Accelerating measles and rubella elimination through research and innovation - Findings from the Measles & Rubella Initiative research prioritization process, 2016.

The Measles & Rubella Initiative (M&RI) identified five key strategies to achieve measles and rubella elimination, including research and innovation to support cost-effective operations and improve vaccination and diagnostic tools. In 2016, the M&RI Research and Innovation Working Group (R&IWG) completed a research prioritization process to identify key research questions and update the global research agenda. The R&IWG reviewed meeting reports and strategic planning documents and solicited programmatic inputs from vaccination experts at the program operational level through a web survey, to identify previous research priorities and new research questions. The R&IWG then convened a meeting of experts to prioritize the identified research questions in four strategic areas: (1) epidemiology and economics, (2) surveillance and laboratory, (3) immunization strategies, and (4) demand creation and communications. The experts identified 19 priority research questions in the four strategic areas to address key areas of work necessary to further progress toward elimination. Future commitments from partners will be needed to develop a platform for improved coordination with adequate and predictable resources for research implementation and innovation to address these identified priorities.

Development of a District-Level Programmatic Assessment Tool for Risk of Measles Virus Transmission.

All six World Health Organization (WHO) regions have now set goals for measles elimination by or before 2020. To prioritize measles elimination efforts and use available resources efficiently, there is a need to identify at-risk areas that are offtrack from meeting performance targets and require strengthening of programmatic efforts. This article describes the development of a WHO measles programmatic risk assessment tool to be used for monitoring, guiding, and sustaining measles elimination efforts at the subnational level. We outline the tool development process; the tool specifications and requirements for data inputs; the framework of risk categories, indicators, and scoring; and the risk category assignment. Overall risk was assessed as a function of indicator scores that fall into four main categories: population immunity, surveillance quality, program performance, and threat assessment. On the basis of the overall score, the tool assigns each district a risk of either low, medium, high, or very high. The cut-off criteria for the risk assignment categories were based on the distribution of scores from all possible combinations of individual indicator cutoffs. The results may be used for advocacy to communicate risk to policymakers, mobilize resources for corrective actions, manage population immunity, and prioritize programmatic activities. Ongoing evaluation of indicators will be needed to evaluate programmatic performance and plan risk mitigation activities effectively. The availability of a comprehensive tool that can identify at-risk districts will enhance efforts to prioritize resources and implement strategies for achieving the Global Vaccine Action Plan goals for measles elimination.

Development of the World Health Organization Measles Programmatic Risk Assessment Tool Using Experience from the 2009 Measles Outbreak in Namibia.

In the World Health Organization (WHO) African region, reported measles cases decreased by 80% and measles mortality declined by 88% during 2000-2012. Based on current performance trends, however, focused efforts will be needed to achieve the regional measles elimination goal. To prioritize efforts to strengthen implementation of elimination strategies, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and WHO developed a measles programmatic risk assessment tool to identify high-risk districts and guide and strengthen program activities at the subnational level. This article provides a description of pilot testing of the tool in Namibia using comparisons of high-risk districts identified using 2006-2008 data with reported measles cases and incidence during the 2009 outbreak. Of the 34 health districts in Namibia, 11 (32%) were classified as high risk or very high risk, including the district of Engela where the outbreak began in 2009. The district of Windhoek, including the capital city of Windhoek, had the highest overall risk score-driven primarily by poor population immunity and immunization program performance-and one of the highest incidences during the outbreak. Other high-risk districts were either around the capital district or in the northern part of the country near the border with Angola. Districts categorized as high or very high risk based on the 2006-2008 data generally experienced high measles incidence during the large outbreak in 2009, as did several medium- or low-risk districts. The tool can be used to guide measles elimination strategies and to identify programmatic areas that require strengthening.

Application of the World Health Organization Programmatic Assessment Tool for Risk of Measles Virus Transmission-Lessons Learned from a Measles Outbreak in Senegal.

The World Health Organization (WHO) African Region set a goal for regional measles elimination by 2020; however, regional measles incidence was 125/1,000,000 in 2012. To support elimination efforts, the WHO and U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed a tool to assess performance of measles control activities and identify high-risk areas at the subnational level. The tool uses routinely collected data to generate district-level risk scores across four categories: population immunity, surveillance quality, program performance, and threat assessment. To pilot test this tool, we used retrospective data from 2006 to 2008 to identify high-risk districts in Senegal; results were compared with measles case-based surveillance data from 2009 when Senegal experienced a large measles outbreak. Seventeen (25%) of 69 districts in Senegal were classified as high or very high risk. The tool highlighted how each of the four categories contributed to the total risk scores for high or very high risk districts. Measles case-based surveillance reported 986 cases during 2009, including 368 laboratory-confirmed, 540 epidemiologically linked, and 78 clinically compatible cases. The seven districts with the highest numbers of laboratory-confirmed or epidemiologically linked cases were within the capital region of Dakar. All except one of these seven districts were estimated to be high or very high risk, suggesting that districts identified as high risk by the tool have the potential for measles outbreaks. Prospective use of this tool is recommended to help immunization and surveillance program managers identify high-risk areas in which to strengthen specific programmatic weaknesses and mitigate risk for potential measles outbreaks.

Evaluation of economic costs of a measles outbreak and outbreak response activities in Keffa Zone, Ethiopia.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the economic impact of a measles outbreak and response activities that occurred in Keffa Zone, Ethiopia with 5257 reported cases during October 1, 2011-April 8, 2012, using the health sector and household perspectives. METHODS: We collected cost input data through interviews and record reviews with government and partner agency staff and through a survey of 100 measles cases-patients and their caretakers. We used cost input data to estimate the financial and opportunity costs of the following outbreak and response activities: investigation, treatment, case management, active surveillance, immunization campaigns, and immunization system strengthening. FINDINGS: The economic cost of the outbreak and response was 758,869 United States dollars (US$), including the opportunity cost of US$327,545 (US$62.31/case) and financial cost of US$431,324 (US$82.05/case). Health sector costs, including the immunization campaign (US$72.29/case), accounted for 80% of the economic cost. Household economic cost was US$29.18/case, equal to 6% of the household median annual income. 92% of financial costs were covered by partner agencies. CONCLUSION: The economic cost of the measles outbreak was substantial when compared to household income and health sector expenditures. Improvement in two-dose measles vaccination coverage above 95% would both reduce measles incidence and save considerable outbreak-associated costs to both the health sector and households.