A new large-scale community survey, the first of its kind, has revealed substantial variation in snakebite incidence across Kenya, offering vital insights on national snakebite control strategies.
Researchers Dr George Oluoch from the Kenyan Institute of Primate Research (KIPR) and Professor Ymkje Stienstra from Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine (LSTM), both members of the African Snakebite Alliance (ASA), embedded snakebite questions into ongoing mass drug administration programmes for neglected tropical diseases in 17 counties. The survey reached more than 13 million people, around 28 per cent of the national population.
A total of 4,667 snakebite cases were reported. These community-reported incidents far exceeded the numbers recorded in Kenya’s official health system database, highlighting significant under-reporting and the limitations of relying solely on health facility surveillance.
The data revealed clear hotspots of snakebite incidence with striking variation between counties, ranging from 412.9 bites per 100,000 people in the worst affected region to 3.7 per 100,000 in the lowest. It also showed that men are slightly more at risk overall, with incidence rates of 39.3 per 100,000 for men and 32.2 per 100,000 for women.
This wealth of new data offers opportunities for targeted prevention and treatment strategies. The authors emphasise the need to integrate snakebite education, prevention and treatment into routine community health and NTD programmes, and to expand access to antivenom and emergency care.
The study’s lead author, Dr Oluoch, head of KIPR’s Kenya Snakebite Research and Intervention Centre (K-SRIC), said: “This is the first survey of its scale to systematically capture snakebite incidence across a broad cross-section of Kenyan communities.
“The rich snakebite data we have collected will be shared with health officials and policymakers in the hopes of influencing snakebite public health programmes, education and treatment. Ultimately, we want this data to help prevent the thousands of injuries and deaths that come from snakebite envenoming.”
The study’s approach, embedding snakebite surveillance into existing NTD control campaigns, delivered data at a fraction of the time and cost required for standalone snakebite surveys, offering an effective template for future public health efforts. Strengthening this community-based surveillance could be critical to detecting and managing snakebite burden more effectively, particularly in underserved regions where incidence appears highest.
Professor Ymkje Stienstra, Director of the ASA and a researcher in LSTM’s Centre for Snakebite Research and Interventions, said: “Our findings have important implications for how we plan and deliver interventions. Distributing antivenom, for example, is far more challenging when incidence differs so widely between regions.
“The same applies to prevention efforts, since educational messages need to be tailored to how common snakebite is in the communities you are targeting. These variations will influence not only which areas to prioritise but also how we deliver the programmes designed to protect people.”
With this first nationwide evidence base for snakebite incidence in Kenya, stakeholders now have a clearer foundation for planning prevention, treatment and health-system response, bringing the country a step closer to tackling this neglected crisis.