-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2023Mpox was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) by the World Health Organization (WHO) on 23 July 2022, following the identification of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Mpox was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) by the World Health Organization (WHO) on 23 July 2022, following the identification of thousands of cases in several non-endemic countries in previous months. There are currently no licenced therapeutics for treating mpox; however, some medications may be authorized for use in an outbreak. The efficacy and safety of possible therapeutic options has not been studied in humans with mpox. There is a need to investigate the evidence on safety and effectiveness of treatments for mpox in humans; should any therapeutic option be efficacious and safe, it may be approved for use around the world.
OBJECTIVES
There are two parts to this Cochrane Review: a review of evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and a narrative review of safety data from non-randomized studies. Randomized controlled trials review To systematically review the existing evidence on the effectiveness of therapeutics for mpox infection in humans compared to: a) another different therapeutic for mpox, or b) placebo, or c) supportive care, defined as the treatment of physical and psychological symptoms arising from the disease. Non-randomized studies review To assess the safety of therapeutics for mpox infection from non-randomized studies (NRS).
SEARCH METHODS
Randomized controlled trials review We searched the following databases up to 25 January 2023: MEDLINE (OVID), Embase (OVID), Biosis previews (Web of Science), CAB Abstracts (Web of science), and Cochrane CENTRAL (Issue 1 2023). We conducted a search of trial registries (Clinicaltrials.gov and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP)) on 25 January 2023. There were no date or language limits placed on the search. We undertook a call to experts in the field for relevant studies or ongoing trials to be considered for inclusion in the review. Non-randomized studies review We searched the following databases on 22 September 2022: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Issue 9 of 12, 2022), published in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (Ovid); Embase (Ovid); and Scopus (Elsevier). We also searched the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov for trials in progress.
SELECTION CRITERIA
For the RCT review and the narrative review, any therapeutic for the treatment of mpox in humans was eligible for inclusion, including tecovirimat, brincidofovir, cidofovir, NIOCH-14, immunomodulators, and vaccine immune globulin. Randomized controlled trials review Studies were eligible for the main review if they were of randomized controlled design and investigated the effectiveness or safety of therapeutics in human mpox infection. Non-randomized studies review Studies were eligible for inclusion in the review of non-randomized studies if they were of non-randomized design and contained data concerning the safety of any therapeutic in human mpox infection.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Randomized controlled trials review Two review authors independently applied study inclusion criteria to identify eligible studies. If we had identified any eligible studies, we planned to assess the risk of bias, and report results with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The critical outcomes were serious adverse events, development of disease-related complications, admission to hospital for non-hospitalized participants, pain as judged by any visual or numerical pain scale, level of virus detected in clinical samples, time to healing of all skin lesions, and mortality. We planned to perform subgroup analysis to explore whether the effect of the therapeutic on the planned outcomes was modified by disease severity and days from symptom onset to therapeutic administration. We also intended to explore the following subgroups of absolute effects: immunosuppression, age, and pre-existing skin disease. Non-randomized studies review One review author applied study inclusion criteria to identify eligible studies and extracted data. Studies of a non-randomized design containing data on the safety of therapeutics could not be meta-analyzed due to the absence of a comparator; we summarized these data narratively in an appendix.
MAIN RESULTS
Randomized controlled trials review We did not identify any completed RCTs investigating the effectiveness of therapeutics for treating mpox for the main review. We identified five ongoing trials that plan to assess the effectiveness of one therapeutic option, tecovirimat, for treating mpox in adults and children. One of these ongoing trials intends to include populations with, or at greater risk of, severe disease, which will allow an assessment of safety in more vulnerable populations. Non-randomized studies review Three non-randomized studies met the inclusion criteria for the narrative review, concerning data on the safety of therapeutics in mpox. Very low-certainty evidence from non-randomized studies of small numbers of people indicates no serious safety signals emerging for the use of tecovirimat in people with mpox infection, but a possible safety signal for brincidofovir. All three participants who received brincidofovir had raised alanine aminotransferase (ALT), but not bilirubin, suggesting mild liver injury. No study reported severe drug-induced liver injury with brincidofovir.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Randomized controlled trials review This review found no evidence from randomized controlled trials concerning the efficacy and safety of therapeutics in humans with mpox. Non-randomized studies review Very low-certainty evidence from non-randomized studies indicates no serious safety signals emerging for the use of tecovirimat in people with mpox infection. In contrast, very low-certainty evidence raises a safety signal that brincidofovir may cause liver injury. This is also suggested by indirect evidence from brincidofovir use in smallpox. This warrants further investigation and monitoring. This Cochrane Review will be updated as new evidence becomes available to assist policymakers, health professionals, and consumers in making appropriate decisions for the treatment of mpox.
Topics: Adult; Child; Humans; Mpox (monkeypox); Organophosphonates; Immunoglobulins
PubMed: 36916727
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD015769 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2017Molluscum contagiosum is a common skin infection that is caused by a pox virus and occurs mainly in children. The infection usually resolves within months in people... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Molluscum contagiosum is a common skin infection that is caused by a pox virus and occurs mainly in children. The infection usually resolves within months in people without immune deficiency, but treatment may be preferred for social and cosmetic reasons or to avoid spreading the infection. A clear evidence base supporting the various treatments is lacking.This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2006, and updated previously in 2009.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of specific treatments and management strategies, including waiting for natural resolution, for cutaneous, non-genital molluscum contagiosum in people without immune deficiency.
SEARCH METHODS
We updated our searches of the following databases to July 2016: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We searched six trial registers and checked the reference lists of included studies and review articles for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials. We contacted pharmaceutical companies and experts in the field to identify further relevant randomised controlled trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials of any treatment of molluscum contagiosum in people without immune deficiency. We excluded trials on sexually transmitted molluscum contagiosum and in people with immune deficiency (including those with HIV infection).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed methodological quality, and extracted data from selected studies. We obtained missing data from study authors where possible.
MAIN RESULTS
We found 11 new studies for this update, resulting in 22 included studies with a total of 1650 participants. The studies examined the effects of topical (20 studies) and systemic interventions (2 studies).Among the new included studies were the full trial reports of three large unpublished studies, brought to our attention by an expert in the field. They all provided moderate-quality evidence for a lack of effect of 5% imiquimod compared to vehicle (placebo) on short-term clinical cure (4 studies, 850 participants, 12 weeks after start of treatment, risk ratio (RR) 1.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92 to 1.93), medium-term clinical cure (2 studies, 702 participants, 18 weeks after start of treatment, RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.14), and long-term clinical cure (2 studies, 702 participants, 28 weeks after start of treatment, RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.17). We found similar but more certain results for short-term improvement (4 studies, 850 participants, 12 weeks after start of treatment, RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.47; high-quality evidence). For the outcome 'any adverse effect', we found high-quality evidence for little or no difference between topical 5% imiquimod and vehicle (3 studies, 827 participants, RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.07), but application site reactions were more frequent in the groups treated with imiquimod (moderate-quality evidence): any application site reaction (3 studies, 827 participants, RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.77, the number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) was 11); severe application site reaction (3 studies, 827 participants, RR 4.33, 95% CI 1.16 to 16.19, NNTH over 40).For the following 11 comparisons, there was limited evidence to show which treatment was superior in achieving short-term clinical cure (low-quality evidence): 5% imiquimod less effective than cryospray (1 study, 74 participants, RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.78) and 10% potassium hydroxide (2 studies, 67 participants, RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.93); 10% Australian lemon myrtle oil more effective than olive oil (1 study, 31 participants, RR 17.88, 95% CI 1.13 to 282.72); 10% benzoyl peroxide cream more effective than 0.05% tretinoin (1 study, 30 participants, RR 2.20, 95% CI 1.01 to 4.79); 5% sodium nitrite co-applied with 5% salicylic acid more effective than 5% salicylic acid alone (1 study, 30 participants, RR 3.50, 95% CI 1.23 to 9.92); and iodine plus tea tree oil more effective than tea tree oil (1 study, 37 participants, RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.57) or iodine alone (1 study, 37 participants, RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.50). Although there is some uncertainty, 10% potassium hydroxide appears to be more effective than saline (1 study, 20 participants, RR 3.50, 95% CI 0.95 to 12.90); homeopathic calcarea carbonica appears to be more effective than placebo (1 study, 20 participants, RR 5.57, 95% CI 0.93 to 33.54); 2.5% appears to be less effective than 5% solution of potassium hydroxide (1 study, 25 participants, RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.01); and 10% povidone iodine solution plus 50% salicylic acid plaster appears to be more effective than salicylic acid plaster alone (1 study, 30 participants, RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.16).We found no statistically significant differences for other comparisons (most of which addressed two different topical treatments). We found no randomised controlled trial evidence for expressing lesions or topical hydrogen peroxide.Study limitations included no blinding, many dropouts, and no intention-to-treat analysis. Except for the severe application site reactions of imiquimod, none of the evaluated treatments described above were associated with serious adverse effects (low-quality evidence). Among the most common adverse events were pain during application, erythema, and itching. Included studies of the following comparisons did not report adverse effects: calcarea carbonica versus placebo, 10% povidone iodine plus 50% salicylic acid plaster versus salicylic acid plaster, and 10% benzoyl peroxide versus 0.05% tretinoin.We were unable to judge the risk of bias in most studies due to insufficient information, especially regarding concealment of allocation and possible selective reporting. We considered five studies to be at low risk of bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
No single intervention has been shown to be convincingly effective in the treatment of molluscum contagiosum. We found moderate-quality evidence that topical 5% imiquimod was no more effective than vehicle in terms of clinical cure, but led to more application site reactions, and high-quality evidence that there was no difference between the treatments in terms of short-term improvement. However, high-quality evidence showed a similar number of general side effects in both groups. As the evidence found did not favour any one treatment, the natural resolution of molluscum contagiosum remains a strong method for dealing with the condition.
Topics: Adjuvants, Immunologic; Aminoquinolines; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Benzoyl Peroxide; Cimetidine; Humans; Hydroxides; Imiquimod; Molluscum Contagiosum; Myrtus; Olive Oil; Phytotherapy; Plant Oils; Potassium Compounds; Povidone-Iodine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Remission, Spontaneous; Salicylic Acid; Sodium Nitrite
PubMed: 28513067
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004767.pub4 -
Journal of Microbiology, Immunology,... Feb 2024Monkeypox is a viral zoonotic disease rarely found outside Africa. Monkeypox can be spread from person to person through close contact with an infected person, and the... (Review)
Review
Monkeypox is a viral zoonotic disease rarely found outside Africa. Monkeypox can be spread from person to person through close contact with an infected person, and the rate of transmission is not very high. In addition, monkeypox and variola virus are both pox viruses, and the spread of monkeypox virus was also controlled to some extent by the smallpox campaign, so monkeypox was not widely paid attention to. However, as smallpox vaccination is phased out in various countries or regions, people's resistance to orthopoxviruses is decreasing, especially among people who have not been vaccinated against smallpox. This has led to a significant increase in the frequency and geographical distribution of human monkeypox cases in recent years, and the monkeypox virus has become the orthopoxvirus that poses the greatest threat to public health. Since the last large-scale monkeypox infection was detected in 2022, the number of countries or territories affected has exceeded 100. Many confirmed and suspected cases of monkeypox have been found in individuals who have not travelled to affected areas, and the route of infection is not obvious, making this outbreak of monkeypox a cause for concern globally. The purpose of this systematic review is to further understand the pathophysiological and epidemiological characteristics of monkeypox, as well as existing prevention and treatment methods, with a view to providing evidence for the control of monkeypox.
Topics: Humans; Mpox (monkeypox); Smallpox; Monkeypox virus; Disease Outbreaks; Public Health
PubMed: 38177001
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmii.2023.12.006 -
Viruses Apr 2023The recent multi-country outbreak of Mpox (Monkeypox disease) constituted a public health emergency. Although animal-to-human transmission is known to be the primary way... (Review)
Review
The recent multi-country outbreak of Mpox (Monkeypox disease) constituted a public health emergency. Although animal-to-human transmission is known to be the primary way of transmission, an increasing number of cases transmitted by person-to-person contact have been reported. During the recent Mpox outbreak sexual or intimate contact has been considered the most important way of transmission. However, other routes of transmission must not be ignored. The knowledge of how the Monkeypox Virus (MPXV) spreads is crucial to implement adequate measures to contain the spread of the disease. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to collect scientific data published concerning other implicated sources of infection beyond sexual interaction, such as the involvement of respiratory particles, contact with contaminated surfaces and skin-to-skin contact. The current study was performed using the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Publications analyzing contacts of Mpox index cases and their outcome after contact were included. A total of 7319 person-to-person contacts were surveyed and 273 of them became positive cases. Positive secondary transmission of MPXV was verified after contact with people cohabiting in the same household, with family members, with healthcare workers, or within healthcare facilities, and sexual contact or contact with contaminated surfaces. Using the same cup, sharing the same dishes, and sleeping in the same room or bed were also positively associated with transmission. Five studies showed no evidence of transmission despite contact with surfaces, skin-to-skin contact, or through airway particles within healthcare facilities where containment measures were taken. These records support the case for person-to-person transmission and suggest that other types of contact beyond sexual contact pose a significant risk of acquiring the infection. Further investigation is crucial to elucidate MPXV transmission dynamics, and to implement adequate measures to contain the spread of the infection.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Mpox (monkeypox); Disease Outbreaks; Public Health; Sexual Behavior; Family; Monkeypox virus
PubMed: 37243160
DOI: 10.3390/v15051074 -
Annals of Clinical Microbiology and... Aug 2022A multicountry monkeypox disease (MPX) outbreak began in May 2022 in Europe, leading to the assessment as a potential Public Health Emergency of International Concern... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
A multicountry monkeypox disease (MPX) outbreak began in May 2022 in Europe, leading to the assessment as a potential Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) on June 23, 2022. Some observational studies have partially characterised clinical features, hospitalisations, and deaths. However, no systematic reviews of this MPX outbreak have been published.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis, using five databases to assess clinical features, hospitalisations, complications and deaths of MPX confirmed or probable cases. Observational studies, case reports and case series, were included. We performed a random-effects model meta-analysis to calculate the pooled prevalence and 95% confidence interval (95% CI). In addition, we carried out a subgroup analysis according to the continents and a sensitivity analysis excluding studies classified as having a high risk of bias.
RESULTS
A total of 19 articles were included, using only 12 articles in the quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis). For 1958 patients, rash (93%, 95% CI 80-100%), fever (72%, 95% CI 30-99%), pruritus (65%, 95% CI 47-81%), and lymphadenopathy (62%, 47-76%), were the most prevalent manifestations. Among the patients, 35% (95% CI 14-59%) were hospitalised. Some 4% (95% CI 1-9%) of hospitalised patients had fatal outcomes (case fatality rate, CFR).
CONCLUSION
MPX is spreading rapidly, with a third of hospitalised patients, but less than 5% with fatal outcomes. As this zoonotic virus spreads globally, countries must urgently prepare human resources, infrastructure and facilities to treat patients according to the emerging guidelines and the most reliable clinical information.
Topics: Disease Outbreaks; Europe; Fever; Hospitalization; Humans; Mpox (monkeypox)
PubMed: 35948973
DOI: 10.1186/s12941-022-00527-1 -
Pediatric Neurology Sep 2023There is an increasing number of cases being reported of neurological manifestations of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and Monkeypox (Mpox), both during...
BACKGROUND
There is an increasing number of cases being reported of neurological manifestations of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and Monkeypox (Mpox), both during the course of the infection and as a presenting symptom. We aim to review the neurological manifestations of COVID-19 and monkeypox in pediatric patients and their management.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review that included cohort studies and case series or reports involving a pediatric population of patients with a confirmed COVID-19 or Mpox infection and their neurological manifestations. We searched the following electronic databases: PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus.
RESULTS
From 1136 articles identified, 127 studies were included. Headache, stroke, Guillain-Barré syndrome, seizure, nerve palsies, and multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children were the most common neurological symptoms caused by COVID-19, whereas encephalitis was commonly seen in patients with Mpox. Rare neurological manifestations of COVID-19 included cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, plexopathies, demyelinating disorders, encephalitis, etc., and rare neurological manifestations of Mpox included headache.
CONCLUSIONS
Our review highlights the importance of investigating possible neurological manifestations and closely monitoring these patients to develop a better understanding of the treatment strategies that can be adopted.
Topics: Humans; Child; COVID-19; Mpox (monkeypox); Nervous System Diseases; SARS-CoV-2; Headache; Encephalitis
PubMed: 37441883
DOI: 10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2023.05.011 -
Asia-Pacific Journal of Ophthalmology...The purpose of this study was to pool the prevalence rate of monkeypox-associated eye manifestations and/or complications during the current and previous outbreaks. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to pool the prevalence rate of monkeypox-associated eye manifestations and/or complications during the current and previous outbreaks.
DESIGN
A systematic review and meta-analysis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
On August 7, 2022, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant articles. We included all studies that reported the involvement of the eye (either as a manifestation or a complication) among patients with monkeypox. The primary outcome included pooling the effect size (ES) of reported manifestations and complications, and the secondary outcome included the conduct of a subgroup analysis based on the timing of the monkeypox outbreak (before vs. during 2022).
RESULTS
Eleven studies reporting 3179 monkeypox-confirmed cases were included. Eye manifestations included conjunctivitis, corneal, conjunctival, and eyelid lesions, photophobia, and eye pain. Compared with previous monkeypox outbreaks, the current outbreak revealed much lower rates of ocular involvement in terms of conjunctivitis (ES=1%; 95% CI: 0%-1% vs. ES=17%; 95% CI: 11%-22%), corneal and conjunctival lesions (ES=1%; 95% CI: 0%-2% vs. ES=13%; 95% CI: 4%-22%), and eyelid lesions (ES=1%; 95% CI: 0%-4% vs. ES=13%; 95% CI: 5%-28%). Monkeypox-associated eye complications were reported only in the previous outbreaks which included keratitis (ES=4%; 95% CI: 3%-6%), corneal ulceration (ES=4%; 95% CI: 2%-5%), unilateral (ES=3%; 95% CI: 1%-4%) and bilateral blindness (ES=0%; 95% CI: 0%-2%), and impaired vision (ES=4%; 95% CI: 1%-8%).
CONCLUSIONS
Ophthalmic manifestations and complications are common among monkeypox-confirmed cases. Although these data are mainly related to previous outbreaks, health care workers should familiarize themselves with these signs to provide better care for monkeypox patients.
Topics: Humans; Mpox (monkeypox); Conjunctiva; Disease Outbreaks; Conjunctivitis; Keratitis
PubMed: 37249903
DOI: 10.1097/APO.0000000000000608 -
International Journal of Public Health 2023We aimed to evaluate global epidemiological features of human monkeypox (mpox) cases and their associations with social-economic level and international travel... (Review)
Review
Global Epidemiological Features of Human Monkeypox Cases and Their Associations With Social-Economic Level and International Travel Arrivals: A Systematic Review and Ecological Study.
We aimed to evaluate global epidemiological features of human monkeypox (mpox) cases and their associations with social-economic level and international travel arrivals. We estimated the pooled value by random-effects models. Then, we conducted an ecological study to evaluate the relationship of confirmed cases with social-economic indices and international travel arrivals using correlation analyses. The average age (2022: 35.52, 95% CI [28.09, 42.94] vs. before 2022: 18.38, 95% CI [14.74, 22.02]) and comorbidity rate (2022: 15.7%, 95% CI [8.9%, 22.4%] vs. before 2022: 14.9%, 95% CI [8.5%, 21.3%]) of mpox cases in the 2022 human mpox outbreak were significantly higher than those of cases before 2022. During the 2022 mpox outbreak, the proportion of men who have sex with men (MSM) was high (79.8%, 95% CI [65.5%, 94.2%]). The number of confirmed mpox cases in 2022 significantly correlated with high social-economic levels and international travel arrivals (all < 0.05). Our findings highlighted the importance of early surveillance and timely detection in high-risk populations, including older people, MSM, and travelers, which is crucial to curb the wide transmission of mpox.
Topics: Male; Humans; Aged; Homosexuality, Male; Mpox (monkeypox); Sexual and Gender Minorities; Disease Outbreaks
PubMed: 36743344
DOI: 10.3389/ijph.2023.1605426 -
Medicine Sep 2023The last few decades have witnessed an appalling rise in several emerging and re-emerging viral and zoonotic outbreaks. Amongst those emerging zoonosis, one of the...
BACKGROUND
The last few decades have witnessed an appalling rise in several emerging and re-emerging viral and zoonotic outbreaks. Amongst those emerging zoonosis, one of the diseases which is gaining popularity these days and has been declared as public health emergency of international concern by the world health organization, is human monkeypox virus (HMPX). Proper understanding of the clinical spectrum of the disease is of paramount importance for early diagnosis and treatment. In this review, we aimed to study and quantify the neurological manifestations of HMPX virus infection.
METHODS
Any study, released prior to April 13, 2023, that reported neurological manifestations in patients infected by HMPX virus were reviewed systematically on PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis) statement.
RESULTS
Our systematic review included data from 22 eligible studies: 10 cohort studies, 3 cross sectional studies, one retrospective study, 5 case series, and 2 case reports. The most commonly reported neurological manifestations of HMPX were headache (48.84%), myalgia (27.50%), fatigue (17.73%), and photophobia (4.43%). Uncommonly, HMPX can also present with visual deficit (0.57%), seizure (0.34%), encephalitis (0.8%), dizziness (0.34%), encephalomyelitis (0.23%), coma (0.11%), and transverse myelitis (0.11%).
DISCUSSIONS
Monkeypox virus usually presents with self-limiting painful rash, lymphadenitis, and fever, complications like secondary skin infection, eye problems and pneumonia can be life threatening, carrying a case fatality rate of 1% to 10%. Neurological manifestations are not uncommon and can further add-on to morbidity and mortality.
Topics: Humans; Coinfection; Cross-Sectional Studies; Mpox (monkeypox); Monkeypox virus; Public Health; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37657009
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000034664 -
Scientific Reports Mar 2024The seasonal outbreaks of Mpox continue in most parts of West and Central Africa. In the past year, Nigeria had the highest number of reported cases. Here, we used the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The seasonal outbreaks of Mpox continue in most parts of West and Central Africa. In the past year, Nigeria had the highest number of reported cases. Here, we used the PRISMA guidelines to carry out a systematic review and meta-analysis of available evidence on Mpox in Nigeria to assess the prevalence, transmission pattern, diagnostic approach, and other associated factors useful for mitigating the transmission of the disease. All relevant observational studies in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, AJOL, Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar on Mpox in Nigeria were assessed within the last fifty years (1972 to 2022). In all, 92 relevant articles were retrieved, out of which 23 were included in the final qualitative analysis. Notably, most of the cases of Mpox in Nigeria were from the southern part of the country. Our findings showed a progressive spread from the southern to the northern region of the country. We identified the following factors as important in the transmission of Mpox in Nigeria; poverty, lack of basic healthcare facilities, and risk of exposure through unsafe sexual practices. Our findings reiterate the need to strengthen and expand existing efforts as well as establish robust multi-sectoral collaboration to understand the dynamics of Mpox Nigeria.
Topics: Humans; Mpox (monkeypox); Nigeria; Disease Outbreaks; Health Facilities; MEDLINE
PubMed: 38548826
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-58147-y