1
|
Munywoki PK, Bigogo G, Nasimiyu C, Ouma A, Aol G, Oduor CO, Rono S, Auko J, Agogo GO, Njoroge R, Oketch D, Odhiambo D, Odeyo VW, Kikwai G, Onyango C, Juma B, Hunsperger E, Lidechi S, Ochieng CA, Lo TQ, Munyua P, Herman-Roloff A. Heterogenous transmission and seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in two demographically diverse populations with low vaccination uptake in Kenya, March and June 2021. Gates Open Res 2023; 7:101. [PMID: 37990692 PMCID: PMC10661969 DOI: 10.12688/gatesopenres.14684.2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/29/2023] [Indexed: 11/23/2023] Open
Abstract
Background SARS-CoV-2 has extensively spread in cities and rural communities, and studies are needed to quantify exposure in the population. We report seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in two well-characterized populations in Kenya at two time points. These data inform the design and delivery of public health mitigation measures. Methods Leveraging on existing population based infectious disease surveillance (PBIDS) in two demographically diverse settings, a rural site in western Kenya in Asembo, Siaya County, and an urban informal settlement in Kibera, Nairobi County, we set up a longitudinal cohort of randomly selected households with serial sampling of all consenting household members in March and June/July 2021. Both sites included 1,794 and 1,638 participants in the March and June/July 2021, respectively. Individual seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was expressed as a percentage of the seropositive among the individuals tested, accounting for household clustering and weighted by the PBIDS age and sex distribution. Results Overall weighted individual seroprevalence increased from 56.2% (95%CI: 52.1, 60.2%) in March 2021 to 63.9% (95%CI: 59.5, 68.0%) in June 2021 in Kibera. For Asembo, the seroprevalence almost doubled from 26.0% (95%CI: 22.4, 30.0%) in March 2021 to 48.7% (95%CI: 44.3, 53.2%) in July 2021. Seroprevalence was highly heterogeneous by age and geography in these populations-higher seroprevalence was observed in the urban informal settlement (compared to the rural setting), and children aged <10 years had the lowest seroprevalence in both sites. Only 1.2% and 1.6% of the study participants reported receipt of at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine by the second round of serosurvey-none by the first round. Conclusions In these two populations, SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence increased in the first 16 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Kenya. It is important to prioritize additional mitigation measures, such as vaccine distribution, in crowded and low socioeconomic settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patrick K. Munywoki
- Division for Global Health Protection, Global Health Center, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Godfrey Bigogo
- Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Kisumu, Kenya
| | - Carolyne Nasimiyu
- Global Health Program, Washington State University – Global Health Kenya (WSU-GH Kenya), Nairobi, Kenya
- Paul G. Allen School of Global Health, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington, USA
| | - Alice Ouma
- Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Kisumu, Kenya
| | - George Aol
- Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Kisumu, Kenya
| | - Clifford O. Oduor
- Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Samuel Rono
- Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Joshua Auko
- Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Kisumu, Kenya
| | - George O. Agogo
- Division for Global Health Protection, Global Health Center, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Ruth Njoroge
- Global Health Program, Washington State University – Global Health Kenya (WSU-GH Kenya), Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Dismas Oketch
- Global Health Program, Washington State University – Global Health Kenya (WSU-GH Kenya), Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Dennis Odhiambo
- Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Kisumu, Kenya
| | - Victor W. Odeyo
- Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Kisumu, Kenya
| | - Gilbert Kikwai
- Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Clayton Onyango
- Division for Global Health Protection, Global Health Center, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Bonventure Juma
- Division for Global Health Protection, Global Health Center, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Elizabeth Hunsperger
- Division for Global Health Protection, Global Health Center, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Shirley Lidechi
- Centre for Global Health Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), Kisumu, Kenya
| | | | - Terrence Q. Lo
- Division for Global Health Protection, Global Health Center, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Peninah Munyua
- Division for Global Health Protection, Global Health Center, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Amy Herman-Roloff
- Division for Global Health Protection, Global Health Center, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Saleh S, Shepherd W, Jewell C, Lam NL, Balmes J, Bates MN, Lai PS, Ochieng CA, Chinouya M, Mortimer K. Air pollution interventions and respiratory health: a systematic review. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 2021; 24:150-164. [PMID: 32127098 DOI: 10.5588/ijtld.19.0417] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Indoor and ambient air pollution exposure is a major risk to respiratory health worldwide, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Interventional trials have mainly focused on alternatives to cooking stoves, with mixed results. Beyond cooking, additional sources of particulate matter also contribute to the burden of air pollution exposure. This review explores evidence from current randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the clinical effectiveness of interventions to reduce particulate matter in LMICs.METHODS: Twelve databases and the grey literature (e.g., Government reports and policy papers) were searched. Eligible studies were RCTs conducted in LMICs aiming to reduce particulate exposure from any source and reporting on at least one clinical respiratory outcome (respiratory symptoms, lung function or clinical diagnoses). Data from relevant studies were systematically extracted, the risk of bias assessed and narrative synthesis provided.RESULTS: Of the 14 included studies, 12 tested 'improved' cookstoves, most using biomass, but solar and bioethanol cookers were also included. One trial used solar lamps and another was an integrated intervention incorporating behavioural and environmental components for the treatment and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Of the six studies reporting child pneumonia outcomes, none demonstrated significant benefit in intention-to-treat analysis. Ten studies reported respiratory symptom outcomes with some improvements seen, but self-reporting made these outcomes highly vulnerable to bias. Substantial inter-study clinical and methodological heterogeneity precluded calculation of pooled effect estimates.CONCLUSION: Evidence from the RCTs performed to date suggests that individual household-level interventions for air pollution exposure reduction have limited benefits for respiratory health. More comprehensive approaches to air pollution exposure reduction must be developed so their potential health benefits can be assessed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Saleh
- Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, London, UK, Malawi-Liverpool-Wellcome Trust Programme, Lilongwe, Malawi
| | - W Shepherd
- Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - C Jewell
- Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
| | - N L Lam
- Schatz Energy Research Center, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA
| | - J Balmes
- University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, University of California, Berkeley, CA
| | - M N Bates
- University of California, Berkeley, CA
| | - P S Lai
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - C A Ochieng
- National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland, Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - M Chinouya
- Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - K Mortimer
- Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Abstract
UNLABELLED Household use of biomass fuels is a major source of indoor air pollution and poor health in developing countries. We conducted a cross-sectional investigation in rural Kenya to assess household air pollution in homes with traditional three-stone stove and rocket mud stove (RMS), a low-cost unvented wood stove. We conducted continuous measurements of kitchen carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations and personal exposures in 102 households. Median 48-h kitchen and personal CO concentrations were 7.3 and 6.5 ppm, respectively, for three-stone stoves, while the corresponding concentrations for RMS were 5.8 and 4.4 ppm. After adjusting for kitchen location, ventilation, socio-economic status, and fuel moisture content, the use of RMS was associated with 33% lower levels of kitchen CO [95% Confidence Interval (CI), 64.4-25.1%] and 42% lower levels of personal CO (95% CI, 66.0-1.1%) as compared to three-stone stoves. Differences in CO concentrations by stove type were more pronounced when averaged over the cooking periods, although they were attenuated after adjusting for confounding. In conclusion, RMS appear to lower kitchen and personal CO concentrations compared to the traditional three-stone stoves but overall, the CO concentrations remain high. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS The rocket mud stoves (RMS) were associated with lower CO concentrations compared to three-stone stoves. However, the difference in concentrations was modest and concentrations in both stove groups exceeded the WHO guideline of 7 μg/m(3) , suggesting the unvented RMSs on their own are unlikely to appreciably benefit health in this population. Greater air quality benefit could be realized if the stoves were complemented with behavior change, including education on extinguishing fire when not in use as well as fuel drying, and cooking in locations that are separate from the main house.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C A Ochieng
- Department of Social and Environmental Health Research, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|