Enteric Fever and Related Contextual Factors in Bangladesh

Résumé fourni par la source

Enteric fever remains a major public health problem in the developing world. With the emergence of antimicrobial resistance, disease prevention is becoming essential. There is evidence that improvement of contextual factors, such as socioeconomic development and water supply and sanitation, reduce the burden of this disease. However, such positive results are not universal. This study describes enteric fever trends in Bangladesh along with these factors’ progress between 1990 and 2014. Retrospective enteric fever data were collected from Dhaka Shishu (children) Hospital (DSH), Shishu Shasthya Foundation Hospital (SSFH), International Center for Diarrheal Disease Research, Bangladesh, and Popular Diagnostic Center (PDC). Contextual factors data were gathered from relevant organizations and their websites and plotted against time to see trends. During 2001–2014, data for a total of 131,449 blood cultures were available at DSH, SSFH, and PDC. Of those, 7,100 (isolation rate 5.4%) yielded either Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi or Salmonella enterica serovar Paratyphi growth without visible change in isolation rate trends. Contextual factors data were reported from 1990 to 2014. There were significant developments for sanitation facilities, drinking water supply, female literacy, and reduction in poverty head count ratio. During this time period, population density also increased significantly. Despite improvements in these contextual factors in Bangladesh, the enteric fever trend seems steady, possibly because of high population density and unplanned development of water supply and sewerage system. Although proper development of these two factors is important, immunization with an effective vaccine is instrumental to prevent this disease immediately in endemic countries such as Bangladesh, specifically to overcome the challenge of emerging resistance to available antibiotics.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.