West Nile Virus - Assignment Example

? TOPIC: WEST NILE VIRUS LITERATURE REVIEW LECTURER: WEST NILE VIRUS LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction The literature review chapter of the research is dedicated to using existing literature as secondary data collection procedure for the study. As a data collection approach, the researcher shall ensure that the information that is reviewed as part of the chapter is those that are directly related to the study’s specific objectives and research questions. In effect, the literature review is going to be the first avenue in trying to find answers to the research questions and also achieve the specific objectives of the study. To do this more comprehensively, the researcher shall make use ten major sources that have been annotated earlier as part of the research process. These sources are however not going to be reviewed independent of each other. Rather, the researcher shall set various themes that related directly to the research questions and specific objectives of the study. Under each theme, there shall be specific parameters of review which shall include analysis of the research on the research topic, investigating what has already been done in the area of study, outcomes of works that have already been done in the area of study, gaps in areas of the study that needs to be improved, overview of populations used in various studies relating to this area of study, methodologies that have been used by previous researchers, and the researchers personal interpretation of various information that will be sampled from the various studies. While finding answers to the parameters that have been given, the sources that were used in the annotation shall be used in an exclusive manner. Overview of the Research Topic The research topic focuses on the West Nile virus. This is a health topic that has been researched by several writers and health professionals. Gruszynski (2006) has identified the West Nile virus (WNV) to be a member of the genus Flavivirus that is transmitted mainly by mosquitoes. Looking in to the history of the disease in the United States, Gruszynski (2006) found that the first incidence of the disease was made in 1999 in New York. Since then, the disease would develop into a national epidemic as it covered as many as 48 states in just three years in 2002. The West Nile virus catches the attention of the researcher for further studies as revelations made in other works of literature actually point to the fact that the disease seems to have overtaken scientists in terms of control and treatment (Klenk and Komar, 2003). This is because as at now, there is no known specific treatment for the disease (Luanda, 2010). it is for this reason that Shortridge, Oya, Kobayashi and Duggan (2010) advocates an all-inclusive preventive approach to the disease as a way of ensuring that its risks on the human population is minimized. Until such a time that monitoring and control is used to reduce cases of new infections, studies by Asnis (2002) have warned that humans will continue to become victims of the disease. Existing Intervention to address the health topic Throughout literature, there seems to be a consensus on the approach to dealing with the disease. This approach focuses more on prevention rather than treatment, knowing that there is no known specific treatment for the disease as at now. In line with this, a number of existing interventions have been used by different researchers. On his part, Gruszynski (2006) recommends the use of an environmental predictive model for West Nile that makes use of a geographic information system and remote sensing for predict the prevalence of the disease in different geographic locations throughout United States. This idea is supported by Asnis (2002), who pointed out that geographic information systems would help in achieving accurate allocation of interventions to the health problem, which would focus on the use of the environment predictive model. By implication, it is important to know what exists in specific locations in order to assign the best interventions that work for those areas. This is because according to Shortridge, Oya, Kobayashi and Duggan (2010), various interventions that sought to expand the idea of one-off solution using a national approach instead of a localized approach in times past failed woefully. Outcome of various interventions to the health topic There have generally been two major approaches of interventions that have been used in literature. The first is a bottom-up approach, which deals with the introduction of localized interventions that are gradually extended on a nationwide basis (Klenk and Komar, 2003). A typical example of this is environmental predictive model which started in areas such as Louisiana and later extended to other nearby states and gradually extended as a nationwide program. The second approach is a waterfall approach that starts at the federal or national level and later spread to all other parts of the country. A typical example of this is the Roll-Out WNV Campaign which emphasized on the use of supportive care to roll out cases of affected West Nile virus to a 0% rate (Bernard and Kramer, 2001). Whereas the first approach was a preventive approach, the second approach was an eradication approach. In terms of outcome, it has been found that because the eradication approach failed to find the root cause of the health problem and rightly block reoccurrence, even though interventions used in the eradication approach such as hospitalization and intravenous fluids helped in reducing incidents of the disease, it did not really lead to a 0% infection rate because there continued to be infections (Shilite, 2003). On the other hand, Petersen and Roehrig (2001) found that places such as Louisiana where the preventive approaches were used yielded better long term results because future occurrences were minimized. Eradicative approach therefore brings short terms results whiles preventive approaches lead to long term results. Improving the health problem Based on the findings on the preventive and eradicative interventions that have been identified above, the way forward for improving the situation with West Nile virus has been researched by several researchers and professionals. In this, there seem to be a very unanimous convection that using an integrated approach to tackling West Nile virus would be the best way to improve the health problem for the people of the United States. This means that the preventive and eradicative approaches to interventions must be combined in a manner that works hand-in-hand (Shilite, 2003). In a rebuttal to this line of argument, Petersen and Roehrig (2001) stated that the waterfall approach must be replaced entirely with the bottom-up method when implementing the integrated approach. What this means is that even though the integrated approach is supported, it must be done using only one implementation format, which is the bottom-up method, instead of using the waterfall method for the eradicative intervention and bottom-up method for the preventive intervention. Should this advocacy be championed, then there is going to be an era where the approach to dealing with West Nile virus will be taken from a decentralized perspective instead of a centralized perspective that is controlled by federal agencies and organizations. This time round, the control will be with local agencies at the state level. Existing research on population In terms of population, there are two major trends that can be seen of the populations that have been used by various researchers in the past decade to find data on the West Nile virus. The first of this has to do with researchers who approach their populations from a national perspective and the second are those who deal with confined groups. Often times, those who use the national perspective to building their population do so by collecting respondents from different states, made up of ten or more states in the United States. They therefore generalize their findings to the larger nation instead of localizing it to specific groups or people (Gruszynski, 2006). There have been both merits and demerits with this approach. Specifically, issues of concentrated attention have come up. That is, where there is a national perspective to creating a population, there is often very large population for the researchers to deal with, defeating the need to have the opportunity to critically study the population. It is not surprising that most of these researchers have used qualitative approaches that give a more generalized interpretation to social variables, instead of giving specific interpretation to variables on the respondents. The merit with the national perspective however has to deal with the fact that it has resulted in finding expanded interventions that benefit a larger group of the United States citizenry (Hubalek and Halouzka, 1999). The focused population group has been the exact opposite of the national perspective. This is because it has often been made up of very small population numbers as compared to large numbers from the national perspectives. Generally, the focused population use single states and identify peculiar cases with specific groups of people such as patients aligned to a particular hospital (Gruszynski, 2006). The advantage that has often come with this approach is that it gives the researchers the opportunity to delve very deep into the variables and factors that affect the population rather than generalizing their findings (Wittich, 2007). This approach therefore leads to better understanding of variable cases that are outlined by the researchers. In effect, the quantitative approach has often been used in this instance. The only demerit with this approach is that when conclusions are made, they become limited to only a smaller population, meaning that the impact of such researches does not benefit many enough people. Another peculiar characteristic of the focused population is that there are cases that this has been used to focus on other populations other than human beings. Examples of these are population of birds to find out the relationship that infections in these birds have with humans (Eldridge, 1987). Methodologies used in existing research Throughout the literatures that were used for the study, a very common trend that was discovered was that when different methodologies are used between qualitative and quantitative methods, the outcome of studies are always different. More specifically, researchers who have given emphasis to qualitative research methods have been more concerned about finding behavioral factors and characteristics associated with the disease. These people would therefore investigate the personal behaviors of people towards the disease and ways in which these people attempt to eradicate or treat the disease (Wittich, 2007). The quantitative approaches have however focused on clinical aspects of the West Nile virus such as epidemiology, pharmacology of available drugs, and best practices that focus on prevention (Hubalek, 2000). Between the qualitative and quantitative methods however, the researcher finds a trend where the qualitative methods seem to dominate in most of the research works that were reviewed. This is found to be a not too helpful trend because the most effective means to approaching this health problem is to be more concerned with clinical interventions that put the issue of control and prevention in the hands of health professionals instead of the general public. What is more, it is important to give more focus to quantitative methods because they guarantee the use of more best practice approaches. Summary of the Review The literature review that has been conducted so far has been very important in making very important deductions for the study that will lead up to having very successful primary data collection in the next chapter. This is because empirical data on the West Nile virus has been collected that will easily be compared to the primary data to prove authenticity and accuracy of primary data. Generally, through the literature review, it has been established that the United State currently suffers a nationwide challenge with West Nile virus with as many as 48 states being disease points as of 2003 (Hubalek, 2000). This has led to several interventions and research works that have been aimed at correcting the situation. Surprisingly though, not much has been achieved in terms of reducing the numbers, especially with new infections. According to the review, this situation could be blamed on the absence of an effective predictive model that would serve as a preventive approach to controlling the disease. Currently, much of the focus on the disease has centered on the treatment of affected people, which is not being a very viable means of dealing with the disease. To curtail the situation, the environmental predictive model for West Nile virus is recommended in the literature review. This approach is rightly supported by the researcher with future input to it. As part of the aim of the current study, it recommended for there to be a pragmatic best practice that can guarantee that the environmental predictive model for West Nile virus will work perfectly based on empirical research and evidence. References Asnis D. (2002). West Nile Infection in the United States: A Review and Update. Inf Med. 19(6):266-78, Bernard KA, Kramer LD. (2001). West Nile virus activity in the United States, 2001. Eldridge BF. (1987). Strategies for surveillance, prevention, and control of arbovirus diseases in western North America. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 37(3):77S-86S. Gruszynski K. R. (2006). The epidemiology of West Nile virus in Louisiana. Louisiana: Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center. Viral Immunol.14(4):319-38. Hubalek Z, Halouzka J. (1999). West Nile fever--a reemerging mosquito-borne viral disease in Europe. Emerg Infect Dis. 5(5):643-50. Hubalek Z. (2000). European experience with the West Nile virus ecology and epidemiology: could it be relevant for the New World? Viral Immunol;13(4):415-26. Klenk K and Komar N. (2003). Poor replication of West Nile virus (New York 1999 strain) in three reptilian and one amphibian species. Am J Trop Med Hyg Sep;69(3):260-2. Luanda L. L (2010) .Epidemiological research regarding West Nile virus in Romania. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 67(1): 67-75. Petersen LR, Roehrig JT. (2001). West Nile virus: a reemerging global pathogen. Emerg Infect Dis. 7(4):611-4. Shilite T. R. (2003). West Vile Virus and Wild Bird Population. Journal of Medical Entomology. 41(4):539-44. Shortridge KF, Oya A, Kobayashi M and Duggan R. (2010). Japanese encephalitis virus antibody in cold blooded animals. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1977;71(3):261- 2. Wittich A. C. (2007). Spatial analysis of West Nile virus and predictors of Hyperendemicity in the Texas equine industry. Emergency Infectious Diseases. 11(10):1633-5 Read More