Full Text Available
Note: Clicking the button above will open the full text document at the original institutional repository in a new window.
Prevalence of Rift Valley fever virus in livestock and humans in South Africa from 2010 to 2024: a systematic literature review
Background: Rift Valley fever (RVF) poses a significant threat to human and animal health. Understanding the burden of RVF virus (RVFV) is essential for guiding prevention and control strategies. We conducted a systematic review of the prevalence of, and risk factors for, RVFV in livestock and human...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Thesis |
| Language: | English English |
| Published: |
Department of Public Health and Family Medicine
2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Tags: |
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Background: Rift Valley fever (RVF) poses a significant threat to human and animal health. Understanding the burden of RVF virus (RVFV) is essential for guiding prevention and control strategies. We conducted a systematic review of the prevalence of, and risk factors for, RVFV in livestock and humans in South Africa from 2010- 2024. Methods: We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and registered this study on PROSPERO (Animal studies: CRD42025063878; Human studies: CRD420251018289). We searched electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus) until April 2025 for studies published from 2010-2024. Cross sectional and cohort studies that reported prevalence of RVFV in livestock or humans in South Africa were eligible, with no language restrictions. We screened all identified articles independently in duplicate using Rayyan software. We cross-checked all extracted data. Two reviewers assessed risk of bias using a tool developed by Hoy et al. We used the PERSystMA App (version 1.0) to estimate pooled prevalence. Principal findings: We included seven studies with a total of 2,355 human and 4,397 livestock participants. None of the studies had high risk of bias. Prevalence ranged from 0.5-42.9% in cattle (three studies), 9.3-31.7% in goats (two studies) and 0-9.1% in humans (three studies). Prevalence was 0.8% in pigs and 28.0% in sheep (one study each). Pooled prevalence was 2.3% (95% confidence interval 0.4-12.8%) in humans and 4.8% (95% confidence interval 0.6-28.3%) in livestock, I2>90%. Risk factors included increasing age and increased proximity to water sources for both livestock and humans. Conclusion: This review identified significant interepidemic RVF virus circulation in South African livestock and humans. Limitations include few studies and significant heterogeneity. This review highlights a need for expanded surveillance, to aid outbreak preparedness and help mitigate public health and economic impacts. The authors received no specific funding for this work. |
|---|