Search

Background: In Egypt, the highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) subtype H5N1 is endemic and possesses a severe impact on the poultry. To provide a better understanding of the distributional characteristics of HPAI H5N1 outbreaks in Egypt, this study aimed to explore the spatiotemporal pattern and identify clusters of HPAI H5N1 outbreaks in Egypt from 2006 to 2017. Results: The Epidemic curve (EC) was constructed through time series analysis; in which six epidemic waves (EWs) were revealed. Outbreaks mainly started in winter peaked in March and ended in summer. However, newly emerged thermostable clades (2.2.1.1 and 2.2.1.2) during the 4th EW enabled the virus to survive and cause infection in warmer months with a clear alteration in the seasonality of the epidemic cycle in the 5th EW. The endemic situation became more complicated by the emergence of new serotypes. As a result, the EC ended up without any specific pattern since the 6th EW to now. The spatial analysis showed that the highest outbreak density was recorded in the Nile Delta considering it as the 'Hot spot' region. By the 6th EW, the outbreak extended to include the Nile valley. From spatiotemporal cluster epidemics, clustering in the Delta was a common feature in all EWs with primary clusters consistently detected in the hot-spot region, but the location and size varied with each EW. The highest Relative Risk (RR) regions in an EW were noticed to contain the primary clusters of the next EW and were found to include stopover sites for migratory wild birds. They were in Fayoum, Dakahlia, Qalyobiya, Sharkia, Kafr_Elsheikh, Giza, Behera, Menia, and BeniSuef governorates. Transmission of HPAI H5N1 occurred from one location to another directly resulted in a series of outbreaks forming neighboring secondary clusters. The absence of geographical borders between the governorates in addition to non-restricted movements of poultry and low vaccination and surveillance coverage contributed to the wider spread of infection all over Egypt and to look like one epidemiological unit. Conclusion: Our findings can help in better understanding of the characteristics of HPAI H5N1 outbreaks and the distribution of outbreak risk, which can be used for effective disease control strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Systems for animal disease mitigation involve both surveillance activities and interventions to control the disease. They are complex organizations that are described by partial or imprecise data, making it difficult to evaluate them or make decisions to improve them. A mathematical method, called loop analysis, can be used to model qualitatively the structure and the behavior of dynamic systems; it relies on the study of the sign of the interactions between the components of the system. This method, currently widely used by ecologists, has to our knowledge never been applied in the context of animal disease mitigation systems. The objective of the study was to assess whether loop analysis could be applied to this new context. We first developed a generic model that restricted the applicability of the method to event-based surveillance systems of endemic diseases, excluding the emergence and eradication phases. Then we chose the mitigation system of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) H5N1 in Cambodia as an example of such system to study the application of loop analysis to a real disease mitigation system. Results: Breaking down the generic model, we constructed a 6-variables model to represent the HPAI H5N1 mitigation system in Cambodia. This construction work improved our understanding of this system, highlighting the link between surveillance and control which is unclear in traditional representations of this system. Then we analyzed the effect of the perturbations to this HPAI H5N1 mitigation system that we interpreted in terms of investment in a given compartment. This study suggested that increasing intervention at a local level can optimize the system's efficiency. Indeed, this perturbation both decreases surveillance and intervention costs and reduces the disease's occurrence. Conclusion: Loop analysis can be applied to disease mitigation systems. Its main strength is that it is easy to design, focusing on the signs of the interactions. It is a simple and flexible tool that could be used as a precursor to large-scale quantitative studies, to support reflection about disease mitigation systems structure and functioning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]