Contrasting the impact and cost-effectiveness of successive intervention strategies in response to Ebola in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2018-2020.

IF 7.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Thibaut Jombart, Wu Zeng, Michel Yao, Anne Cori, Steve Ahuka-Mundeke, Hadia Samaha, Thomas Wilkinson, Mathias Mossoko, Jean-Pierre Lokonga, Dominique Baabo, Fatima El Kadiri El Yamini, Patrick Hoang-Vu Eozenou, Sylvain Yuma, Linda Mobula
{"title":"Contrasting the impact and cost-effectiveness of successive intervention strategies in response to Ebola in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2018-2020.","authors":"Thibaut Jombart, Wu Zeng, Michel Yao, Anne Cori, Steve Ahuka-Mundeke, Hadia Samaha, Thomas Wilkinson, Mathias Mossoko, Jean-Pierre Lokonga, Dominique Baabo, Fatima El Kadiri El Yamini, Patrick Hoang-Vu Eozenou, Sylvain Yuma, Linda Mobula","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2024-015822","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The 10th outbreak of Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) in 2018-2020 was the largest in DRC's history and the second largest worldwide. Different strategic response plans (SRPs) were implemented, and the outbreak was eventually stopped after a large scale-up of operations with the SRP 4, which benefited from all public health measures deployed during SRPs 1-3, upon which it developed a more holistic approach including community engagement, logistics and security.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used modelling to characterise EVD transmission and assess the epidemiological impact of the two main response strategies (SRPs 1-3 vs SRP 4). We simulated potential future epidemics with different intervention scenarios, combined with a costing model to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness of different strategies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We estimated a mean effective reproduction number <i>R</i> of 1.19 (credible interval (95% CrI) = (1.13 ; 1.25)). The spatial spread was moderate with an average 4.4% (95% CrI = (3.5%; 5.4%)) of transmissions moving to different health zones. The scale-up of operations in SRP 4 coincided with a threefold reduction in transmission, and 30% faster control of EVD waves. In simulations, SRP 4 appears cost-saving, although most simulated outbreaks remain small even with SRPs 1-3.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most EVD outbreaks are expected to be small and can be contained with SRPs 1-3. In outbreaks with increased transmissibility or in the presence of insecurity, rapid scale-up to SRP 4 is likely to save lives and be cost-effective.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":"10 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12004461/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2024-015822","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The 10th outbreak of Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) in 2018-2020 was the largest in DRC's history and the second largest worldwide. Different strategic response plans (SRPs) were implemented, and the outbreak was eventually stopped after a large scale-up of operations with the SRP 4, which benefited from all public health measures deployed during SRPs 1-3, upon which it developed a more holistic approach including community engagement, logistics and security.

Methods: We used modelling to characterise EVD transmission and assess the epidemiological impact of the two main response strategies (SRPs 1-3 vs SRP 4). We simulated potential future epidemics with different intervention scenarios, combined with a costing model to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness of different strategies.

Results: We estimated a mean effective reproduction number R of 1.19 (credible interval (95% CrI) = (1.13 ; 1.25)). The spatial spread was moderate with an average 4.4% (95% CrI = (3.5%; 5.4%)) of transmissions moving to different health zones. The scale-up of operations in SRP 4 coincided with a threefold reduction in transmission, and 30% faster control of EVD waves. In simulations, SRP 4 appears cost-saving, although most simulated outbreaks remain small even with SRPs 1-3.

Conclusion: Most EVD outbreaks are expected to be small and can be contained with SRPs 1-3. In outbreaks with increased transmissibility or in the presence of insecurity, rapid scale-up to SRP 4 is likely to save lives and be cost-effective.

对比2018-2020年刚果民主共和国应对埃博拉的连续干预战略的影响和成本效益。
2018-2020年在刚果民主共和国(DRC)爆发的第10次埃博拉病毒病(EVD)是DRC历史上最大的一次,也是全球第二大疫情。实施了不同的战略应对计划,在大规模扩大战略应对计划4的行动后,疫情最终得到遏制。战略应对计划4受益于战略应对计划1-3期间部署的所有公共卫生措施,并在此基础上制定了更全面的方法,包括社区参与、后勤和安全。方法:我们使用建模来描述EVD传播特征,并评估两种主要应对策略(SRP 1-3 vs SRP 4)的流行病学影响。我们模拟了不同干预方案下潜在的未来流行病,并结合成本模型来评估不同策略的增量成本效益。结果:我们估计平均有效繁殖数R为1.19(可信区间(95% CrI) = 1.13;1.25))。空间分布中等,平均为4.4% (95% CrI = 3.5%;(5.4%))传播到不同的卫生区。在扩大SRP 4行动的同时,传播减少了三倍,埃博拉病毒病的控制速度加快了30%。在模拟中,srp4似乎节省了成本,尽管大多数模拟爆发即使使用srp1 -3也仍然很小。结论:大多数EVD疫情规模较小,可通过SRPs 1-3加以控制。在传播能力增强或存在不安全因素的疫情中,迅速扩大到SRP 4可能挽救生命并具有成本效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMJ Global Health
BMJ Global Health Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.90%
发文量
429
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信