Elsevier

The Lancet

Volume 369, Issue 9557, 20–26 January 2007, Pages 191-200
The Lancet

Articles
Has the 2005 measles mortality reduction goal been achieved? A natural history modelling study

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60107-XGet rights and content

Summary

Background

In 2002, the UN General Assembly Special Session on Children adopted a goal to reduce deaths owing to measles by half by the end of 2005, compared with 1999 estimates. We describe efforts and progress made towards this goal.

Methods

We assessed trends in immunisation against measles on the basis of national implementation of the WHO/UNICEF comprehensive strategy for measles mortality reduction, and the provision of a second opportunity for measles immunisation. We used a natural history model to evaluate trends in mortality due to measles.

Results

Between 1999 and 2005, according to our model mortality owing to measles was reduced by 60%, from an estimated 873 000 deaths (uncertainty bounds 634 000–1 140 000) in 1999 to 345 000 deaths (247 000–458 000) in 2005. The largest percentage reduction in estimated measles mortality during this period was in the western Pacific region (81%), followed by Africa (75%) and the eastern Mediterranean region (62%). Africa achieved the largest total reduction, contributing 72% of the global reduction in measles mortality. Nearly 7·5 million deaths from measles were prevented through immunisation between 1999 and 2005, with supplemental immunisation activities and improved routine immunisation accounting for 2·3 million of these prevented deaths.

Interpretation

The achievement of the 2005 global measles mortality reduction goal is evidence of what can be accomplished for child survival in countries with high childhood mortality when safe, cost-effective, and affordable interventions are backed by country-level political commitment and an effective international partnership.

Introduction

Measles was the single most lethal infectious agent before the licensure in 1963, and subsequent widespread use, of live attenuated measles vaccine. In the early 1960s, as many as 135 million cases of measles and over 6 million measles-related deaths are estimated to have occurred yearly.1 The immunosuppressive nature of measles reduces patients' defences against complications such as pneumonia, diarrhoea, and acute encephalitis. Pneumonia, either a primary viral pneumonia or a bacterial superinfection, is a contributing factor in about 60% of measles-related deaths.2, 3 The introduction of routine measles vaccination in most developing countries during the 1980s as part of the Expanded Programme on Immunization had a major effect on global measles mortality. By 1987, WHO estimated that the number of deaths from measles worldwide had been reduced to 1·9 million.4

Global measles vaccination activities can be characterised into three broad phases. The first phase involved the introduction of routine vaccination against measles in almost every country in the world through the Expanded Programme on Immunization, beginning in 1974,5 and the UNICEF-led initiative for Universal Childhood Immunization by 1990.6 In this phase the recommendation was for one dose of measles vaccine to be administered at or shortly after 9 months of age to at least 80% of children in every country. During the second phase from 1990 to 1999, routine measles vaccination levelled off in the 70–80% coverage range7 and many industrialised countries introduced a second routine dose, usually at or around the time of school entry, to protect children who did not respond to the first dose.8 Also during this period, the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) implemented a strategy that included a second opportunity for measles immunisation for all children to stop endemic measles transmission in the Americas.9

The third phase began around 2000 with the realisation that despite the availability of a safe, effective, and relatively inexpensive measles vaccine for over 40 years, measles remained a leading cause of childhood mortality, especially for children living in developing countries.10 To address this problem, WHO and UNICEF began to target 45 priority countries (panel), together accounting for more than 90% of estimated global measles deaths, to implement a comprehensive strategy for accelerated and sustained reduction in mortality due to measles. The strategy emphasised the PAHO approach to provide all children with a second opportunity for measles immunisation.11 At present 47 countries are targeted for measles mortality reduction, because Yemen and Timor Leste have been added to the list of priority countries.

The WHO/UNICEF comprehensive strategy for measles mortality reduction has four components: achieving and maintaining high coverage (>90%) for routine measles immunisation in every district; ensuring that all children receive a second opportunity for measles immunisation; effective surveillance for cases of measles, including monitoring of immunization coverage; and assuring appropriate clinical management of patients with measles, particularly the provision of vitamin A.10, 11

Achieving high immunisation coverage for all birth cohorts is the foundation of the strategy for accelerated and sustained measles mortality reduction. Because about 15% of infants who receive measles vaccine at 9 months of age do not develop lasting immunity, even high coverage with a single-dose vaccination policy will result in a substantial proportion of children who remain susceptible to the disease.9 Since measles is highly infectious, the risk of an outbreak increases over time through an accumulation of susceptible children in the population. The ongoing strengthening of routine immunisation services at the district level alone will not result in a rapid reduction in deaths from measles. To obtain a timely reduction of measles deaths, a critical component of the strategy is to provide all children with a second opportunity for measles immunisation. This approach aims to protect children who did not previously receive measles vaccine, as well as those who were vaccinated but failed to develop an immune response.

The second opportunity for measles immunisation can be delivered either through a routine two-dose schedule (in which immunisation services achieve and sustain high coverage), or through periodic supplementary immunisation activities where routine coverage is low to moderate. Supplementary immunisation activities are mass vaccination campaigns that target all children in a defined age group and wide geographical area regardless of previous disease or vaccination history. They use a range of additional strategies (eg, outreach to remote areas, door-to-door canvassing, additional clinic hours, mobile vaccination teams) that reach children who do not routinely access health services and thereby achieve very high vaccination coverage. Catch-up campaigns are one-time only events generally targeting children aged 9 months to 14 years with a goal of rapidly increasing population immunity among pre-school and school-age children.12 The specific target age group depends on the age-specific susceptibility in the population.

To maintain high population immunity in pre-school-age children over time, follow-up campaigns, generally targeting all children aged 9 months to 4 years, are periodically done every 3–5 years. The interval between follow-up campaigns is a function of routine immunisation coverage (the higher the routine coverage, the longer the interval between campaigns). By contrast, in countries that have achieved and maintained high routine vaccination coverage, the second opportunity for measles immunisation can also be provided through implementation of a routine two-dose measles vaccination schedule. This appproach usually involves administration of a second dose of measles vaccine at age 12–18 months of age or at school entry.13

In May, 2003, the World Health Assembly endorsed a resolution urging member states to achieve the goal adopted by the UN General Assembly Special Session on Children (2002) to halve the number of deaths due to measles by the end of 2005, compared with 1999 estimates.14, 15 We report the achievement of this goal, and outline remaining challenges to reduce mortality further and prospects for the eventual global eradication of measles.

Section snippets

Measuring vaccination coverage

By July of each year, all Member States of WHO and UNICEF are requested to submit information on routine measles vaccination coverage, supplementary measles immunisation activities, and reported measles cases from the previous year to WHO and UNICEF. WHO/UNICEF estimates of national routine coverage16 with one dose of measles vaccine are based on a review of coverage data from administrative records, surveys, national reports, and consultation with local and regional experts. Coverage achieved

Results

During the 1980s, worldwide coverage of routine measles vaccination increased to about 70%, and then levelled off during the 1990s. Between 1999 and 2005, coverage of routine immunisation increased from 71% to 77%, with substantial variation across geographical regions (table 1). Moreover, we noted a marked increase in the proportion of countries providing children with a second opportunity for measles immunisation either through a routine two-dose schedule or a nationwide supplementary

Discussion

Intensified large-scale vaccination efforts, particularly in priority countries with the highest burden of measles, have substantially decreased reported incidence of measles and the estimated number of deaths from measles worldwide. Although difficult to quantify, the widespread administration of vitamin A through supplementary immunisation activities against polio and measles and through routine services has also probably contributed to the reduction of measles mortality. Based on modelled

References (99)

  • DR Hopkins et al.

    The case for global measles eradication

    Lancet

    (1982)
  • CL Clements et al.

    Measles

  • RM Barkin

    Measles mortality: a retrospective look back at the vaccine era

    Am J Epidemiol

    (1975)
  • WL Atkinson et al.

    Measles and measles vaccine

    Semin Pediatr Infect Dis

    (1991)
  • K Kejak et al.

    Expanded Programme on Immunisation

    World Health Stat Q

    (1988)
  • Handbook of Resolutions. Vol 1, 1·8. World Health Assembly, fourteenth plenary meeting, 23 May 1974

    (1974)
  • State of the world's vaccines and immunizations

    (2002)
  • WHO Vaccine-preventable diseases: monitoring system 2005 global summary

    (2005)
  • AM Henao-Restrepo et al.

    Experience in global measles control, 1990–2001

    J Infect Dis

    (2003)
  • CA de Quadros et al.

    Measles elimination in the Americas: evolving strategies

    JAMA

    (1996)
  • P Strebel et al.

    The unfinished measles immunization agenda

    J Infect Dis

    (2003)
  • United Nations Children's Fund. Measles mortality reduction and regional elimination strategic plan 2001–2005

    (2001)
  • Measles elimination: field guide (Scientific and Technical Publication no 605)

    (2005)
  • Measles vaccine: WHO position paper

    Wkly Epidemiol Rec

    (2004)
  • A world fit for children

    (2002)
  • World Health Assembly Resolution WHA 52.20. Reducing global measles mortality

    (2003)
  • WHO/UNICEF estimates of national immunization coverage

  • World population prospects: the 2004 revision

    (2005)
  • “Progress in Reducing Global Measles Deaths: 1999–2003.”

    Wkly Epidemiol Rec

    (2005)
  • CE Stein et al.

    The global burden of measles in the year 2000—a model that uses country-specific indicators

    J Infect Dis

    (2003)
  • FL Black

    Measles antibodies in the population of New Haven, Connecticut

    J Immunol

    (1959)
  • AW Hedrich

    Monthly estimates of the child population ≪susceptible≫ to measles, 1900-1931, Baltimore, Maryland

    Am J Hyg

    (1933)
  • AD Langmuir

    Medical importance of measles

    Am J Dis Child

    (1962)
  • MJ Snyder et al.

    Observations on the seroepidemiology of measles

    Am J Dis Child

    (1962)
  • RT Perry et al.

    The clinical significance of measles: a review

    J Infect Dis

    (2004)
  • SR Preblud et al.

    Assessment of susceptibility to measles and rubella

    JAMA

    (1982)
  • F Assaad

    Measles: summary of worldwide impact

    Rev Infect Dis

    (1983)
  • WHO regional offices

  • JB Kadane et al.

    Experiences in Elicitation

    J Royal Stat Soc Ser D Statistician

    (1998)
  • L Brenzel et al.

    Vaccine-preventable diseases

  • FT Cutts et al.

    The effect of dose and strain of live attenuated measles vaccines on serological responses in young infants

    Biologicals

    (1995)
  • J Hammersley et al.

    Monte Carlo methods

    (1964)
  • B Samb et al.

    Decline in measles case fatality ratio after the introduction of measles immunization in rural Senegal

    Am J Epidemiol

    (1997)
  • AJG Barclay et al.

    Vitamin A supplements and mortality related to measles: a randomised clinical trial

    BMJ

    (1987)
  • SS Morris et al.

    Predicting the Distribution of Under-Five Deaths by Cause in Countries without Adequate Vital Registration Systems

    Int J Epidemiol

    (2003)
  • The World Health Report, 2005—make every mother and child count

    (2005)
  • Impact of measles control activities in the WHO African Region, 1999–2005

    Wkly Epidemiol Rec

    (2006)
  • RK Yaméogo et al.

    Risk factors for measles after a mass vaccination campaign, Burkina Faso, 2002

    Int J Epidemiol

    (2005)
  • Measles reported cases

  • Cited by (220)

    • Art of prevention: The importance of measles recognition and vaccination

      2020, International Journal of Women's Dermatology
    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Partners listed at end of paper

    View full text