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":"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。","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":"{\"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}","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}
Contrasting the impact and cost-effectiveness of successive intervention strategies in response to Ebola in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2018-2020.
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.
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.