Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 17, Number 11—November 2011

Rapid Assessment of Cholera-related Deaths, Artibonite Department, Haiti, 2010

Article Metrics
citations of this article
EID Journal Metrics on Scopus
Janell A. RouthComments to Author , Anagha Loharikar1, Marie-Délivrance Bernadette Fouché, Emily J. Cartwright2, Sharon L. Roy, Elizabeth Ailes, W. Roodly Archer, Jordan W. Tappero, Thierry H. Roels, Georges Dahourou, and Robert E. Quick
Author affiliations: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA (J.A. Routh, A. Loharikar, E.J. Cartwright, S.L. Roy, W.R. Archer, J.W. Tappero, T.H. Roels, R.E. Quick); Laboratoire National de Santé Publique, Port-au-Prince, Haiti (M.-D.B. Fouché); IHRC, Inc., Atlanta (E. Ailes); Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Port-au-Prince (G. Dahourou)

Cite This Article


We evaluated a high (6%) cholera case-fatality rate in Haiti. Of 39 community decedents, only 23% consumed oral rehydration salts at home, and 59% did not seek care, whereas 54% of 48 health facility decedents died after overnight admission. Early in the cholera epidemic, care was inadequate or nonexistent.

Epidemic cholera remains a public health problem in developing countries. In 2009, a total of 45 countries reported 221,226 cases and 4,946 deaths; for both, >98% occurred in sub-Saharan Africa (1).

On October 21, 2010, an outbreak of acute watery diarrhea in Artibonite and Centre Departments, Haiti, a country with no history of epidemic cholera, was confirmed as cholera when fecal specimens yielded toxigenic Vibrio cholerae O1 (2). Within 1 month, cholera spread to all 10 departments (2).

Figure 1

Thumbnail of Number of and case-fatality rate (CFR) for persons hospitalized with cholera, Artibonite Department, Haiti, October 20–November 24, 2010.

Figure 1. Number of and case-fatality rate (CFR) for persons hospitalized with cholera, Artibonite Department, Haiti, October 20–November 24, 2010.

With prompt treatment, the cholera case-fatality rate (CFR) should remain <1% (3). However, by November 13, 2010, the Ministère de la Santé Publique et de la Population (MSPP) had reported 16,111 persons hospitalized with suspected cholera and 992 cholera-related deaths, for a CFR of 6.2% (4) (Figure 1). To determine reasons for the high CFR, we conducted a rapid cholera mortality assessment in Artibonite Department during November 12–16.

The Study

We defined cholera decedents as persons who died of suspected cholera (acute watery diarrhea in persons >5 years of age [5]) with illness onset after October 16, 2010, three days before the first case-patients were seen at the hospital (reflecting the 3-day average incubation period [6]). To locate decedents, we obtained reports of cholera-related deaths from 2 sources: admission records from 2 hospitals in Artibonite that had cholera treatment centers (Hôpital Albert Schweitzer and Hôpital Charles Colimon) and verbal reports from community health workers (CHWs). We attempted to locate households of all decedents from hospital records and verbal reports. Logistic and time constraints limited case finding to communities within 2 hours’ travel from the hospitals. We visited decedents’ households; obtained informed consent; and interviewed families about demographics, symptoms, health-seeking behavior, treatment, type of health facility, and knowledge about cholera. We also asked decedents’ household members and local CHWs about other cholera-related deaths. If additional decedents were identified, we visited their homes and interviewed household members. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Institutional Review Board (Atlanta, GA, USA) and MSPP determined that this emergency response activity was nonresearch.

Figure 2

Thumbnail of Number of persons who died of cholera, Artibonite Department, Haiti, October 16–November 14, 2010.

Figure 2. Number of persons who died of cholera, Artibonite Department, Haiti, October 16–November 14, 2010.

We enrolled 87 decedents. Of 28 decedents identified from hospital records, we found homes of 22 (79%); homes of 6 decedents could not be located or were too remote for inclusion. Illness onset ranged from October 16 through November 14; a total of 29 (33%) persons died during the first week of the epidemic (Figure 2). Median age of decedents was 50 years (range 5–100 years); 58 (67%) were male. Forty-eight (55%) decedents died in a health facility (health facility decedents) and 39 (45%) died at home or en route to a facility (community decedents). We identified 17 (35%) health facility decedents from hospital records and 31 (65%) from community interviews; we identified 5 (13%) community decedents from hospital records and 34 (87%) from community interviews.

Twenty-three (48%) health facility decedents and 9 (23%) community decedents had used oral rehydration solution (ORS) at home before seeking care (Table 1). ORS use at home was lower for persons who died during the first week of the outbreak (7 [27%]) than during the second (8 [40%]) or third (17 [46%]) weeks. We observed ORS sachets in homes of 17 (35%) health facility decedents and 14 (36%) community decedents. No respondents reported use of homemade sugar–salt solution by decedents.

Median time from illness onset to death was 20 hours (range 3 hours–7 days) for health facility decedents and 12 hours (range 2 hours–8 days) for community decedents. Twenty-two (46%) health facility decedents died on day of admission and 26 (54%) died after spending >1 night in the facility (Table 2). Twenty-three (59%) community decedents never sought care, 8 (21%) died en route to care, and 8 (21%) died after discharge. Of those who sought care, 29 (60%) health facility decedents and 7 (44%) community decedents waited <2 hours to visit a health facility. Family members of community decedents reported the following reasons for not seeking care: no need for care (19 [69%]), long distance to the health facility (6 [26%]), too ill to travel (4 [17%]), lack of transport (3 [13%]), unsafe to travel at night (3 [13%]), and cost of transport (1 [4%]).

Of 48 health facility decedents, 38 (79%) were treated in hospital and 10 (21%) at a health center or dispensary. Decedents received intravenous fluids (35 [73%]), ORS (27 [56%]), both (20 [42%]), or neither (3 [9%]).

Household members of 33 (69%) health facility decedents and 30 (81%) community decedents reported receiving information about cholera after the outbreak started. The most common information sources for families of health facility and community decedents, respectively, were radio (26 [79%] vs. 26 [89%]), friend (6 [18%] vs. 8 [27%]), cellular telephone text message from MSPP (4 [12%] vs. 4 [13%]), community meeting (2 [6%] vs. 2 [7%]), and CHWs (1 [3%] vs. 3 [10%]). Fewer than half of family members of health facility (23 [48%]) and community (19 [49%]) decedents believed cholera was treatable. Of these, 16 (70%) health facility decedents and 17 (90%) community decedents knew to seek care at a health facility.


Our findings suggest that, early in the cholera epidemic in Haiti, death occurred rapidly, and care was either inadequate or nonexistent. We found several possible explanations for this situation.

First, early in the outbreak, the population knew little about cholera. Many decedents did not know to seek care immediately. Knowledge, availability, and use of ORS were inadequate. Although many families acknowledged receiving cholera messages, their understanding was incomplete. Few reported receiving cholera messaging or ORS from CHWs. Global deficiencies in the distribution and use of ORS in recent years have impeded the ability of CHWs to initiate treatment (7).

Second, CHWs probably lacked sufficient information, experience, and resources to provide proper treatment early in the outbreak. Identification and aggressive treatment of dehydration is critical for effective cholera treatment. Deaths in health facilities in Haiti might have resulted from problems commonly observed elsewhere: overwhelming patient load, inadequate supplies, and health worker shortages (8).

Third, decedents’ relatives identified several commonly observed barriers to care: distance to health facility, lack of transport, and unaffordable transport (9). Research suggests that the effect of distance and lack of transport on cholera-related death can be mitigated by local treatment with ORS by CHWs (10,11). Finally, the epidemic strain, which was particularly virulent, might have contributed to deaths (12).

Active case finding detected 87% of community decedents. This finding suggests that cholera-related deaths might have been underreported, particularly in more remote communities.

Our study had several limitations. First, time and logistics limited our ability to visit remote communities where more deaths might have occurred. Second, our geographically circumscribed convenience sample might not have been representative of all cholera deaths. Third, medical records at cholera treatment facilities were incomplete or absent. Finally, our data were limited to reports from decedents’ families.

Findings from this assessment suggested several practical actions that could mitigate the risk for death from cholera. CHWs, particularly in remote settings, should receive training in cholera treatment and referral and adequate supplies of ORS; similar efforts for HIV and tuberculosis in Haiti have been promising (13,14). Health providers should receive sufficient cholera training and treatment supplies. Cholera education should be disseminated through multiple communication channels. Longer term efforts to increase health facility staffing and improve access to care should be prioritized.

In response to the epidemic, training and supplies have been provided to health workers in all 10 departments of Haiti. By April 2011, the cholera CFR had declined to <1% (

Dr Routh is an Epidemic Intelligence Service officer in the Division of Foodborne, Waterborne, and Environmental Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. Her research interests include safe water systems for diarrhea prevention.



We thank the many persons in Haiti who made this study possible, including Ian Rawson, Carrie Weinrobe, and the staff at Hôpital Albert Schweitzer; the Médecins Sans Frontières staff at Hôpital Charles Colimon; our enumerators Frankie Cledemon, Lucienne Orelius, Lynda Sejournee, Linda Ciceron, and Stephanie Dorvil; and our drivers Olivier Felord and Emile Saget, who assisted with data collection.



  1. World Health Organization. Cholera, 2009. Wkly Epidemiol Rec. 2010;85:293308.
  2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Update: cholera outbreak—Haiti 2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2010;59:158690.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. World Health Organization. Cholera. Factsheet no 107. Geneva: The Organization; 2010 [cited 2011 Aug 24].
  4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Update: cholera outbreak—Haiti, 2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2010;59:14739.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Global Task Force on Cholera Control. Cholera outbreak. Assessing the outbreak response and improving preparedness. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2004. p. 15 [cited 2011 Aug 24].
  6. Heymann  DL. Control of communicable diseases manual. 19th ed. Washington: American Public Health Association; 2008. p. 124.
  7. Boschi-Pinto  C, Bahl  R, Martines  J. Limited progress in increasing coverage of neonatal and child-health interventions in Africa and Asia. J Health Popul Nutr. 2009;27:75562.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Shikanga  OT, Mutonga  D, Abade  M, Amwayi  S, Ope  M, Limo  H, High mortality in a cholera outbreak in western Kenya after post-election violence in 2008. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2009;81:108590. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Quick  RE, Vargas  R, Moreno  D, Mujica  O, Beingolea  L, Palacios  AM, Epidemic cholera in the Amazon: the challenge of preventing death. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 1993;48:597602.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Baqui  AH, Yunus  M, Zaman  K. Community-operated treatment centres prevented many cholera deaths. Diarrhoeal Dis Res. 1984;2:928.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Mandara  M, Mhalu  FS. Cholera control in an inaccessible district in Tanzania: importance of temporary rural centres. Med J Zambia. 1980–81;15:103.
  12. Pal  BB, Khuntia  HK, Samal  SK, Kar  SK, Patnaik  B. Epidemics of severe cholera caused by El Tor Vibrio cholerae O1 Ogawa possessing the ctxB gene of the classical biotype in Orissa, India. Int J Infect Dis. 2010;14:e3849. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Mukherjee  JS, Eustache  E. Community health workers as a cornerstone for integrating HIV and primary health care. AIDS Care. 2007;19(Suppl 1):S7382. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Walton  DA, Farmer  PE, Lambert  W, Léandre  F, Koenig  SP, Mukherjee  JS. Integrated HIV prevention and care strengthens primary health care: lessons from rural Haiti. J Public Health Policy. 2004;25:13758. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar




Cite This Article

DOI: 10.3201/eid1711.110747

1Current affiliation: Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

2Current affiliation: Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.

Table of Contents – Volume 17, Number 11—November 2011

EID Search Options
presentation_01 Advanced Article Search – Search articles by author and/or keyword.
presentation_01 Articles by Country Search – Search articles by the topic country.
presentation_01 Article Type Search – Search articles by article type and issue.



Please use the form below to submit correspondence to the authors or contact them at the following address:

Janell A. Routh, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Rd NE, Mailstop A38, Atlanta, GA 30333, USA

Send To

10000 character(s) remaining.


Page created: October 26, 2011
Page updated: October 26, 2011
Page reviewed: October 26, 2011
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.