4.6 Article

Crimean-Congo Haemorrhagic Fever (CCHF) in animals: Global characterization and evolution from 2006 to 2019

Journal

TRANSBOUNDARY AND EMERGING DISEASES
Volume 69, Issue 3, Pages 1556-1567

Publisher

WILEY-HINDAWI
DOI: 10.1111/tbed.14120

Keywords

CCHF; Crimean– Congo haemorrhagic fever; global distribution; Information System; OIE; World Animal Health

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study revealed that the global distribution and reporting of Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever (CCHF) varied among countries, with some lacking surveillance capacity in animal populations. Efforts in disease control have shown an increasing trend, indicating a growing awareness of the importance of the disease.
This study describes the global distribution and temporal evolution of Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever (CCHF) during the period 2006-2019, using the information officially reported to the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) by the National Veterinary Services of 210 countries. Eight per cent (CI 95% 4-12) of the countries reported the disease as present at least once during the study period, whereas 82% (CI 95% 77-87) as absent. Information on CCHF status lacked for 10% (CI 95% 6-13) of the countries. The majority of the countries (46%, CI 95% 39-53) never declared CCHF as notifiable, whereas only 27% (CI 95% 21-33) reported the disease as notifiable during the large majority (>= 76%) of the study period. The percentage of countries that routinely applied some CCHF control measures were as following: 14% (CI 95% 9-18) passive surveillance, 3% (CI 95% 0.9-5) active surveillance and 1% (CI 95% -0.2-3) control of vector. The time series analysis indicates a significant decreasing trend in the percentage of countries reporting no information, whereas the percentage of countries applying disease control measures significantly increase. This finding may reflect the increased awareness on the importance of the disease and the increased efforts to monitor virus circulation in animals through the application of surveillance programmes. Out of 25 countries reporting cases in humans since 2006, only 12 report cases in animals, pointing out the lack of surveillance capacity in animal populations for some countries. The paucity of CCHF notifications in animals may also reflect the difficulty in identifying the infection due to absent or mild clinical signs. Given that the implementation of surveillance programmes by the Veterinary Services is an essential tool for monitoring the virus circulation and prevent its further spread, National Veterinary Services should keep monitoring and reporting information on CCHF, and at the same time, they should improve the quality and accuracy of the information provided.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available