Category Archives: Elimination

Eradication, Elimination: What is Feasible – WHO Global Malaria Program

Over the past few months several key malaria partners have been discussing the potentials for malaria elimination and mentioning target dates. Based on these discussions and publications Dr Pedro Alonso, Director, Global Malaria Programme or the World Health Organization has provided a reminder of WHO’s position and strategy. We share his comments for our readers below.

24 October 2015

Dear colleagues and partners,

Global Malaria Strategy Cover Page blue borderIn recent weeks, you may have seen press articles stating that the United Nations and partners are calling on the world to eradicate malaria by the year 2040.

The World Health Organization (WHO) shares the vision of a malaria-free world and – to that end – we welcome the commitment of all of our partners. However, I would like to clarify the strategy, targets and timeline that our organization has endorsed at this point in time.

WHO’s work on malaria is guided, as you will recall, by the Global Technical Strategy for Malaria Elimination 2016-2030, adopted in May 2015 by the World Health Assembly. The strategy calls for accelerated action toward malaria elimination in countries and regions but does not set a time frame for global eradication.

This WHO strategy is complemented by the Roll Back Malaria advocacy plan, Action and Investment to Defeat Malaria 2016-2030.  Both documents were the result of an extensive consultative process involving the participation of more than 400 malaria experts from 70 countries. They set ambitious but achievable global targets, including:

  • Reducing malaria case incidence by at least 90% by 2030
  • Reducing malaria mortality rates by at least 90% by 2030
  • Eliminating malaria in at least 35 countries by 2030
  • Preventing a resurgence of malaria in all countries that are malaria-free

The timeline of 2016-2030 is aligned with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the new global development framework adopted by all UN Member States in September.

New WHO estimates

Recent news articles have reported a wide range of estimates on case incidence, mortality and global investment for malaria, which may have caused confusion. Please find below two documents with the latest WHO-approved estimates:

  1. A fact sheet with key global and regional estimates from the WHO-UNICEF report “Achieving the malaria MDG target,” published on 17 Sept. 2015. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs094/en/ (see some excerpts below)
  1. An updated WHO general fact sheet on malaria.
    http://www.who.int/malaria/media/malaria-mdg-target/en/

Best regards,

Dr Pedro Alonso
Director, Global Malaria Programme
World Health Organization

Elimination

Malaria elimination is defined as interrupting local mosquito-borne malaria transmission in a defined geographical area, typically countries; i.e. zero incidence of locally contracted cases. Malaria eradication is defined as the permanent reduction to zero of the worldwide incidence of malaria infection caused by a specific agent; i.e. applies to a particular malaria parasite species.

On the basis of reported cases for 2013, 55 countries are on track to reduce their malaria case incidence rates by 75%, in line with World Health Assembly targets for 2015. Large-scale use of WHO-recommended strategies, currently available tools, strong national commitments, and coordinated efforts with partners, will enable more countries – particularly those where malaria transmission is low and unstable – to reduce their disease burden and progress towards elimination.

In recent years, 4 countries have been certified by the WHO Director-General as having eliminated malaria: United Arab Emirates (2007), Morocco (2010), Turkmenistan (2010), and Armenia (2011). In 2014, 13 countries reported 0 cases of malaria within their own borders. Another 6 countries reported fewer than 10 cases of malaria.

The WHO Global Technical Strategy for Malaria 2016-2030 sets ambitious but achievable global targets, including:

  • Reducing malaria case incidence by at least 90% by 2030.
  • Reducing malaria mortality rates by at least 90% by 2030.
  • Eliminating malaria in at least 35 countries by 2030.
  • Preventing a resurgence of malaria in all countries that are malaria-free.

“Nobel” drug discoveries rewarded, but delivery of malaria and filarial medicines to the community also matters

Herbs, soil and hard scientific work have yielded Nobel Prizes in Medicine/Physiology for three scientists whose results now save millions of lives from death and disability due to malaria, onchocerciasis (river blindness) and filariasis (elephantiasis), according to the New York Times. Two of the winners, “Dr. Campbell and Dr. Omura, developed Avermectin, the parent of Ivermectin, a medicine that has nearly eradicated river blindness and radically reduced the incidence of filariasis.” Dr Tu Youyou, “inspired by Chinese traditional medicine in discovering Artemisinin, a drug that is now part of standard anti-malarial regimens and that has reduced death rates from the disease.”

Community Case Management of Malaria in Rwanda using Rapid Diagnostic Tests and ACTs

Community Case Management of Malaria in Rwanda using Rapid Diagnostic Tests and ACTs

The development of these chemicals into human medicines was a long time coming, and in the case of artemisinin, over 2000 years. The Guardian quotes the Deputy Director of the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine as saying that, “Artemisinin was discovered when fatalities from malaria were rocketing and the world was terrified we’d be looking at a post-chloroquine era. It has been a real game-changer.”

In fact artemisinin in combination with other medicines or artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) rescued many lives in the face of parasite resistance to earlier first line drugs like chloroquine and sulfadoxine-pyrimentamine (though artemisinin resistance is now growing). ACTs are also made freely available to populations in malaria endemic countries through such programs as the Global Fund to fight against AIDS, TB and Malaria (GFATM), the US President’s Malaria Initiative, the World Bank and others.

Avermectin began its medical role as a veterinary drug that killed parasites in livestock. Eventually research by Merck based on the similarities between animal and human filarial worms led to the testing and development of ivermectin to control onchocerciasis through annual doses that killed microfilariae.

Not only are both ACTs and ivermectin on WHO’s essential medicines list, but they form the basis of global efforts to eliminate disease. Once Merck determined that ivermectin was safe and effective in humans, it began donations of the drug to what has become the African Program for Onchocerciasis Control (APOC) and its counterpart that is working to eliminate the disease in the Americas. APOC and its national counterparts now reache people in over 200,000 endemic villages in 18 African countries with annual doses.

Community Directed Distribution of Ivermectin in Cameroon

Community Directed Distribution of Ivermectin in Cameroon

While we celebrate the recognition that the drugs and their discoverers are receiving, we should not lose sight of the fact that without good delivery mechanisms these life saving medicines would not reach the poor, neglected, often remote populations who need them.

Beginning in 1995, APOC and the Tropical Disease Research Program of WHO and partners pioneered what has now become known as Community Directed Interventions (CDI) where the thousands of communities “beyond the end of the road” and their selected volunteers organize the annual ivermectin distributions. This community directed approach works for community case management of malaria, too.

Hopefully in the future, groups like APOC will receive Nobel Prize recognition for ensuring that those in need actually receive the medicines they require. In the meantime we encourage more countries to adopt the CDI approach to reduce malaria deaths and work toward the elimination of malaria, onchocerciasis and filariasis.

Initial Evidence Of A Reduction In Malaria Incidence Following Indoor Residual Spraying With Actellic 300 Cs In A Setting With Pyrethroid Resistance: Mutasa District, Zimbabwe

Mufaro Kanyangarara and her PhD thesis adviser, Luke Mullany of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Department of International Health, have been looking into the challenges of controlling and eventually eliminating malaria in a multi-country context in southern Africa. We are sharing abstracts from her pioneering work including the following which explores indoor residual spraying in Zimbabwe in a District near the Mozambique border.

sprayed and unsprayed wardsIn order to reduce the vector population and interrupt disease transmission, IRS with appropriate insecticides is essential. In response to local vector resistance, the Zimbabwe NMCP with support from PMI began a large-scale IRS campaign with organophosphates in four high transmission districts in Manicaland province – Chimanimani, Mutare, Mutasa and Nyanga. Using HMIS data, the present study reports on the effect of switching from pyretheroids to OP on malaria morbidity in one of the four high transmission districts selected. In the subsequent high transmission season following the switch from pyretheroids to organophosphates, there was evidence of a 43% decline in malaria incidence reported by health facilities from wards in Mutasa District treated with organophosphates, after accounting for possible confounding by environmental variables. Previous research shows that switching to organophospates effectively reduced biting rates and vector densities in areas with pyretheroid resistant strains in Ghana, Benin and Tanzania. Although previous research focused on using entomological data to show the reduction in the vector population following application of Actellic, organophosphates, this study adds to the literature by showing a decline in malaria transmission using health facility surveillance data.

In the present study, there were variations in rainfall and temperature over the study period, and these changes were associated with changes in malaria incidence. The study results also indicated malaria transmission in Mutasa District was driven by rainfall, proximity to second order streams, elevation and temperature. These results concur with previous research, which found that elevation, temperature, and rainfall are positively associated with malaria incidence. After adjustment for climatic variables and seasonality, malaria incidence rates a downward trend following the 2014 IRS campaign and thus supporting the plausible conclusion that switching to organophosphates in this setting contributed to the observed public health benefits. No major political, socio-economic, or health-care changes with the potential to reduce malaria morbidity by almost half occurred in Mutasa District during the study period.

Observed and predicted weekly malaria counts in MutasaTypically data from health facilities only includes data on the number of suspected cases. The HMIS in Zimbabwe is more sophisticated in that it allows reports of confirmed malaria cases. In calculating of incidence rates, the denominator used was the catchment area population size. The reliability of this value has been questioned as this assumes that people will visit the closest health facility/health facility in their catchment area. It is noteworthy to mention that in the present study the main results did not chance after including an offset for catchment area population size. This indicates that in the Zimbabwean context, the reported catchment area population size may be a reliable estimate. The study also underscores the utility of HMIS data in the evaluation of population level interventions. The HMIS has the advantage of providing quality data quickly and easily, with minimal additional investment. Additionally, HMIS reflects the burden of disease on the health system. Results from this study further suggest that passive surveillance data from the HMIS in Zimbabwe was sufficiently sensitive to detect IRS related reduction in malaria morbidity among residents of Mutasa District.

There are several important limitations of this study that should be highlighted. Causal inferences between spraying and improvements in malaria incidence should be made with caution as spraying was not implemented as an intervention in a randomized control trial. However, data from 14 health facilities located in unsprayed wards were included in the analysis to serve as a comparison and help understand any possible changes in malaria morbidity unassociated with the 2014 IRS campaign. Although the univariate model indicated that health facilities in unsprayed wards carried a lower burden of malaria, the multivariable model showed no significant differences between health facilities in sprayed and unsprayed wards prior to the IRS pilot, suggesting that climatic variables included in the model adequately adjusted for differences. However, it should be noted that although the study adjusted for environmental factors, it did not account for other factors like population movement, changes in treatment seeking behaviors, changes in the coverage of ITNs during the study period. The model developed in this analysis assumed that these factors remained constant over the study period. This seems reasonable given that the rural population of Mutasa is relatively stable, with access to health facilities providing malaria diagnosis and treatment. Additionally, although the number of suspected malaria cases was not explicitly model, a descriptive analysis does not indicate changes in diagnostic practice over the study period (data not shown). The HMIS in Zimbabwe has been in place for decades and has previously been used to evaluate the impact of changes in malaria morbidity, construct empirical seasonality maps and describe the spatial and temporal distribution of malaria.

Despite these potential limitations, health surveillance systems provide a feasible and efficient means of collecting longitudinal data on measures of malaria morbidity. The pronounced decline in malaria morbidity observed in this study is evidence supporting the benefit of switching to an insecticide class with a different mode of action in response to pyretheroid resistance. Although the IRS strategy implemented by ZNMCP and PMI was successful, continued entomological monitoring will be necessary. Additionally, with emerging resistance to multiple insecticides, this approach may not be sustainable over time. There is need for the development of novel strategies to manage insecticide resistance.

Are we ready to actively support malaria elimination?

As Michael Gerson of the Washington Post said today, “It is now possible to set goals in a number of areas — malaria elimination, an AIDS-free generation, the end of extreme poverty — and not be dismissed as a crank.” He was lamenting the fact that with the 17 new Sustainable Development Goals there are 169 targets – too much to get a handle on. Thus focus on something specific like malaria elimination is important for endemic countries to consider.

The New York Times reports that, “Now, the United Nations and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation are calling on the world to eradicate the disease by 2040, potentially saving 11 million lives in the next 25 years. They say this goal can be achieved for between $90 billion and $120 billion and would produce economic benefits of $2 trillion.” Even though some experts may question the feasibility of 2040, they are no longer calling Gates a crank.

2000-2015The challenge has been though that our global malaria programming is largely stuck in the era of scale up of control efforts with a focus on getting more long lasting insecticide-treated nets and increased household spraying out in high burden areas. As recent reports from WHO and partners indicate, the malaria morbidity and mortality map is shrinking, but there do remain high burden areas. It is only that now we need to focus equally on the science and management of the tools needed to eliminate the disease.

The challenges lie in issues like weak health systems and increasing resistance of parasites and vectors to existing tools. These problems can be overcome through research if the international community is willing to provide the funding.

Here is where groups like the Malaria Eradication Scientific Alliance (MESA) come in. They are addressing the following:

  • Basic science and enabling technologies
  • Insecticide and drug resistance
  • Characterizing the reservoir and measuring transmission
  • Specific Tools for elimination
  • Combining interventions and modelling
  • Health systems and policy research

Major donors like the US President’s Malaria Initiative, The Global Fund to fight AIDS, TB and Malaria and the World Bank need to join with groups like MESA and the Gates Foundation and get behind this agenda. Countries, when updating their malaria strategic plans for new funding from the Global Fund, need to be encouraged to include malaria elimination efforts. Opportunities are should not be missed on the frontline in southern Africa including Zimbabwe, Zambia, Angola, Mozambique, Botswana, South Africa, Swaziland and Namibia to study and implement new approaches and document the lessons, which could also be picked up in the countries of the Sahel, the Pacific Islands and South America. Malaria will not eliminate itself!

Epidemiology of Resurgent Malaria in Eastern Zimbabwe: Risk Factors, Spatio-Temporal Patterns and Prospects for Regaining Malaria Control

Mufaro Kanyangarara and her PhD thesis adviser, Luke Mullany, of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Department of International Health, have been looking into the challenges of controlling and eventually eliminating malaria in a multi-country context in southern Africa. We are sharing abstracts from her pioneering work. The first seen below provides an overview of the three components of the study.

Incidence 2012Despite recent reductions in malaria morbidity and mortality due to the scale up of malaria interventions, malaria remains a public health problem in sub-Saharan Africa, especially among children under five years of age, pregnant women and people living with HIV/AIDS. A recent resurgence in malaria, in areas where malaria control was previously successful, has brought to the forefront the importance of research to understand the epidemiology of malaria and the effectiveness of malaria control efforts in resurgent settings. Using cross-sectional surveys, routine data from health-facility based surveillance and freely available remotely sensed environmental data, this research examined the distribution of malaria and the impact of vector control in Mutasa, a rural district in Zimbabwe characterized by resurgent malaria.

Firstly, individual- and household level factors independently associated with individual malaria risk were identified using multilevel logistic regression models based on data from cross-sectional surveys conducted between October 2012 and September 2014. Secondly, geostatistical methods and remotely sensed environmental data were used to model the spatial and seasonal distribution of household malaria risk; then develop seasonal malaria risk maps with corresponding maps of the prediction uncertainty. Lastly, an evaluation of the effect of introducing an organophosphate for indoor residual spraying was conducted using routine health facility data covering 24 months before and 6 months after the campaign.

The results of multilevel model suggested that malaria risk was significantly higher among individuals who were younger than 25 years, did not sleep under a bed net, and lived close to the Zimbabwe-Mozambique border. The spatial risk maps depicted relatively increased risk of finding a positive household in low-lying areas along the Mozambique border during the rainy season. Lastly, the introduction of organophosphates to this pyretheroid resistant area resulted in a significant reduction in malaria incidence following spraying. These findings elucidate the heterogeneous distribution of malaria, identify risk factors driving malaria transmission and assess the quantitative impact of switching insecticide classes on health outcomes. Collectively, the findings provide evidence to guide country-specific decision making for regaining malaria control and underscore the need for strong between-country initiatives to curb malaria in Mutasa District and elsewhere.

Malaria Status in the 2014-15 Rwanda Demographic and Health Survey

Rwanda is experiencing low and very low levels of malaria test positivity rates, thought there are a few districts near the borders with Uganda, Tanzania and Burundi that have relatively higher transmission. Overall the country is strategizing how to move toward the pre-elimination phase on the pathway to malaria elimination. This is defined as a test positivity rate of less than 5% during the high transmission season.

DHS 2010 Malaria Prevalence in Children 6-59 MonthsIt is important to distinguish between test positivity rate and prevalence rate. The most recent survey report that gives prevalence is the DHS 2010 with a rate of 1.4% in children below 5 years of age and 0.7% among women of reproductive age. During 2010 the health management information system shows that among those tested (microscopy or RDT) for malaria, 24% were positive. The population for test positivity reports is a much smaller group that is already suspected of having malaria. That said, 24% or the 2013 rate of 29% is still far from the 5% cut-off for pre-elimination status.

Rwanda still maintains a policy of universal coverage with insecticide treated nets (ITNs). Rwanda also has a policy that every pregnant woman should receive an ITN during her first antenatal care visit. Ideally in order to reach pre-elimination status, a country needs to sustain high coverage of malaria prevention and treatment interventions at an 80% level for several years.

The newly released preliminary results of the 2014-15 DHS provide an opportunity to examine achievements. The 2014-15 DHS found that 81% of households had at least one ITN, while 43% had achieved the universal coverage target of one ITN per two household members. These numbers remain basically unchanged from the 2013 Malaria Information Survey (83% and 43%), while the 2010 DHS found 82% of households had a net, but did not report on the indicator of one net per two people. In short, it appears that coverage levels have been maintained at a certain level.

DSCN7129a pregnant women get ITNs when register for ANC RwandaDHS 2014-15 shows that 99% of pregnant women in Rwanda received antenatal care from a skilled provider. That means that basically all pregnant women should have received an ITN. 73% of pregnant women had slept under an ITN the night before they were surveyed, while 88% of all women of reproductive age slept under a net. 68% of children below the age of five years slept under an ITN the night before their household was surveyed, while 80% who lived in households that owned an ITN did so.

Indoor Residual Spraying (IRS) is focused on certain high transmission/burden districts. The preliminary 2014-15 DHS does not report on this and the 2013 MIS reports broadly by region, hence one sees coverage reports for IRS in the east (22%) and south (16%), where there is greater malaria burden, but this cannot be linked to specific districts that may have been targeted.

Rwanda also has a policy that all suspected malaria cases should be tested, whether with microscopy in health centers or rapid diagnostic tests by village health workers. It is only those persons testing positive for malaria who are supposed to be given malaria medicine.

DHS shows that 1439 children below five years of age (or 19% of the total) had fever in the two weeks prior to the survey. Of these 36% reported having a blood test performed, and 11% of those with fever received the approved artemisinin-based combination (ACT) therapy drug. The report does not indicate the actual testDSCN7282 results of those receiving ACT.

As Rwanda strategized toward reaching malaria pre-elimination status it can consider ways of enhancing ITN use, not only among vulnerable groups like small children and pregnant women, but all members of the household. As prevalence drops, so does acquired immunity, putting adults at greater risk.

The universal coverage target of at least 1 net for every two people in a household must be maintained, especially since it is nearing three years since the last universal coverage distribution campaign. Either another campaign will be needed or efforts to strengthen delivery of nets to families through routine health services.

In addition prompt and appropriate treatment based on diagnostics can be strengthened. One would have expected more children with fever to have been tested for malaria that the DHS reports.

Internal and external support is needed. Rwanda has been on the verge of reaching malaria pre-elimination status several times in the past decade. Even though malaria is no longer the top cause of death, we should not reduce our efforts to create a malaria-free Rwanda.

Congenital malaria: A neglected global health concern

Reena Sethi, DrPH Candidate in International Health, The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Senior Monitoring and Evaluation Adviser, Jhpiego shares with us the challenges of malaria acquired from the pregnant mother by their newborn child.

DSCN6805 mother of newborn in Malawi given LLINStrategies and recommendations to prevent the transmission of HIV from a mother to her child are known but less information is available on the epidemiology and management of malaria transmitted from pregnant women to their newborns. As presented in a review of congenital infections, one of the lesser known effects of malaria in pregnancy is the maternal-fetal transmission of infected erythrocytes that can result in poor perinatal outcomes. While clinical malaria in newborns is rare, most likely due to the transplacental transfer of maternal antibodies and the inhibitory effect of fetal hemoglobin on the development of malaria parasites, it is unclear what the true incidence of this condition is in Africa and Asia.

Recently published studies in Burkina Faso estimated the incidence of congenital malaria to be 2.1% and the prevalence of mother-to-child transmission of asymptomatic malaria to be 18.5% in one health center in Ouagadougou; in one hospital in Papua, Indonesia, congenital malaria was said to occur in 8 out of 1000 live births from 2005 to 2010; and in a study in one hospital in Madhya Pradesh, India, the incidence of congenital malaria was 29 out of 1000 live births. In a study involving six hospitals in Nigeria, the overall incidence of congenital malaria was found to be 5.1%. Transmission has been associated with both Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax. The uncertainty and variation in estimates are likely related to the source of the tested blood (umbilical cord blood or infant peripheral blood), presentation of symptoms that are similar to neonatal sepsis, as well as the lack of capacity to conduct high quality diagnostic tests.

Since congenital malaria results from the transmission of parasites from the mother to the baby (presumably through placental transmission), prevention of malaria through the use of IPTp when appropriate reduces maternal parasitemia, most likely resulting in a lower rate of transmission of malaria to the newborn. In a study in Côte d’Ivoire, factors that protected mothers from placental malaria parasitaemia were the use of IPTp (SP) or ITNs during pregnancy and multigravidity. A study in Ibadan, Nigeria found that IPT-SP was effective in preventing maternal and placental malaria as well as improving pregnancy outcomes among parturient women. Researchers in Southern Ghana reported that placental malaria decreased after the implementation of IPTp.

However, in settings where IPTp is ineffective, the effect of alternative strategies, such as intermittent screening and testing in pregnancy (ISTp) on placental malaria should be examined. Little evidence is currently available on the efficacy of ISTp on maternal and newborn outcomes.

Further research also needs to be conducted in diverse settings to develop a standardized definition for congenital malaria and to understand the short and long-term consequences of this condition in order to establish guidelines for diagnosis and treatment. In pre-elimination contexts, where acquired malaria immunity may be reduced, further evidence is needed on the feasibility of screening all febrile babies and following newborns born to women with malaria during pregnancy and of other possible strategies to improve infant outcomes.

Moving toward Malaria Elimination in Botswana

elimination countriesThe just concluded 2015 Global Health Conference in Botswana, hosted by Boitekanelo College at Gaborone International Convention Centre on 11-12 June provided us a good opportunity to examine how Botswana is moving toward malaria elimination. Botswana is one of the four front line malaria elimination countries in the Southern African Development Community and offers lessons for other countries in the region. Combined with the 4 neighboring countries to the north, they are known collectively as the “Elimination Eight”.

The malaria elimination countries are characterised by low leves of transmission in focal areas of the country, often in seasonal or epidemic form. The pathway to malaria elimination requires that a country or defined areas in a country reach a slide positivity rates during peak malaria season of < 5%.

pathwayChihanga Simon et al. provide us a good outline of 60+ years of Botswana’s movements along the pathway beginning with indoor residual spraying (IRS) in the 1950s. Since then the country has expanded vector control to strengthened case management and surveillance. Particular recent milestones include –

  • 2009: Malaria elimination policy required all cases to be tested before treatment malaria elimination target set for 2015
  • 2010: Malaria Strategic Plan 2010–15 using recommendations from programme review of 2009; free LLINs
  • 2012: Case-based surveillance introduced

The national malaria elimination strategy includes the following:Map

  • Focus distribution LLIN & IRS in all transmission foci/high risk districts
  • Detect all malaria infections through appropriate diagnostic methods and provide effective treatment
  • Develop a robust information system for tracking of progress and decision making
  • Build capacity at all levels for malaria elimination

Botswana like other malaria endemic countries works with the Roll Back Malaria Partnership to compile an annual road map that identifies progress made and areas for improvement. The 2015 Road Map shows that –

  • 116,229 LLINs distributed during campaigns in order to maintain universal coverage in the 6 high risk districts
  • 200,721 IRS Operational Target structures sprayed
  • 2,183,238 RDTs distributed and 9,876 microscopes distributed
  • While M&E, Behavior Change, and Program Management Capacity activities are underway

Score cardFinally the African Leaders Malaria Alliance (ALMA) provides quarterly scorecards on each member. Botswana is making a major financial commitment to its malaria elimination commodity and policy needs. There is still need to sustain high levels of IRS coverage in designated areas.

Monitoring and evaluation is crucial to malaria elimination. Botswana has a detailed M&E plan that includes a geo-referenced surveillance system, GIS and malaria database training for 60 health care workers, traininf for at least 80% of health workers on Case Based Surveillance in 29 districts, and regular data analysis and feedback.

M&E activities also involve supervision visits for mapping of cases, foci and interventions, bi-annual malaria case management audits, enhanced diagnostics through PCR and LAMP as well as Knowledge, Attitudes, Behaviour, and Practice surveys.

Malaria elimination activities are not simple. Just because cases drop, our job is easier. Botswana, like its neighbors in the ‘Elimination Eight’ is putting in place the interventions and resources needed to see malaria really come to an end in the country. Keep up the good work!

Huambo: Thinking ahead toward investing in malaria elimination

wmd2015logoEight members of the Southern African Development Community are strategizing toward the pre-elimination phase of malaria.  The four frontline states are Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland and Botswana.  The second tier includes Angola, Zambia, Zimbabwe and Mozambique.

Huambo circled Pf_mean_2010_AGOMalaria prevalence varies by province in Angola with greater burden in the north (see map on right). Huambo in the central highlands is the second most populous province at 2 million and in some of the 11 municipalities malaria transmission is low.  This has led provincial health authorities to strategize how to invest in pre-elimination efforts where appropriate while maintaining full prevention interventions where needed.

An analysis of routine health information system (HIS) data is a first step. Rapid Diagnostic tests are part of the basic protocol for case management in all health centers. Data for 2014 was summarized by municipality. Test positivity rates for each municipality are shown in the map to the left. These range from a low of 2% in Katchiungo in the east to 54% Bailundo in the north.

Huambo Municipalities Malaria Test PositivityMore detailed geospatial analysis will be needed looking at variations within municipalities by health center catchment area, but a broad picture emerges that three municipalities in the northern part of the province have higher RDT positivity rates, and require sustained interventions like long lasting insecticide-treated nets and intermittent preventive treatment for pregnant women.

Reactive case detection such as being practiced in Swaziland might be considered in the remaining 8 municipalities after some initial pilot testing. Community based surveys using RDTs and more precise tests like polymerase chain reaction (PCR) could also be tried in order to supplement current HIS data and provide better targeting of interventions.

Hopefully government and partners will invest in helping Huambo test these processes. Huambo could then provide a good model for approaching malaria elimination for the rest if the country and the region.

Moving toward Malaria Elimination through Integrated Vector Control

As malaria control efforts are scaled up and sustained, we expect a drop in prevalence to the point where Ministries of Health may no longer devote a whole operational unit – a National Malaria Control Program – to the disease. This does not mean that malaria programming stops, otherwise countries would experience a resurgence.

Pf_mean_2010_NAMWe can learn from countries like Namibia and Rwanda that are on the frontline of malaria elimination efforts. In Namibia, “The National Vector-borne Disease Control Program (NVDCP) at the Namibia Ministry of Health and Social Services effectively controls the spread of malaria with interventions such as spraying dwellings with insecticides, distributing mosquito nets treated with insecticides, using malaria tests that can give accurate results within 15 minutes, and distributing medicines that kill the parasite.”

The NVDCP falls under the Primary Health Care Services Directorate with its five divisions: Epidemiology; Public and Environmental Health Services; Family Planning; Information, Education and Communication (IEC); Disability Prevention and Rehabilitation. Contrary to what one might think, malaria activities are not lost, but are teaming up with international partners like UCSF Global Health Group’s Malaria Elimination Initiative, the Novartis Foundation for Sustainable Development, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, the Clinton Health Access Initiative and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

In Rwanda we now have the Malaria and Other Parasitic Diseases Division (MOPDD) within the Rwanda Biomedical Center within the Ministry of Health. Major donors like the US Presidents Malaria Initiative are supporting the MOPDD to achieve Rwanda’s national strategic plan of reaching the pre-elimination stage by 2018.

PAMCA logo smEven if a country is still highly malaria endemic, it is important to ensure that integrated vector management is taking place so that in the future the country’s malaria efforts will have a strong ‘home base’ to approach elimination. This is why the opportunity presented by upcoming the Second Pan-African Mosquito Control Association is important.  According to the organizers …

The 2nd Pan African Mosquito Control Association (PAMCA) Conference themed, “Emerging mosquito-borne diseases in sub-Saharan Africa” will be held in Dar-es- Salaam, Tanzania, from 6-8th October 2015. The 2nd Annual PAMCA conference will build on the momentum generated following the successful hosting of the 1st PAMCA Annual Conference in Nairobi, Kenya. The main objective is to bring professionals, students, research institutions and other stakeholders working in mosquito control and mosquito-borne diseases research together under common agenda to discuss the challenges of emerging and re-emerging mosquito-borne diseases across the African continent. The conference will seek to illuminate this subject of emerging mosquito-borne diseases and develop progressive resolutions that will serve as guidelines to tackling this challenge going forward. The conference will also offer a platform for participants to exchange knowledge and ideas on mosquito control, forge new collaborations and strengthen existing ones.

We hope that colleagues will submit abstracts soonest focusing on the various conference themes:

  • Emerging mosquito-borne diseases: new Public Health challenges
  • Mosquito resistance to insecticides and population genetics
  • Translating research into practice: Linking interventions to mosquito behavior
  • Multidisciplinary approaches to tackling mosquito-borne disease
  • Mosquito biology & ecology
  • Impact of climate change on mosquito control