Background
Rift Valley Fever (RVF) is a viral zoonotic fever caused by RVF virus (RVFV), a member of the genus Phlebovirus in the family Bunyaviridae [
1‐
3]. It is an illness characterized by deaths and abortion storms primarily in goats, sheep, and cattle [
4]. The disease also affects humans, dogs, camels and wildlife [
5]. Wild animals such as African buffalo (
Syncerus caffer), black rhino (
Diceros bicornis), lesser kudu (
Tragelaphus imberbis), impala (
Aepyceros melampus), kongoni (
Alcelaphus buselaphus), monkeys (Cercopithecus spp.), waterbuck (
Kobus ellipsiprymnus) and African elephants (
Loxodonta africana) have shown to be exposed to the virus [
6,
7].
Tanzania has experienced 10 epidemic episodes of RVF since 1930s. During the last RVF epidemic a case fatality of 46% was reported among humans [
6‐
8]. Death of animals due to the disease was estimated to cost around 6 million US dollars, with external market flow dropping by 54% [
8] Shortage of meat and milk probably caused acute malnutrition [
9]. Most of the markets were closed and cost of alternative source of protein such as fish and chicken was very high [
9,
10]. In humans, RVFV usually causes mild fever that is often associated with spontaneous recovery [
6,
9]. However, infections characterized by flu-like illness, headache, muscles and joint pain, diarrhoea, vomiting [
11] anorexia and high respiratory rate [
12] do occur. RVFV may cause serious hepatitis and liver necrosis [
6,
7] as well as other complications including loss of eyesight, meningo-encephalitis and haemorrhagic fever [
6,
13]. Economically, apart from high livestock loss, the epidemic may affect the tourism industry that contributes over 17% of GDP in Tanzania [
14] because of fear among tourists of contacting the disease from affected wildlife and loss of animal species that are sought for game viewing.
Despite the severity of the RVF, little is known regarding prevalence and exposure status of humans in different ecosystems in Tanzania. Previous studies conducted in Kilombero valley in eastern Tanzania showed high transmission of the disease in livestock, with sero-prevalence of 5.5% among animals born after last epidemic of 2007 [
9]. Correspondingly, current study in the Serengeti ecosystem, which is the sister study to this, has found recent exposure among domestic animals and wildlife. Cattle and sheep recorded IgM prevalence of 5.7% while buffaloes recorded 3.1% of IgM prevalence (Nyarobi unpublished). RVFV-RNA was extracted from 2.7% of mosquitoes pools studied in the ecosystem (Nyarobi unpublished). This has raised need to understand the current disease burden in humans and predict the possibility of future outbreak. Therefore, this study was done to determine the exposure status of RVFV, its spatial distribution and factors associated with exposure to RVFV among pastoral and agro-pastoral communities of the Serengeti ecosystem.
Results
A total of 751 participants were enrolled in this study. Their median age was 35.5 years (range = 5–90 years). Of them, 439 (58.5%) were females, 294 (45.9%) were small scale farmers, 420 (63.8%) had primary education and 300 (40%) were from Bunda district (Table
1).
Table 1
Socio-demographic distribution of study respondents in the Serengeti ecosystem, 2014
Age group |
< 15 | 2 (1) | 16 (8) | 24 (11) | 42 (5.6) |
15–29 | 67 (22) | 97 (46) | 54 (22) | 218 (29.0) |
30–49 | 169 (56) | 74 (35) | 141 (66) | 384 (51.0) |
> 50 | 62 (21) | 23 (11) | 22 (9) | 107 (14.3) |
Sex |
Female | 186 (62) | 132 (63) | 121 (50) | 439 (58.5) |
Male | 114 (38) | 78 (37) | 120 (50) | 312 (41.5) |
Education Level |
No Education | 15 (5) | 97 (46) | 98 (41) | 214(28.5) |
Primary | 235 (78) | 84 (40) | 105 (44) | 420 (55.9) |
Secondary | 48 (16) | 22 (11) | 28 (12) | 98 (13.1) |
College | 2 (7) | 7 (3) | 10 (4) | 19 (2.5) |
Occupation |
Businessmen | 31 (10) | 10 (5) | 29 (12) | 70 (9.3) |
Pastoralist | 17 (6) | 150 (71) | 59 (25) | 227 (30.2) |
Peasant | 217 (72%) | 20 (10) | 57 (24) | 294 (39.2) |
Employed | 15 (5) | 19 (9) | 15 (6) | 49 (6.5) |
Unspecifieda | 20 (7) | 11 (5) | 81 (34) | 112(15) |
Out of 751 participants tested for anti-RVFV IgG, 34 tested positive making the overall sero-prevalence of 4.5% (95% C.I 3.2–6.3%) (Table
2). Of the 34 positive anti-RVFV IgG subjects, 6 (17.6%) tested positive for anti-RVFV IgM. Ngorongoro district recorded high seroprevalence of anti-RVFV antibodies of 8.1%, (17 of 210) compared to 2.1% recorded in Serengeti district (5 of 241) (
P = 0.003) (Table
2). The seroprevalence of RVFV was significantly higher among pastoralists (8.9%, 20 of 227) compared to agro-pastoralists (3.4%, 10 of 294) (
p = 0.008) (Table
2).
Table 2
Seroprevalence of anti-RVFV IgG by demographic factors in the Serengeti ecosystem, 2014
Total | 751 | 34 | 4.5 | |
Age group |
< 15 | 42 | 0 | 0 | 0.96 |
30–49 | 384 | 16 | 4.2 | 0.61 |
> 50 | 107 | 7 | 6.6 | 0.57 |
15–29 | 218 | 11 | 4.4 | Ref*** |
Sex |
Female | 439 | 17 | 3.9 | 0.30 |
Male | 312 | 17 | 5.5 | |
District |
Bunda | 300 | 12 | 4.0 | 0.61 |
Ngorongoro | 210 | 17 | 8.1 | 0.003 |
Serengeti | 241 | 5 | 2.1 | Ref |
Level of education |
Informal | 214 | 10 | 8.3 | 0.86 |
Primary | 420 | 18 | 4.3 | 0.996 |
Secondaryb | 117 | 5 | 4.3 | Ref |
Occupation |
Businessman | 70 | 4 | 5.7 | 0.36 |
Pastoralist | 227 | 20 | 8.8 | 0.008 |
Othersa | 111 | 0 | 0 | _ |
Employed | 49 | 0 | 0 | _ |
Peasant | 294 | 10 | 3.4 | Ref |
The odds of testing positive were almost 3 times higher among the pastoralists as compared to other occupational groups, which are small scale farmers, businessmen and employees. (aOR 2.9, 95% C.I: 1.21–6.89,
p < 0.01) (Table
3). Those respondents who came from Ngorongoro (pastoral communities) were 2 times more likely to test positive for anti-RVFV IgG as compared to respondents from other districts (aOR 1.8, 95% C.I 1.14–3.39,
p = 0.03) (Table
3). Age, sex and level of education were statistically not associated with exposure to RVFV (Table
3).
Table 3
Socio-demographic factors associated with RVFV sero-positivity in the Serengeti ecosystem, 2014
Occupation |
Pastoralist | 20 | 205 | 3.56 (1.77–7.19 | 2.9 (1.21–6.89) |
Othersa | 14 | 512 | Ref* | Ref* |
District |
Ngorongoro | 17 | 193 | 2.71 (1.36–5.42) | 1.8 (1.14–3.39) |
Others | 17 | 524 | Ref* | Ref* |
Education |
High education | 5 | 93 | 1.15(0.44–3.06) | N/A |
Low education | 29 | 624 | Ref* | |
Age group |
< 29 | 11 | 249 | 0.91 (0.44–1.89) | N/A |
30+ | 21 | 470 | Ref | |
Sex |
Male | 17 | 295 | 1.43 (0.72–2.86) | 1.5 (0.75–3.03) |
Female | 17 | 422 | Ref* | Ref* |
The number of anti-RVFV IgG seroposivity was highest in Malambo, followed by Olbalbal, Nyerere (Serengeti) and Bunda health facilities. The seropositivity of IgM was determined from IgG seropositive samples only, and was sparsely distributed in Endulen, Piyaya, and Malambo in Ngorongoro district, as well as Bunda and Serengeti districts. Despite the higher anti-RVFV IgG seroprevalence in Olbalbal, no anti-RVFV IgM was detected (Fig.
1).
Discussion
This study has shown past and recent exposure to RVFV in the Serengeti ecosystem, as both anti-RVFV IgG and IgM were detected. Anti-RVFV IgG antibodies are believed to last decades after infection and so provide a reliable index of prior RVF exposure. In contrast, anti-RVFV IgM has been reported to persist for only 6 to 8 weeks after initial infection [
15]. Thus, finding anti-RVFV IgM antibodies does suggest recent exposure to the RVF infection among humans residing in the Serengeti ecosystem during interepidemic period. Living in Ngorongoro and being a pastoralist were the two common risk factors associated with exposure to RVF infection in our study.
The overall seroprevalence (4.5%) of RVF in the Serengeti ecosystem was slightly higher than (4%) previously reported in Tanga before the 2006/7 outbreak [
17]. The slight increase of prevalence in this study might be because of cumulative exposure to RVFV infection in humans. Detection of anti-RVFV IgM among IgG seropositive humans was evidence that there is ongoing transmission of infection among humans during the interepidemic period. Lack of clinical RVF cases among anti-RVFV IgM positive humans might be due to the fact that the infections were sub-clinical or they were being missed or misdiagnosed for other disease conditions at health facilities, and this needs more studies. The ongoing transmission may be facilitated by the presence of several species of mosquitoes capable of spreading the disease [
18,
19]. Some of these mosquitoes have been shown to be infected with RVFV in sister study to this (Nyarobi unpublished). In addition, eating raw animal products, including meat, blood and unpasteurised milk is a common practice among community members living in the study area [
17,
20]. The detection might also be due to exposure to infected animals and wildlife in the area. The recorded anti-RVFV IgM seropositivity among anti-RVFV IgG reactive samples which were (17.6%) in this study, was low compared to that of (23%) recorded in study done shortly after 2006 outbreak [
17]. However, there are several studies that didn’t find any anti-RVFV IgM seropositive individuals in spite of presence of anti-RVFV IgG seropositive in both human [
18,
21] and other vertebrate samples [
5]. A large sample size may be useful to detect presence of IgM against the disease during interepidemic period especially in humans.
The evidence of spatial distribution of cases in this study shows that Ngorongoro district had higher seroprevalence, especially in Malambo, Olbabal and Piyaya wards, all of which are typical pastoral communities. In Bunda and Serengeti, most of the seropositive individuals were found from people residing mostly where pastoral and agro-pastoral activities take place, while in Ngorongoro, cases were from typical pastoral communities. The findings is in line with previous studies, where number of clusters of RVF cases was found in several parts of Ngorongoro but neither in Bunda nor in Serengeti [
8]. However, further research is needed to find out the reason behind this. It might be because of uncontrolled movement of live animals and animal products from Ngorongoro, although data on livestock movement is very scarce [
8]. Some of the seropositive individuals in Bunda DDH were coming from the Lamadi ward in Busega district, which is bordering Bunda district, and near to where RVF virus nucleic acids was recently detected in competent vector mosquitoes by Nyarobi, (unpublished).
Geographically, Ngorongoro district had the highest seroprevalence of anti-RVFV IgG compared to Bunda and Serengeti districts. The large area of Ngorongoro district is sparsely populated and livestock keeping is the main activity of the residents, as no cultivation is allowed in the area. The higher exposure rate in Ngorongoro district could be attributed by the 2006/07 RVF outbreak [
6]. High rainfall, high temperature and soil texture supportive of flooding in Malambo ward in Ngorongoro, and high animal density in the ecosystem may account for high disease prevalence in Ngorongoro district [
8]. It is known that Rift Valley fever virus once introduced in the area, continues to exist for decades as it is maintained by Aedes mosquitoes through vertical transmission [
22]. Thus effective surveillance should be enhanced in order to detect cases as early as possible as well as prediction of future outbreaks using satellite mapping. Likewise, community members should be informed on the current disease status, so that residents can be motivated to adhere with preventive measures in order to keep themselves safe from contracting the disease.
In this study, pastoralists were more exposed to RVFV with anti-RVFV IgG seroprevalence of 8.9% compared to other occupations 3.0%, which is in line with findings of other studies [
23,
24]. This findings may be due to occupationally related risk of exposure exacerbated by high contact to infected animals and consumption of raw animal products such as blood, meat and milk [
9]. Increased exposure might be enhanced because of poor community knowledge; attitude and practices related to RVFV infection and transmission pathways. For example, Maasai are used to keep their animals indoors during night to prevent them from wild carnivores’ attacks [
20]. This practice increases the frequency of contact to animals and hence potential for animal-human transmission during outbreak.
The study was done in the Serengeti ecosystem, where several outbreaks of Rift Valley Fever have been reported previously [
6,
7]. Thus the findings cannot be extrapolated to the entire country and may have limitation in generalization to other area of Tanzania. Likewise, as the study was cross-sectional in nature, it can only determine relationship at point in time and hence cannot determine temporal relationship. The study was designed as hospital-based study because of time limitation and financial constraints. The findings from this study can be used as an estimate of anti-RVF IgG and IgM seroprevalence in the Serengeti ecosystem, however, hospital-based study might have some bias and therefore it could be improved if it were supported by community survey.
Another potential limitation is not performing confirmatory virus neutralization test. However, comparison of IgG-sandwich and IgM-capture ELISA with virus neutralization test on field-collected sera from Africa (
n = 2400) found the sensitivity of the IgG-sandwich ELISA was 100% and specificity 99.95%, while for the IgM-capture ELISA the values were 96.47 and 99.44%, respectively [
19].
Following detection of anti-RVFV IgM, there is however, the need to conduct a study to determine the virulence of the viral strains circulating in the ecosystem. There might exist some strains, which are less virulent compared to the previous ones, or its virulence might have been altered by mutation due to lack of clinical cases during the study.