was detected on March 5, 2020 followed by multiple clusters. Understanding the epidemiology of reported COVID-19 cases helps decision makers in planning future responses. We described the epidemiological patterns, laboratory surveillance and contact tracing of COVID-19 cases in Punjab.

Methods

We analysed state's COVID-19 data from March-May 2020 to describe time, place and person distribution. We analysed the laboratory surveillance and contact tracing reports to calculate frequency of testing, sample positivity rate (PR) and contacts traced per case.

Findings

A total of 2256 cases were reported from March-May 2020 (attack rate 75 cases/million and case fatality rate 2%). Attack rate was higher among males (81 cases/million males) and maximum affected age group was 60-69 years (164∙5 cases/million). Five of 22 districts reported almost half cases in May's first week. Mortality rate was highest among individuals >60 years (six deaths/million) and males (two deaths/million males). Of 45 deaths, 41 reported comorbidities [(hypertension (42%), diabetes (40%)]. COVID-19 testing increased from 46 samples/day (PR: 2%) in March's first week to 4000 samples/day (PR: 2∙5%) by May's end (2752 tests/million). Amritsar conducted 2035 tests/million (highest PR: 6∙5%) while Barnala conducted 4158 tests/million (lowest PR: 1%). For 2256 cases, 19,432 contacts were traced (nine contacts/case) with 11% positivity rate.

Interpretation

COVID-19 in Punjab mostly affected males, >60 years of age and individuals with comorbid conditions. Many districts with less testing and contact tracing had higher positivity rate. We recommended to implement and ensure adequate testing and contact tracing in all the districts of Punjab.

Infections among Contacts of Patients with Nipah Virus, India

We conducted a serosurvey of 155 healthcare workers and 124 household and community members who had close contact with 18 patients who had laboratory-confirmed Nipah virus infections in Kerala, India. We detected 3 subclinical infections; 2 persons had IgM and IgG and 1 only IgM against Nipah virus.