Scabies is a dermatological parasitic infestation prevalent in many regions worldwide. Classified as a neglected disease by World Health Organization (WHO) since 2017, it is often associated with poor living conditions and overcrowding. Towards the end of 2021, unusual high numbers of scabies cases in outpatient consultations were observed in two Médecins Sans Frontières’ (MSF) Primary Healthcare Centers (PHCs) in Rohingya refugee camps in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh. Here, we aimed to describe the epidemiological and clinical characteristics of patients with scabies consulting the clinics from July 2022–November 2023. A cross-sectional study using routinely collected data from scabies’ consultations at two MSF clinics located in camp 14 and 15 (total population 91,241 in 2023) was conducted. We retrospectively analyzed programmatic data of patients of all ages attending outpatient consultations and clinically diagnosed as scabies. Data were extracted from MSF clinical routine monitoring databases and descriptive statistics were reported. During the 16-month period, a total of 178,922 scabies consultations were recorded, amongst whom 57.7% were women and 42.3% men. Children <5 years constituted 20.5% of the cases, age-groups 6-14, 36.6%, and ≥15 years, 42.9%. Camp 15 had the highest number of cases (39.4%), followed by other camps (29.7%), and then camp 14 (24.4%). Most cases were simple scabies (79.5%); one in five were scabies with secondary infection cases. Patients were mainly treated with oral ivermectin (71.2%) and topical permethrin (24.3%); 19.5% of patients also received antibiotics. Our findings indicate that scabies is a significant health concern in the Cox’s Bazar refugee camp. This study recorded over 178000 cases in the above period. The scale of this outbreak warrants further actions, including a prevalence survey, quality implementation of mass drug administration, and multidisciplinary interventions related to camps’ living conditions such as water and sanitation.

In 2021 in response to an outbreak of hepatitis E in Bentiu internally displaced persons camp the South Sudanese Ministry of Health with support from Médecins Sans Frontières implemented the first-ever mass reactive vaccination campaign with HEV239 (Hecolin; Innovax, Xiamen, China). We conducted qualitative research to assess knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to hepatitis E and the hepatitis E vaccine. We conducted 8 focus group discussions (FGDs) with community leaders, the general population of vaccine-eligible adults, vaccine-eligible pregnant women (vaccinated and non-vaccinated), and healthcare workers. FGDs were separate by gender and were audio recorded, transcribed, and translated to English. Two coders used inductive thematic analysis to organize emergent themes. Data were collected in November 2022. Most participants had experiences with hepatitis E (e.g., infected themselves or knowing someone that had been infected) and viewed hepatitis E as a dangerous disease. Participants believed children, pregnant women, and older persons were the highest risk groups and frequently made requests for additional hepatitis E vaccination campaigns and expanded eligibility criteria for vaccination. Knowledge of the negative impacts of hepatitis E and trusted relationships with the organizations offering the vaccine were key facilitators of vaccine acceptance. The primary barriers to vaccination were practical issues related to being away from the camp during the campaign or not knowing about the campaign, but participants shared that some in the community were unvaccinated due to fears about injections, social pressure, misinformation, and concerns about why some groups were eligible for vaccination and not others (e.g., young children). Personal experiences with hepatitis E illness, perceived severity of illness, and confidence in organizations recommending the vaccine were drivers of high demand for hepatitis E vaccines in the first-ever use of the vaccine in an outbreak setting. Addressing practical issues related to population mobility can improve coverage in future campaigns.

INTRODUCTION

Understanding sex and gender differences during outbreaks is critical to delivering an effective response. Although recommendations and minimum requirements exist, the incorporation of sex-disaggregated data and gender analysis into outbreak analytics and response for informed decision-making remains infrequent. A scoping review was conducted to provide an overview of the extent of sex-disaggregated data and gender analysis in outbreak response within low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

METHODS

Five databases were searched for peer-reviewed literature examining sex- and gender-specific outcomes for communicable disease outbreaks published in English between 1 January 2012 and 12 April 2022. An adapted version of the WHO’s Gender Analysis Matrix was used to synthesise evidence, which was then mapped across four phases of the outbreak timeline: prevention, detection, treatment/management and recovery.

RESULTS

71 articles met inclusion criteria and were included in this review. Sex-, gender-, and pregnancy-related disparities were identified throughout all four phases of the outbreak timeline. These disparities encompassed a wide range of risk factors for disease, vulnerability, access to and use of services, health-seeking behaviour, healthcare options, as well as experiences in healthcare settings and health and social outcomes and consequences.

CONCLUSION

Significant gender-evidence gaps remain in outbreak response. Evidence that is available illustrates that sex and gender disparities in outbreaks vary by disease, setting and population, and these differences play significant roles in shaping outbreak dynamics. As such, failing to collect, analyse or use sex-disaggregated data and gendered data during outbreaks results in less effective responses, differential adverse health outcomes, increased vulnerability among certain groups and insufficient evidence for effective prevention and response efforts. Systematic sex- and gender-based analyses to ensure gender-responsive outbreak prevention, detection, treatment/management and recovery are urgently needed.

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is a leading cause of acute viral hepatitis, particularly in Asia and Africa, where HEV genotypes 1 and 2 are prevalent. Although a recombinant vaccine, Hecolin, is available, it has not been used to control outbreaks. The licensed three-dose regimen might pose challenges for it to be an impactful outbreak control tool. Our study aimed to estimate the effectiveness of two doses of Hecolin in the context of the first-ever reactive use of the vaccine.

METHODS

We conducted a case-control study during an HEV outbreak in the Bentiu internally displaced persons camp, South Sudan. Patients with acute jaundice syndrome (suspected cases) seeking care at the Médecins Sans Frontières hospital were screened for study eligibility. Eligible participants were those that had been eligible for vaccination (ie, living in the camp and aged 16-40 years). Confirmed cases were defined as individuals who tested positive for hepatitis E by RT-PCR or anti-HEV IgM ELISA. Each case was matched to six controls by age, sex, pregnancy status, and residence. Self-reported vaccination status was verified through vaccination cards. The primary analysis was two-dose vaccine effectiveness, which we estimated with a matched case-control design using conditional logistic regression models. In secondary analyses we estimated vaccine effectiveness using a test-negative design and the screening method. We used test-negative cases and their matched controls as a bias indicator analysis to help quantify potential health seeking behaviour biases.

FINDINGS

Between May 10 and Dec 30, 2022, we identified 859 patients with suspected hepatitis E. Of these, 201 met the eligibility criteria and 21 cases had laboratory confirmed hepatitis E. Among the confirmed cases, 10 (48%) were unvaccinated compared with 33 (27%) of 121 matched controls. In the primary analysis we estimated an unadjusted two-dose vaccine effectiveness of 67·8% (95% CI -28·6 to 91·9), and a two-dose vaccine effectiveness of 84·0% (-208·5 to 99·2) after adjustment for potential confounders. The bias indicator analysis suggested that test-negative cases might have been more likely to have been vaccinated than their matched community controls due to different health-care seeking behaviours, potentially meaning underestimation of effectiveness estimates. The test-negative design, which uses facility-matched controls, led to an adjusted two-dose effectiveness of 89·4% (56·4 to 98·0).

INTERPRETATION

Despite the small sample size, our estimates provide evidence of effectiveness of a two-dose regimen against HEV genotype 1 during a protracted outbreak, supporting its use in similar contexts.

In many ways, Marburg virus disease resembles the more well-known Ebola virus disease: The clinical syndrome is similar, management of outbreaks is similar, and the fear engendered in the population experiencing the outbreak is similar. However, diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines to manage patients and outbreaks are not similarly available. These have been developed but not yet approved, as outbreaks have not provided the opportunity to establish an evidence base for regulators to evaluate their use in humans. The history of outbreaks of Marburg virus disease suggests that this opportunity will not come, and so alternative pathways to regulatory approval are needed.