Michael C.A.,A+ Network |
Michael C.A.,Nigeria Field Epidemiology and Laboratory Training Program |
Ogbuanu I.U.,Centers for Disease Control and Prevention |
Storms A.D.,Centers for Disease Control and Prevention |
And 7 more authors.
Journal of Infectious Diseases | Year: 2014
Results: Polio risk perception was low among study participants. The majority (59%) of participants believed that vaccination was either not necessary or would not be helpful, and 30% thought it might be harmful. Religious beliefs were an important driver in the way people understood disease. Fifty-two percent of 48 respondents reported that illnesses were due to God's will and/or destiny and that only God could protect them against illnesses. Only a minority (14%) of respondents indicated that polio was a significant problem in their community.Background: Accumulation of susceptible children whose caregivers refuse to accept oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV) contributes to the spread of poliovirus in Nigeria.Methods: During and immediately following the OPV campaign in October 2012, polio eradication partners conducted a study among households in which the vaccine was refused, using semistructured questionnaires. The selected study districts had a history of persistent OPV refusals in previous campaigns.Conclusions: Caregivers refuse OPV largely because of poor polio risk perception and religious beliefs. Communication strategies should, therefore, aim to increase awareness of polio as a real health threat and educate communities about the safety of the vaccine. In addition, polio eradication partners should collaborate with other agencies and ministries to improve total primary healthcare packages to address identified unmet health and social needs. © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. © 2014 Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2014. This work is written by (a) US Government employee(s) and is in the public domain in the US.
Lo Y.-C.,Centers for Disease Control and Prevention |
Dooyema C.A.,Centers for Disease Control and Prevention |
Neri A.,Centers for Disease Control and Prevention |
Durant J.,Agency of Toxic Substances and Disease Registry |
And 12 more authors.
Environmental Health Perspectives | Year: 2012
Background: During May-June 2010, a childhood lead poisoning outbreak related to gold ore processing was confirmed in two villages in Zamfara State, Nigeria. During June-September of that year, villages with suspected or confirmed childhood lead poisoning continued to be identified in Zamfara State. Objectives: We investigated the extent of childhood lead poisoning [≥ 1 child with a blood lead level (BLL) ≥ 10 μg/dL] and lead contamination (≥ 1 soil/dust sample with a lead level > 400 parts per million) among villages in Zamfara State and identified villages that should be prioritized for urgent interventions. Methods: We used chain-referral sampling to identify villages of interest, defined as villages suspected of participation in gold ore processing during the previous 12 months. We interviewed villagers, determined BLLs among children < 5 years of age, and analyzed soil/dust from public areas and homes for lead. Results: We identified 131 villages of interest and visited 74 (56%) villages in three local government areas. Fifty-four (77%) of 70 villages that completed the survey reported gold ore processing. Ore-processing villages were more likely to have ≥ 1 child < 5 years of age with lead poisoning (68% vs. 50%, p = 0.17) or death following convulsions (74% vs. 44%, p = 0.02). Soil/dust contamination and BLL ≥ 45 μg/dL were identified in ore-processing villages only [50% (p < 0.001) and 15% (p = 0.22), respectively]. The odds of childhood lead poisoning or lead contamination was 3.5 times as high in ore-processing villages than the other villages (95% confidence interval: 1.1, 11.3). Conclusion: Childhood lead poisoning and lead contamination were widespread in surveyed areas, particularly among villages that had processed ore recently. Urgent interventions are required to reduce lead exposure, morbidity, and mortality in affected communities.
Fawole O.I.,Nigeria Field Epidemiology and Laboratory Training Program |
Fawole O.I.,University of Ibadan |
Bamiselu O.F.,University of Ibadan |
Adewuyi P.A.,Nigeria Field Epidemiology and Laboratory Training Program |
And 2 more authors.
Annals of African Medicine | Year: 2016
Background: An outbreak of Ebola disease was declared in Lagos, South West Nigeria, on 23rd July 2014. Later, the outbreak spread to the south south and south eastern part of the country. The last cases occurred on August 31, 2014 and the country was certified to be Ebola free on 20th October, 2014. This paper describes the experiences and implications of the Ebola outbreak for Nigerian women. Subjects and Methods: Identification and listing of cases and contacts was done in Lagos, Port Harcourt and Enugu. Socio demographic information was collected. Results: Women made up 55% of Ebola cases and 56.6% of contacts traced. Of the 8 deaths reported 50.0% (4) were women, of which 75.0% (3) were health care providers. The sex specific case attack and fatality rates for males and females were 2.2% versus 2.3% and 45.5% versus 33.3% respectively. The women restricted their movement in order to avoid the infection. The outbreak affected their utilisation of health care services and livelihood. Conclusion: Women were exposed occupationally and domestically due to their care giving roles. In health facilities, they were directly involved in the care or encountered persons who had been in contact with persons with Ebola. In the homes, they were at the forefront of nursing the sick. There is the need to ensure women have access to information, services and personal protective equipment to enable them protect themselves from infection. Education and engagement of women is crucial to protect women from infection and for prompt outbreak containment. © 2016 Annals of African Medicine | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow.