Epidemiology of COVID-19 Among Indigenous Populations in Brazil

Abstract

Background Due to social and geographical isolation, indigenous people are more vulnerable to adverse conditions; however, there is a lack of data on the epidemics’ impact on these populations. Thus, this article’s objective was to describe the epidemiological situation of COVID-19 in indigenous communities in Brazil. Methods This descriptive observational study was carried out in indigenous communities in the municipality of Amaturá (Amazonas, Brazil). Individuals from the Alto Rio Solimões Special Indigenous Sanitary District (DSEI) who met the Sars-Cov-2 infection case definitions during the period between January and August 2020 were included. For case notification, the definitions adopted by the Ministry of Health of Brazil and by the Special Secretariat for Indigenous Health were considered. Results Out of the entire population served by the Alto Rio Solimões DSEI ( n = 2890), 109 indigenous people were suspected of having been infected with Sars-Cov-R during the study period; a total of 89 cases were actually confirmed (rate: 3.08 cases/100,000 inhabitants). Most patients diagnosed with COVID-19 were female (56.2%), with a mean age of 32.4 (± 23.6) years. Predominant symptoms were fever (76.4%), dry cough (64%), and headache (60.7%). Complications occurred in 7.9% of the patients; no deaths were reported. Conclusion These results enhance the observation that indigenous populations, even if relatively isolated, are exposed to COVID-19. The disease cases assessed showed a favorable evolution, which does not mean reducing the need for caring of this population.

Seroprevalence and lethality by SARS-CoV-2 in indigenous populations of Latin America and the Caribbean: a systematic review

“…All the studies included were published between 2020–2021 and were cross-sectional ( n = 15). Eleven of the included studies were conducted in the indigenous population of Brazil ( Hallal et al, 2020 ; Baqui et al, 2020 ; Santos et al, 2020 ; Palamim, Ortega & Marson, 2020 ; Horta et al, 2020 ; Rodrigues et al, 2021 ; da Silva et al, 2021a ; Escobar, Rodriguez & Monteiro, 2020 ; Mendes et al, 2021 ; da Silva et al, 2021b ; Hillesheim et al, 2020 ), three were conducted in the indigenous population of Mexico ( Ortiz-Hernández & Pérez-Sastré, 2020 ; Argoty-Pantoja et al, 2021 ; Ibarra-Nava et al, 2021 ), and one in Colombia ( Cifuentes et al, 2021 ). No multicounty studies were included.…”

“…Likewise, most studies were published in English; only one was published in Portuguese ( da Silva et al, 2021a ), and two were also available in Spanish ( Horta et al, 2020 ; Ortiz-Hernández & Pérez-Sastré, 2020 ). Only five of the included studies specified data about the age and sex of the indigenous participants studied ( Rodrigues et al, 2021 ; da Silva et al, 2021a ; da Silva et al, 2021b ; Argoty-Pantoja et al, 2021 ; Ibarra-Nava et al, 2021 ). Six of the studies were conducted specifically in the indigenous population, all from Brazil ( Santos et al, 2020 ; Palamim, Ortega & Marson, 2020 ; Rodrigues et al, 2021 ; da Silva et al, 2021a ; Mendes et al, 2021 ; da Silva et al, 2021b ).…”

“…Only five of the included studies specified data about the age and sex of the indigenous participants studied ( Rodrigues et al, 2021 ; da Silva et al, 2021a ; da Silva et al, 2021b ; Argoty-Pantoja et al, 2021 ; Ibarra-Nava et al, 2021 ). Six of the studies were conducted specifically in the indigenous population, all from Brazil ( Santos et al, 2020 ; Palamim, Ortega & Marson, 2020 ; Rodrigues et al, 2021 ; da Silva et al, 2021a ; Mendes et al, 2021 ; da Silva et al, 2021b ). Three pairs of studies analyzed the same database during a similar time frame; thus, the results of one study may have been included in those of another ( Hallal et al, 2020 ; Baqui et al, 2020 ; Horta et al, 2020 ; da Silva et al, 2021a ; Argoty-Pantoja et al, 2021 ; Ibarra-Nava et al, 2021 ) ( Table 1 ).…”

“…Four studies ( Hallal et al, 2020 ; Horta et al, 2020 ; Rodrigues et al, 2021 ; da Silva et al, 2021b ) reported data about the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in indigenous populations in Brazil ( Table 1 ). The two largest studies conducted household surveys of 1,219 indigenous people through three surveys and 767 indigenous people in two surveys, respectively.…”

“…Finally, the fourth study was conducted in various indigenous communities in Amaturá, Amazonas. In this study, a total of 109 individuals with respiratory symptoms were tested using an unspecified rapid test, 89 of whom tested positive with a seroprevalence of 81.65% ( da Silva et al, 2021b ).…”