Prioritization of zoonotic diseases of public health significance in Nigeria using the one-health approach

Abstract

Nigeria, with a population of over 190 million people, is rated among the 10 countries with the highest burden of infectious and zoonotic diseases globally. In Nigeria, there exist a sub-optimal surveillance system to monitor and track priority zoonoses. We therefore conducted a prioritization of zoonotic diseases for the first time in Nigeria to guide prevention and control efforts. Towards this, a two-day in-country consultative meeting involving experts from the human, animal, and environmental health backgrounds prioritized zoonotic diseases using a modified semi-quantitative One Health Zoonotic Disease Prioritization tool in July 2017. Overall, 36 of 52 previously selected zoonoses were identified for prioritization. Five selection criteria were used to arrive at the relative importance of prioritized diseases based on their weighted score. Overall, this zoonotic disease prioritization process marks the first major step of bringing together experts from the human-animal-environment health spectrum in Nigeria. Importantly, the country ranked rabies, avian influenza, Ebola Virus Disease, swine influenza and anthrax as the first five priority zoonoses in Nigeria. Finally, this One Health approach to prioritizing important zoonoses is a step that will help to guide future tracking and monitoring of diseases of grave public health importance in Nigeria.

Zoonotic pathogens and diseases detected in Vietnam, 2020–2021

“…Several other countries have conducted similar studies. We used a common methodology of generating lists of pathogens/diseases to be prioritized based on expert consultation and review of literature and then determining their significance based on disease frequencies in the population [ [14] , [15] , [16] , [17] , [18] , [19] , [20] ]. Prioritization criteria commonly include measures of disease burden or frequency such as prevalence or incidence [ 19 , 20 ].…”

“…The list of common zoonotic diseases in Vietnam was similar to other countries. For instance, rabies, influenza, and brucellosis were commonly included in the list of priority zoonoses in Asia [ 14 , 17 ], and Africa [ 16 , 18 , 20 ].…”

The Interface Between the Lassa Virus Epidemic, the Covid-19 Pandemic, and the Food Environment in Nigeria: A One Health Approach

“…The catastrophic effects of zoonotic diseases such as Ebola, Lassa fever, Dengue, Rabies and Yellow fever have been reported in the last 5 years and Nigeria rank Rabies, Avian Influenza, Ebola Virus Disease, Swine Influenza and Anthrax as the first five priority zoonoses (FGN, 2019). Nigeria is rated among the 10 countries with the highest burden of infectious and zoonotic diseases globally and there exist a sub-optimal surveillance system to monitor and track priority zoonoses (Ihekweazu et al, 2021). Moreover, agricultural activities that cause occupational hazards from animal rearing and farming facilitates new zoonoses, specifically the pathogenic avian influenza and H1N1 influenza (Schmidt, 2009).…”

“…The plan was jointly developed by the Federal Ministries of Health, Agriculture and Rural Development (FMARD), and Environment and their agencies, reinforcing Nigeria's commitment to strengthen a multisectoral collaboration for health security (NCDC, 2019). One Health approach to prioritizing important zoonoses is a step that helps guide future tracking and monitoring of diseases of grave public health importance in Nigeria (Ihekweazu et al,2021). One Health approach is required for other public health threats at the human animal-ecosystem interface, including food safety and security, antimicrobial resistance, and emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases with consequent spill over from animals to humans and vice versa.…”

Context matters: Leveraging anthropology within one health

“…One Health in part has its roots in a collaboration between veterinary medicine and public health, and as such the One Health approach has been primarily focussed on zoonotic disease [ 1 ]. One Health collaborations across academic and non-academic/policy sectors can result in practical outcomes such as shared priorities for the development of health monitoring and response programs [ 2 , 3 ]. However, if collaborations do not integrate community-based, lived-experience understandings of health and disease, they risk being anthropocentric and/or ethnocentric, and may provide only partial insights into the range of issues that can be approached from a One Health perspective.…”