Abstract

Pastoralists and agro-pastoralists often occupy remote and hostile environments, which lack infrastructure and capacity in human and veterinary healthcare and disease surveillance systems. Participatory epidemiology (PE) and Participatory Disease Surveillance (PDS) are particularly useful in situations of resource scarcity, where conventional diagnostics and surveillance data of disease prevalence may be intermittent or limited. Livestock keepers, when participating in PE studies about health issues, commonly use their local language terms, which are often syndromic and descriptive in nature. Practitioners of PE recommend confirmation of their findings with triangulation including biomedical diagnostic techniques. However, the latter is not practiced in all studies, usually due to time, financial or logistical constraints. A cross sectional study was undertaken with the Maasai of Ngorongoro District, Tanzania. It aimed to identify the terms used to describe the infectious diseases of livestock and humans with the greatest perceived impact on livelihoods. Furthermore, it aimed to characterise the usefulness and limitations of relying on local terminology when conducting PE studies in which diagnoses were not confirmed. Semi-structured interviews were held with 23 small groups, totalling 117 community members within five villages across the district. In addition, informal discussions and field observations were conducted with village elders, district veterinary and medical officers, meat inspectors and livestock field officers. For human conditions including zoonoses, several biomedical terms are now part of the common language. Conversely, livestock conditions are described using local Maasai terms, usually associated with the signs observed by the livestock keeper. Several of these descriptive, syndromic terms are used inconsistently and showed temporal and spatial variations. This study highlights the complexity and ambiguity which may exist in local terminology when used in PE studies. It emphases the need for further analysis of such findings, including laboratory diagnosis where possible to improve specificity before incorporating them into PDS or disease control interventions.

Highlights

  • The pastoralist Maasai of East Africa traditionally inhabit large areas of savannah and semi-arid to arid rangelands, which are considered unsuitable for other forms of agriculture

  • Findings from Participatory epidemiology (PE) can provide the foundation for participatory disease surveillance (PDS), which may be the only option in resource poor settings

  • Syndromic reporting by livestock keepers in Participatory Disease Surveillance (PDS) may lack specificity but it is usually sensitive and prompt

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The pastoralist Maasai of East Africa traditionally inhabit large areas of savannah and semi-arid to arid rangelands, which are considered unsuitable for other forms of agriculture As a result, these regions lack investment for development and infrastructure. The terms are often linked to the recognition of the signs of disease in the live animal or carcase, presence of vectors, species and age of the affected animal and location or seasonality of outbreaks Their understanding of risk factors for both human and livestock conditions is often based on their existing knowledge of conditions with similar symptoms or signs, their historic knowledge, customs and beliefs, and the advice given by local veterinary and health professionals (Ole-Miaron, 2003)

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call