RSV Infection in Refugees and Asylum Seekers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Respiratory diseases, including respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections, are common reasons for seeking healthcare among refugees and asylum seekers. A systematic review with meta-analysis was designed to appraise all the available evidence on RSV infections among individuals in refugee camps. Three medical databases (PubMed, Embase, and Scopus) as well as the preprint repository medRxiv.org were searched for eligible observational studies, and the collected cases were pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistics. Funnel plots and a regression analysis were calculated for analyzing reporting bias. Eventually, six studies were retrieved from three areas (Bangladesh, Thailand, and Kenya), with pooled estimates of 129.704 cases per 1000 samples (95% CI 66.393 to 237.986) for RSV compared to 110.287 per 1000 people for influenza A (95% CI 73.186 to 162.889), 136.398 cases per 1000 people (95% CI 84.510 to 212.741) for human adenovirus (HAdV), 69.553 per 1000 people (95% CI 49.802 to 96.343) for parainfluenzavirus (PIFV), and 60.338 per 1000 people (95% CI 31.933 to 111.109) for human metapneumovirus (hMPV). Using influenza A as a reference group, the risk for a positive specimen was greater for RSV (relative risk [RR] 1.514, 95% CI 1.396 to 1.641) and HAdV (RR 1.984, 95% CI 1.834 to 2.146) and lower for influenza B (RR 0.276, 95% CI: 0.239 to 0.319), PIFV (RR: 0.889, 95% CI 0.806 to 0.981), and hMPV (RR 0.594, 95% CI 0.534 to 0.662). In summary, high rates of RSV infections were documented among individuals sheltered in refugee camps, stressing the importance of specifically designed preventive strategies.

Impact of Nirsevimab Immunization on Pediatric Hospitalization Rates: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2024)

“…Fourth, it should be stressed that because of the specific characteristics of RSV infection, a large share of diagnoses may be missed, even among hospitalized patients [ 48 , 123 ]. On one hand, the collection of respiratory tract specimens could fail to provide an appropriate diagnosis in accordance with the stage of the assessed infection [ 124 , 125 ].…”