Prepared by: Portas Olwande Mwihia Evalyn

Presented on: 5th March 2013

Venue: University of Wyoming

Cattle ▪ Exotic cattle – 3,355,407▪ Indigenous cattle – 14,112,367

Goat – 27,740,153 Sheep – 17,129,608 Camel – 2,971,111 Pigs - 334,689 Poultry▪ Indigenous poultry – 25,756,487▪ Commercial – 6,071,042

Donkey – 1,832,519

PROVINCE POPULATIONNairobi 3,138,369Central 4,383,743Coast 3,325,307Eastern 5,668,123N/eastern 2,310,757Nyanza 5,442,711R/valley 10,006,805Western 4,334,282 Total 38,610,097

Cities: Nairobi, Mombasa and Kisumu

Cattle, sheep and goats Extensive – Past0ral and ranching Semi-intensive – agro-pastoral Intensive - Zero-grazing

Pigs Free range (small percentage) Semi-intensive – tethered and also

supplimented Intensive – fed on swill mostly

Camel Pastoral mostly

Although endemic in Africa, brucellosis data in Kenya is scarce

Available data partains only to samples submitted to the laboratory for brucellosis testing

Some surveillance has been carried out by our VEEU team but these are restricted to seroprevalence studies of particular areas of the country.

Some research has also been conducted by various universities in the country e.g. UoN as part of MSc and PhD projects and by various research institutes e.g. KARI and ILRI

This information has not been made available to the DVS since before June 2011, since Brucellosis was not a notifiable disease

Brucellosis data in wildlife may be unavailable because wildlife management in Kenya is a mandate of the KWS (Kenya Wildlife services) and unless they work with DVS in disease surveillance and control, the information remains unavailable

However, despite these constraints in data availability, some journal articles have been published indicating the brucellosis situation in some regions of Kenya e.g.

Brucella melitensis biovar 1 was isolated from bovine milk samples from a herd in central Kenya, and Brucella abortus biovar 3 was isolated from aborted fetus materials and vaginal discharge fluids from cattle in central and eastern provinces of Kenya (Muendo et. al.,2012).

Muriuki et. al. (1997) study in Narok classified 0.8% (n= 1,037,875 ) of all ‘flu-like’ syndromes in man as Brucellosis. 21.2% of these tested positive for Brucellosis on RBT

In another study by Waghela et. al. (1978), 172 camels were sampled from North Eastern province. 11 of 172 sera tested reacted in RBPT, 11 in SAT and 21 in CFT.

An overall prevalence of 4.9% and 3.9% by ELISA and MRT respectively was determined in at milk consumer-level. At the informal market level, ELISA and MRT classified 2.4% and 3.4%, respectively, as positive. Study carried out in Nairobi, Kiambu, Nakuru and Narok (Kangethe et. al., 2000).

Antibodies to Brucella spp. were found in 18% (31/175) of blue wildebeest and 30% (5/17) of African buffalo examined in the Masai Mara, Narok on either SAT or CFT or both (Waghela and Karstad, 1986).

Muriuki SM, McDermott JJ, Arimi SM, Mugambi JT and Wamola IA (1997). Criteria for better detection of brucellosis in the Narok District of Kenya. East Afr Med J. 74(5):317-20.

Waghela, S., Fazil, M.A., Gathuma, J.M. and Kagunya, D.K.(1978). A serological survey of brucellosis in camels in north-eastern province of Kenya. Trop. Anlm. Hlth Prod.10:28-29

Waghela, S. and Karstad, L. (1986) Antibodies to brucella spp. Among blue wildebeest and african buffalo in Kenya. Journal of Wildlife Diseases. 22(2):189-192

Kang'ethe, E.K., Arimi, S.M., Omore, A.O., McDermott, J.J., Nduhiu, J.G., Macharia J.K. and Githua, A.(2000). The prevalence of antibodies to brucella abortus in marketed milk in Kenya and its public health implications. Paper for oral presentation at the 3rd all Africa conference on animal agriculture. 6 – 9 Nov2000.

 Muendo, E.N., Mbatha, P.M., Macharia, J.M., Abdoel, T.H., Janszen, P.V., Pastoor, R. and Smits, H.L. (2012). Infection of cattle in Kenya with Brucella abortus biovar 3 and Brucella melitensis biovar 1 genotypes. Trop Anim Health Prod. 44:17–20

On 17th June of 2011 (Legal notice No. 68), Brucellosis was gazetted as a notifiable disease in Kenya under the animal diseases act (Cap. 364).

This means that all identified cases of brucellosis must be reported to the department of veterinary services.

Prior to this gazettement, cases of brucellosis were not necessarily reported and therefore it was difficult to determine the occurrence, prevalence and spread nationwide.

The available data on brucellosis is not adequate enough to inform an effective control processes.

The free range production system practiced in most parts of the country helps to maintain the disease in both animal and human populations.

The cultures of some community that encourages consumption of raw livestock products e.g. whole blood an raw milk.

Inadequate resources for effective brucellosis control; i.e.:- For the implementation of test and cull

policy (currently not practiced) For skill improvement and equipping of the

existing surveillance personnel/ staff For the hiring of adequate skilled personnel

(currently there is shortage) Livestock-wild life interaction (especially

during free grazing) Cattle rustling Porous borders limiting control efforts Inadequate diagnostic techniques i.e. do not

give a true picture of Brucellosis presence/absence

Brucellosis is a real public health problem owing to:

Poor laboratory diagnosis especially in human diagnosis : many a times diagnosed and treated as malaria

Non standardized control in animals

Vaccination not widely done; if any??

Test and slaughter/ culling not practical

Policy for compensation is not in place yet??

Public awareness to counter ‘risky’ cultural beliefs would be vital

YearNo. of positive

cases

2003 6

2004 72

2005 81

2006 5

2007 118

2008 37

2009 390

2010 65

2011 123Total no. of

cases 897

The following tests are conducted to diagnose brucellosis: Rose Bengal Plate test (RBPT) Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) Complement fixation test (CFT)

We are currently working on establishing polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing for Brucellosis

Similarly, we are working on trying to have our brucellosis diagnosis techniques accredited under the ISO 17025

The following divisions,among others, are present in Kenya: VEEU, disease control and laboratories.

We have about 7 veterinarians in the VEEU unit each of whom is in charge of particular diseases but work hand in hand in disease surveillance as a group

Under disease control, each district in Kenya has at least one veterinarian to implement disease control measures in that district

Although after the elections, additional staff, county veterinary directors will be deployed to each county to co-ordinate DVOs within the counties

Veterinary laboratories in Kenya comprise of the following:

National referral laboratories▪ Central Veterinary Laboratories (CVL), Kabete▪ National Veterinary Quality Control Lab., Embakasi

Regional laboratories Nakuru - Serves Southern Rift Valley Kericho - For Nyanza, Western, Western Rift Valley Eldoret - Serves Northern Rift Valley

Has a Satellite lab. at Lodwar Karatina - Serves Central and Eastern Provinces

Has a Satellite lab. at Isiolo Mariakani - Serves Coast Province

Has 2 satellites at Ukunda and Witu Garissa - Serves North Eastern Province

The Zoonotic Disease Unit (ZDU)was set up in 2011 by the Ministry of Livestock Development (MoLD) and the Ministry of Public Health and Sanitation (MPHS) with the main objective of establishing and maintaining active collaboration at the animal, human and ecosystem interface towards better prevention and control of zoonotic diseases.

The United States Department of State Biosecurity Engagement Program, the United States Department of Defense and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention supported the Government of Kenya in the establishment of the Zoonotic Diseases Unit.

One of the primary projects by the ZDU was the Brucellosis project.

The objective of the project were: to determine the sero-prevalence of brucellosis

in animals and man. Incidence study

The targeted areas were Kiambu – agriculture area Kajiado – agro- pastoralist Marsabit – pastoralist

Targeted population were humans, cattle, goat, sheep and camel

Presently, the first phase of determining sero-prevalence is underway.

Sample collection and questionnaire survey has already been undertaken

Sample testing is currently being conducted

The second phase of incidence study is expected to be conducted from June 2013.

These are zones to be established around the country to be free from diseases such as: Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD), Rift Valley Fever (RVF), Contagious Bovine Pleuro-pneumonia (CBPP), Brucellosis, Contagious Caprine Pleuro-pneumonia (CCPP), Pestes de Petit Ruminants (PPR), and Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE).

It will be done in three zones.The first face is currently on-going

and the area located for the first DFZ is the coastal area.

Develop disease-specific contingency plans and review the plans annually

Engage stakeholders on the process of establishing disease free zones and sanitary requirements.

Carry out animal disease surveillance Carry out cartographic surveys to

delineate disease free areas, establish buffer barriers and zones

Build a strategic vaccine reserve

Carry out vaccination campaigns in the disease free areas and in the buffer zone

Establish quality assurance laboratories Control animal movement in and out of the

disease free zone Design and establish quarantine stations

for animal screening within the buffer zones and at exit points

Carry out animal identification within and outside the DFZ

Undertake vector and pest control within and outside the DFZ

Build capacity of MOLD staff to provide quality assurance services