There are currently no Food and Drug Administration-approved vaccines for the prevention of MVD. Many candidate vaccines have been developed and tested in various animal models. Of those, the most promising ones are DNA vaccines or based on Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus replicons, vesicular stomatitis Indiana virus (VSIV) or filovirus-like particles (VLPs) as all of these candidates could protect nonhuman primates from marburgvirus-induced disease. DNA vaccines have entered clinical trials. Marburgviruses are highly infectious, but not very contagious. Importantly, and contrary to popular belief, marburgviruses do not get transmitted by aerosol during natural MVD outbreaks. Due to the absence of an approved vaccine, prevention of MVD therefore relies predominantly on behavior modification, proper personal protective equipment, and sterilization/disinfection.

Marburgviruses are World Health Organization Risk Group 4 Pathogens, requiring Biosafety Level 4-equivalent containment, laboratory researchers have to be properly trained in BSL-4 practices and wear proper personal protective equipment.

Immunosuppressive therapy has been effective in halting the disease for laboratory animals.

Prophylaxis by vaccination, as well as preventive measures like protective clothing, tick control, and mosquito control are advised. The vaccine for KFDV consists of formalin-inactivated KFDV. The vaccine has a 62.4% effectiveness rate for individuals who receive two doses. For individuals who receive an additional dose, the effectiveness increases to 82.9%. Specific treatments are not available.

Although the house mouse ("Mus musculus") is the primary reservoir host for LCMV, it is also often found in the wood mouse ("Apodemus sylvaticus") and the yellow-necked mouse ("Apodemus flavicollis"). Hamster populations can act as reservoir hosts. Other rodents including guinea pigs, rats and chinchillas can be infected but do not appear to maintain the virus. LCMV has been shown to cause illness in New World primates such as macaques, marmosets and tamarins. Infections have also been reported in rabbits, dogs and pigs. After experimental inoculation, the incubation period in adult mice is 5 to 6 days. Congenitally or neonatally infected mice and hamsters do not become symptomatic for several months or longer.

A vaccine is available in the UK and Europe, however in laboratory tests it is not possible to distinguish between antibodies produced as a result of vaccination and those produced in response to infection with the virus. Management also plays an important part in the prevention of EVA.

A vaccine has been conditionally approved for use in animals in the US. It has been shown that knockout of the NSs and NSm nonstructural proteins of this virus produces an effective vaccine in sheep as well.

, no approved vaccines are available. A phase-II vaccine trial used a live, attenuated virus, to develop viral resistance in 98% of those tested after 28 days and 85% still showed resistance after one year. However, 8% of people reported transient joint pain, and attenuation was found to be due to only two mutations in the E2 glycoprotein. Alternative vaccine strategies have been developed, and show efficacy in mouse models. In August 2014 researchers at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in the USA were testing an experimental vaccine which uses virus-like particles (VLPs) instead of attenuated virus. All the 25 people participated in this phase 1 trial developed strong immune responses. As of 2015, a phase 2 trial was planned, using 400 adults aged 18 to 60 and to take place at 6 locations in the Caribbean. Even with a vaccine, mosquito population control and bite prevention will be necessary to control chikungunya disease.

Infection with Japanese encephalitis confers lifelong immunity. There are currently three vaccines available: SA14-14-2, IC51 (marketed in Australia and New Zealand as JESPECT and elsewhere as IXIARO) and ChimeriVax-JE (marketed as IMOJEV). All current vaccines are based on the genotype III virus.

A formalin-inactivated mouse-brain derived vaccine was first produced in Japan in the 1930s and was validated for use in Taiwan in the 1960s and in Thailand in the 1980s. The widespread use of vaccine and urbanization has led to control of the disease in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore. The high cost of this vaccine, which is grown in live mice, means that poorer countries have not been able to afford to give it as part of a routine immunization program.

The most common adverse effects are redness and pain at the injection site. Uncommonly, an urticarial reaction can develop about four days after injection. Vaccines produced from mouse brain have a risk of autoimmune neurological complications of around 1 per million vaccinations. However where the vaccine is not produced in mouse brains but in vitro using cell culture there is little adverse effects compared to placebo, the main side effects are headache and myalgia.

The neutralizing antibody persists in the circulation for at least two to three years, and perhaps longer. The total duration of protection is unknown, but because there is no firm evidence for protection beyond three years, boosters are recommended every three years for people who remain at risk. Furthermore, there is also no data available regarding the interchangeability of other JE vaccines and IXIARO.

In September 2012 the Indian firm Biological E. Limited has launched an inactivated cell culture derived vaccine based on SA 14-14-2 strain which was developed in a technology transfer agreement with Intercell and is a thiomersal-free vaccine.

The virus’s transmission cycle in the wild is similar to the continuous sylvatic cycle of yellow fever and is believed to involve wild primates (monkeys) as the reservoir and the tree-canopy-dwelling "Haemagogus" species mosquito as the vector. Human infections are strongly associated with exposure to humid tropical forest environments. Chikungunya virus is closely related, producing a nearly indistinguishable, highly debilitating arthralgic disease. On February 19, 2011, a Portuguese-language news source reported on a recent survey which revealed Mayaro virus activity in Manaus, Amazonas State, Brazil. The survey studied blood samples from 600 residents of Manaus who had experienced a high fever; Mayaro virus was identified in 33 cases. Four of the cases experienced mild hemorrhagic (bleeding) symptoms, which had not previously been described in Mayaro virus disease. The report stated that this outbreak is the first detected in a metropolitan setting, and expressed concern that the disease might be adapting to urban species of mosquito vectors, which would make it a risk for spreading within the country. A study published in 1991 demonstrated that a colonized strain of Brazilian "Aedes albopictus" was capable of acquiring MAYV from infected hamsters and subsequently transmitting it and a study published in October 2011 demonstrated that "Aedes aegypti" can transmit MAYV, supporting the possibility of wider transmission of Mayaro virus disease in urban settings.

The mainstay of eradication is the identification and removal of persistently infected animals. Re-infection is then prevented by vaccination and high levels of biosecurity, supported by continuing surveillance. PIs act as viral reservoirs and are the principal source of viral infection but transiently infected animals and contaminated fomites also play a significant role in transmission.

Leading the way in BVD eradication, almost 20 years ago, were the Scandinavian countries. Despite different conditions at the start of the projects in terms of legal support, and regardless of initial prevalence of herds with PI animals, it took all countries approximately 10 years to reach their final stages.

Once proven that BVD eradication could be achieved in a cost efficient way, a number of regional programmes followed in Europe, some of which have developed into national schemes.

Vaccination is an essential part of both control and eradication. While BVD virus is still circulating within the national herd, breeding cattle are at risk of producing PI neonates and the economic consequences of BVD are still relevant. Once eradication has been achieved, unvaccinated animals will represent a naïve and susceptible herd. Infection from imported animals or contaminated fomites brought into the farm, or via transiently infected in-contacts will have devastating consequences.

Despite decades of research, no vaccines currently exist.

Recombinant technology has however been used to target the formation of vaccines for HPIV-1, -2 and -3 and has taken the form of several live-attenuated intranasal vaccines. Two vaccines in particular were found to be immunogenic and well tolerated against HPIV-3 in phase I trials. HPIV-1 and -2 vaccine candidates remain less advanced.

Vaccine techniques which have been used against HPIVs are not limited to intranasal forms, but also viruses attenuated by cold passage, host range attenuation, chimeric construct vaccines and also introducing mutations with the help of reverse genetics to achieve attenuation.

Maternal antibodies may offer some degree of protection against HPIVs during the early stages of life via the colostrum in breast milk.

The mortality rate of the virus largely depends on the immune status of the infected dogs. Puppies experience the highest mortality rate, where complications such as pneumonia and encephalitis are more common. In older dogs that develop distemper encephalomyelitis, vestibular disease may present. Around 15% of canine inflammatory central nervous system diseases are a result of CDV.

Parainfluenza viruses last only a few hours in the environment and are inactivated by soap and water. Furthermore, the virus can also be easily destroyed using common hygiene techniques and detergents, disinfectants and antiseptics.

Environmental factors which are important for HPIV survival are pH, humidity, temperature and the medium the virus in found within. The optimal pH is around the physiologic pH values (7.4 to 8.0), whilst at high temperatures (above 37 °C) and low humidity, infectivity reduces.

The majority of transmission has been linked to close contact, especially in nosocomial infections. Chronic care facilities and doctors' surgeries are also known to be transmission 'hotspots' with transmission occurring via aerosols, large droplets and also fomites (contaminated surfaces).

The exact infectious dose remains unknown.

Treatment is mostly supportive. Ribavirin is effective "in vitro" and has been used by mouth during outbreaks, but there is no trial evidence to support its use.

The United States armed forces maintain special stocks of ribavirin to protect personnel deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq from CCHF.

Currently, no specific treatment for chikungunya is available. Supportive care is recommended, and symptomatic treatment of fever and joint swelling includes the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs such as naproxen, non-aspirin analgesics such as paracetamol (acetaminophen) and fluids. Aspirin is not recommended due to the increased risk of bleeding. Despite anti-inflammatory effects, corticosteroids are not recommended during the acute phase of disease, as they may cause immunosuppression and worsen infection.

Passive immunotherapy has potential benefit in treatment of chikungunya. Studies in animals using passive immunotherapy have been effective, and clinical studies using passive immunotherapy in those particularly vulnerable to severe infection are currently in progress. Passive immunotherapy involves administration of anti-CHIKV hyperimmune human intravenous antibodies (immunoglobulins) to those exposed to a high risk of chikungunya infection. No antiviral treatment for chikungunya virus is currently available, though testing has shown several medications to be effective "in vitro".

A number of vaccines against canine distemper exist for dogs (ATCvet code: and combinations) and domestic ferrets (), which in many jurisdictions are mandatory for pets. Infected animals should be quarantined from other dogs for several months owing to the length of time the animal may shed the virus. The virus is destroyed in the environment by routine cleaning with disinfectants, detergents, or drying. It does not survive in the environment for more than a few hours at room temperature (20–25 °C), but can survive for a few weeks in shady environments at temperatures slightly above freezing. It, along with other labile viruses, can also persist longer in serum and tissue debris.

Despite extensive vaccination in many regions, it remains a major disease of dogs.

To prevent canine distemper, puppies should begin vaccination at six to eight weeks of age and then continue getting the “booster shot” every two to four weeks until they are 16 weeks of age. Without the full series of shots, the vaccination will not provide protection against the virus. Since puppies are typically sold at the age of eight to ten weeks, they typically receive the first shot while still with their breeder, but the new owner often does not finish the series. These dogs are not protected against the virus and so are susceptible to canine distemper infection, continuing the downward spiral that leads to outbreaks throughout the country.

Recent research has suggested that macrophage migration inhibitory factor plays a critical role in determining the clinical severity of alphavirus-induced musculoskeletal disease and may provide a target for development of antiviral pharmaceuticals for Mayaro virus and other arthrogenic alphaviruses, such as Ross River virus, chikungunya, Sindbis virus, and O'nyong'nyong virus.

All persons suspected of Lassa fever infection should be admitted to isolation facilities and their body fluids and excreta properly disposed of.

Early and aggressive treatment using ribavirin was pioneered by Joe McCormick in 1979. After extensive testing, early administration was determined to be critical to success. Additionally, ribavirin is almost twice as effective when given intravenously as when taken by mouth. Ribavirin is a prodrug which appears to interfere with viral replication by inhibiting RNA-dependent nucleic acid synthesis, although the precise mechanism of action is disputed. The drug is relatively inexpensive, but the cost of the drug is still very high for many of those in West African states. Fluid replacement, blood transfusion, and fighting hypotension are usually required. Intravenous interferon therapy has also been used.

When Lassa fever infects pregnant women late in their third trimester, induction of delivery is necessary for the mother to have a good chance of survival. This is because the virus has an affinity for the placenta and other highly vascular tissues. The fetus has only a one in ten chance of survival no matter what course of action is taken; hence, the focus is always on saving the life of the mother. Following delivery, women should receive the same treatment as other Lassa fever patients.

Work on a vaccine is continuing, with multiple approaches showing positive results in animal trials.

Marburg virus is a hemorrhagic fever virus of the "Filoviridae" family of viruses and a member of the species "Marburg marburgvirus", genus "Marburgvirus". Marburg virus (MARV) causes Marburg virus disease in humans and nonhuman primates, a form of viral hemorrhagic fever. Considered to be extremely dangerous, the WHO rates it as a Risk Group 4 Pathogen (requiring biosafety level 4-equivalent containment). In the United States, the NIH/National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases ranks it as a Category A Priority Pathogen and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lists it as a Category A Bioterrorism Agent. It is also listed as a biological agent for export control by the Australia Group.

The virus can be transmitted by exposure to one species of fruit bats or it can be transmitted between people via body fluids through unprotected copulation and broken skin. The disease can cause bleeding (haemorrhage), fever and other symptoms much like Ebola. Funeral rituals are a particular risk. Actual treatment of the virus after infection is not possible but early, professional treatment of symptoms like dehydration considerably increase survival chances.

In 2009, expanded clinical trials of an Ebola and Marburg vaccine began in Kampala, Uganda.

There is no specific treatment for Japanese encephalitis and treatment is supportive, with assistance given for feeding, breathing or seizure control as required. Raised intracranial pressure may be managed with mannitol. There is no transmission from person to person and therefore patients do not need to be isolated.

A breakthrough in the field of Japanese encephalitis therapeutics is the identification of macrophage receptor involvement in the disease severity. A recent report of an Indian group demonstrates the involvement of monocyte and macrophage receptor CLEC5A in severe inflammatory response in Japanese Encephalitis infection of the brain. This transcriptomic study provides a hypothesis of neuroinflammation and a new lead in development of appropriate therapeutic against Japanese encephalitis.

Control of the "Mastomys" rodent population is impractical, so measures focus on keeping rodents out of homes and food supplies, encouraging effective personal hygiene, storing grain and other foodstuffs in rodent-proof containers, and disposing of garbage far from the home to help sustain clean households . Gloves, masks, laboratory coats, and goggles are advised while in contact with an infected person, to avoid contact with blood and body fluids. These issues in many countries are monitored by a department of public health. In less developed countries, these types of organizations may not have the necessary means to effectively control outbreaks.

Researchers at the USAMRIID facility, where military biologists study infectious diseases, have a promising vaccine candidate. They have developed a replication-competent vaccine against Lassa virus based on recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus vectors expressing the Lassa virus glycoprotein. After a single intramuscular injection, test primates have survived lethal challenge, while showing no clinical symptoms.

Modern vaccination programmes aim not only to provide a high level of protection from clinical disease for the dam, but, crucially, to protect against viraemia and prevent the production of PIs. While the immune mechanisms involved are the same, the level of immune protection required for foetal protection is much higher than for prevention of clinical disease.

While challenge studies indicate that killed, as well as live, vaccines prevent foetal infection under experimental conditions, the efficacy of vaccines under field conditions has been questioned. The birth of PI calves into vaccinated herds suggests that killed vaccines do not stand up to the challenge presented by the viral load excreted by a PI in the field.

Since the 1970s, several vaccine trials around the world against CCHF have been terminated due to high toxicity.

, the only available and probably somewhat efficacious CCHF vaccine has been an inactivated antigen preparation then used in Bulgaria. No publication in the scientific literature related to this vaccine exists, which a Turkish virologist called suspicious both because antiquated technology and mouse brain were used to manufacture it.

More vaccines are under development, but the sporadic nature of the disease, even in endemic countries, suggests that large trials of vaccine efficacy will be difficult to perform. Finding volunteers may prove challenging, given growing anti-vaccination sentiment, resistance of populations to vaccination against contagious diseases. The number of people to be vaccinated, and the length of time they would have to be followed to confirm protection would have to be carefully defined. Alternatively, many scientists appear to believe that treatment of CCHF with ribavirin is more practical than prevention, but some recently conducted clinical trials appear to counter assumptions of drug efficacy.

In 2011, a Turkish research team led by Erciyes University successfully developed the first non-toxic preventive vaccine, which passed clinical trials. As of 2012, the vaccine was pending approval by the US FDA.

Since the Ebola epidemic, the WHO jumpstarted a "Blueprint for Research and Development preparedness" on emerging pathogens with epidemic potential, against which there are no medical treatments. CCHF was the top priority on the initial list from December 2015, and is second as of January 2017.

Prevention strategies include reducing the breeding of midges through source reduction (removal and modification of breeding sites) and reducing contact between midges and people. This can be accomplished by reducing the number of natural and artificial water-filled habitats and encourage the midge larvae to grow.

Oropouche fever is present in epidemics so the chances of one contracting it after being exposed to areas of midgets or mosquitoes is rare.