Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

25 Years after Vi typhoid vaccine efficacy study, typhoid affects significant number of population in Nepal

  • Deepak Bajracharya
  • , M. Imran Khan
  • , Alfred Pach
  • , Parisha Shrestha
  • , Nilesh Joshi
  • , Shyam R. Upreti
  • , Thomas Wierzba
  • , Mahesh Puri
  • , Sushant Sahastrabuddhe
  • , R. Leon Ochiai

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Salmonella Typhi, first isolated in 1884, results in infection of the intestines and can end in death and disability. Due to serious adverse events post vaccination, whole cell killed vaccines have been replaced with new generation vaccines. The efficacy of Vi polysaccharide (ViPS) vaccine, a new generation, single-dose intramuscular typhoid vaccine was assessed in Nepal in 1987. However, despite the availability of ViPS vaccine for more than 25 years, Nepal has one of the highest incidence of typhoid fever. Therefore we collected information from hospitals in the Kathmandu Valley from over the past five years. There were 9901 enteric fever cases between January 2008 and July 2012. 1,881 of these were confirmed typhoid cases from five hospitals in the Kathmandu district. Approximately 70% of the cases involved children under 15 years old. 1281 cases were confirmed as S. Paratyphi. Vaccines should be prioritized for control of typhoid in conjunction with improved water and sanitation conditions in Nepal and in endemic countries of Asia and Africa.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere77974
JournalPLoS ONE
Volume9
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 6 Jan 2014
Externally publishedYes

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of '25 Years after Vi typhoid vaccine efficacy study, typhoid affects significant number of population in Nepal'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this