Category Archives: Integrated Vector Management

Malaria, Lymphatic Filariasis and Insecticide-treated Nets



Throughout Africa one of the main vectors that carry Lymphatic Filariasis (LF) is the Anopheles mosquito, which also carries the malaria parasite. The Carter Center has been promoting use of insecticide treated nets (ITNs) for many years as part of its LF control efforts, but others may not have gotten the message.

The global community is targeting LF for elimination in 2020. The primary strategy is mass drug administration annually with ivermectin and albendazole. The plan is that up to seven annual rounds of drug distribution in endemic communities where 90% of population coverage is achieved is necessary to stop LF transmission. The Carter Center explains that distribution of long-lasting insecticidal bed nets (LLINs) protects pregnant women and children who cannot take drug treatment.

The LF strategy often builds on and integrates with onchocerciasis control efforts where these diseases overlap. The community directed treatment with ivermectin (CDTI) model pioneered by the African Program for Onchocerciasis Control  (APOC), wherein communities or villages plan together the distribution process including selecting their own community directed distributors (CDDs). This model has also been used to distribute ITNs.

20160818_100110-1A second component of the LF strategy is morbidity management which focuses on enhanced personal hygiene or cleaning of the parts of the body that experience lymphedema. Another aspect uses surgery to address some of the worst effects, hydrocele.  While this component does not ‘control’ LF, it is a necessary effort to reduce suffering and the negative stigma from the disease.

To judge whether transmission has stopped and elimination has been achieved Transmission Assessment Surveys (TAS) are conducted with rapid diagnostic tests on young children after at least 5 years of MDA in a community.  Specifically WHO recommends an implementation unit must have completed five effective rounds of annual MDA defined as achieving rates of drug coverage exceeding 65% in the total population.

For example the Carter Center in Support of the Nigerian Federal Ministry of Health worked in Plateau and Nasarawa States through community health education, delivery of long lasting insecticide-treated nets (LLINs) and 33 million drug treatments for lymphatic filariasis and river blindness between 2000 and 2011. “In 2012, it was confirmed (through TAS) that lymphatic filariasis transmission had stopped. Post-treatment surveillance is currently underway to assure that the parasite is not reintroduced into the area.”

Another component of the assessment process is yet to be fully realized. That is the testing of mosquitoes for the presence of microfilariae. This indirectly implies an important role in preventing human-vector contact as would be achieved through the use of ITNs as well as indoor residual spray (IRS).

Vector control can benefit more than one disease. Integrated vector management is seen as a key tool to prevent reintroduction of LF in areas where anopheles mosquitoes carry the disease and where ITN campaigns are successful.

Ultimately the key to benefiting from the disease control synergies provided by insecticide-treated nets is an understanding what if any effect nets have on transmission. This poses a challenge in terms of separating it from the effect of MDAs as well as the fact that MDAs are time-limited. As MDAs are still underway in many places it is incumbent on program managers to monitor and evaluate the impact of all activities, treatment and vector control, over the next decade to determine the success of eliminating LF and hopefully malaria, too.

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.

World Mosquito Day Is Not Just About Malaria

World Mosquito Day Block the BiteOur colleagues at Roll Back Malaria remind is that 20 August is marked annually as World Mosquito Day since doctor Sir Ronald Ross first identified female Anopheles mosquitoes as the vector that transmits malaria between humans. This year, 2015 is the 118th annual observance.

It may seem obvious to state, but while malaria is carried by mosquitoes, not all types of mosquitoes carry malaria. And more specifically our control measures for combating the anopheles mosquitoes that carry malaria are not specifically aimed at aedes or culex. This has not stopped public health workers in the field, and health worker trainees in the classroom from broadcasting messages to the public implying that the control and destruction of any mosquito will prevent malaria.

In terms of health communication, if we convince people that any mosquito carries malaria, but institute measures like long lasting insecticide-treated nets and indoor residual spraying aimed at anopheles mosquitoes, we may lose some credibility as people will still see other types of mosquitoes flying about. And then when people develop another febrile illness from bites of those other mosquitoes, they may not differentiate illness types, but say our interventions do not work.

Old poster on malaria-mosquito presentionThe conflation of all mosquitoes with malaria is seen clearly in the image at the right from a common malaria poster. The dirty gutters may contain culex larvae; the cans and bottles may contain aedes larvae. Obviously none of these mosquito species is good for human health, so can we achieve clarity in health communication about mosquito-borne disease on World Mosquito Day and thereafter?

We often forget that people in the community are quite observant of their environment; sometimes more so the the public health inspectors who try to teach them about ways of preventing malaria by reducing mosquito breeding. Villagers deal with mosquitoes on a daily basis and can distinguish the coloring and posture of the different species.

Instead of telling people what to do, it would be more helpful for public health workers to engage in dialogue with people to learn what they know about different types of mosquitoes and different forms of febrile illness. Maybe by learning first from the people, health workers can then become better teachers about integrated vector management.

PS – maybe we can also educate the mass media to stop putting pictures of Aedes aegypti on their malaria stories!

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


Indoor Residual Spraying – not a one-trick pony

Jasson Urbach and Donald Roberts claim that the malaria fight is hurt by flimsy anti-DDT research as they opine in Business Day (South Africa) on 9th May 2014. They are particularly exercised by an article on possible DDT effects on bird egg shells. Despite the controversy sparked by the article, there is no evidence that any individual country nor WHO itself is recommending removal of DDT from the arsenal of chemicals used in indoor residual spraying (IRS) to control malaria.



There is something about DDT that raises hackles among proponents and detractors. But malaria vector control planners do have choices. WHO recommends 14 insecticides for indoor residual spraying against malaria vectors as seen below in an list updated on 25 October 2013:

  1. DDT
  2. Malathion
  3. Fenitrothion
  4. Pirimiphos-methyl
  5. Pirimiphos-methyl
  6. Bendiocarb
  7. Propoxur
  8. Alpha-cypermethrin
  9. Bifenthrin
  10. Cyfluthrin
  11. Deltamethrin
  12. Deltamethrin
  13. Etofenprox
  14. Lambda-cyhalothrin

Ironically DDT tops the list.  No chemical is 100% safe, so the caveat with any of these chemicals is that, “WHO recommendations on the use of pesticides in public health are valid ONLY if linked to WHO specifications for their quality control. WHO specifications for public health pesticides are available on the Internet.

Interestingly, a bigger concern should be the potential for mosquitoes to develop resistance to any of the above mentioned insecticides.  This is why it is important to avoid putting all our eggs – soft or hard shelled – in one basket. Ideally insecticides should be rotated often to prevent resistance from developing.

Decisions to embark on IRS and choice of insecticides should be based on national and sub-national environmental and epidemiological characteristics, not emotional attachment to any particular product.

Malaria Control and Earth Day: are they compatible?

Clearly no one wants to argue against efforts to curb a deadly disease. The question is whether the approaches to doing so have any negative consequences that can be easily ameliorated.

dscn7103-sm.jpgVector control gets the most attention. One concern is the plastic bagging in which long-lasting insecticide treated nets are packaged. Rwanda, which has outlawed commercial use of plastic bags for shopping, is taking the LLIN packaging seriously.  The photo shows net packaging that has been removed at a health center and stored for later incineration. Clients take their nets home in paper bags and are encouraged to hang them immediately.

Another net concern is disposal of old, used, damaged nets. LLINs do not have under ‘normal’ conditions the 5-year lifespan originally hoped. Plans for proper disposal are not fully developed in most settings, but the massive distribution of nets to achieve universal coverage from about 2009-12 are about to need replacement. It is possible that some of the net misuse reported in the media is actually repurposing of old nets. More information from communities and local health authorities is needed.

Insecticides for indoor residual spraying usually are the first thought that comes to mind concerning environmental impact of malaria control. While arguments primarily focus on DDT, it is important to note that WHO has approved over a dozen different insecticides for IRS.  The problem is not so much the use of chemicals for actual IRS, but the misuse outside approved spraying programs for farms and fish kills. At present IRS is a highly geographically focused activity in most countries, and control of the activities seems to be working for the large part, but even the process of preparing for and cleaning up after a spraying exercise can results in spills and contamination. Guidelines exist, but are they followed?

dscn3829sm.jpgThen we get to the issue of medical waste from rapid diagnostic tests.  Some health centers sharps and waste boxes for short term disposal and as pictured here in Burkina Faso, have incinerators tor final disposal.  Community health worker use of RDTs is usually accompanied by sharps and disposal boxes that can be returned to health centers.  All of this needs careful monitoring.

One must even think about packaging of artemisinin-based combination therapy medicines which are prepackaged by age group. These packets are small and are sent home with patients and care-givers. The paper may be burned or composted, but there are also plastic blisters in the packet. This may not account for much on an individual family basis, but on the community level it may be substantial.

dscn3738-safety-box-sm.jpgReaders may think of other environmental concerns from their own experiences and share success stories for environmental management accompanying malaria control in their countries.  So, as noted, we will not stop malaria control efforts on Earth Day, but at least we can be more conscious of the materials used, whether they can naturally decompose in the environment and thus make some contribution to a healthier planet.

Modeling Malaria – getting a handle on vectors

Models represent reality but the closer they come to reality, they better they are at helping us plan.  A session at the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene yesterday addressed the modeling process for vector control.

VECNet is developing the capacity to take data from multiple sources to tailor vector populations and behavior to local situations. Such models need to consider vector bionomics/population variables, weather/climate/environment, and effectiveness of deployed vector control strategies.

a-stephensi-map-project-2.jpgModelers encourage us to think beyond existing malaria control strategies and consider a varierty of mosquitoe behaviors beyond direct feeding on humans and immediate resting thereafter. Such understandings can lead us to ask whether new interventions could be directed at other vector bevahiors such as …

  • laying eggs (oviposition)
  • feeding on sugars
  • seeking hosts
  • mating
  • resting generally

In short, we were challenged to look at aspects of vector biology that have been ignored or unknown in the past.

nga_gambiae_ss-sm.pngThe MAP project out of Oxford is also beginning detailed mapping of vectors by region and utlimately my country.  Globally there are 41 dominant vector species, so the work ahead is immense, but some mapping has started with three in a program called Risk Mapper.

The session also included product impact estimation. This should help program planners decide on hypothetical outcomes of investments in different existing interventions and even consider possible outcomes were new interventions developed to address the other aspects of mosquito behavior outlined above – e.g. traps, repellents.

The modeling process requires a lot of data that needs to be updated as control interventions proceed. Such data requires a strong corps of entomologists and health information systems staff that many countries lack.  Hopefully modeling efforts will also include these elements of human resource development.

What do we know about larvicides?

In we read that, “Cuba has announced plans to build biolarvicide factories in Brazil and several African countries in a bid to tackle malaria and dengue fever.” The move is based on apparent successes of efforts such as those in Angola where the Director-general of Labiofam says that, “Angola, for instance, has reduced malaria incidence by 50 per cent, and some areas have seen a 70 per cent fall,” with similar results in Accra, Ghana.

WHO says that larviciding is “indicated only for vectors which tend to breed in permanent or semi-permanent water bodies that can be identified and treated, and where the density of the human population to be protected is sufficiently high to justify the treatment with relatively short cycles of all breeding places.” What actual documented evidence is there from Angola and elsewhere in Africa about the use and effectiveness of larviciding?

An article on the history of malaria control in Liberia reviews early efforts to use synthetic insecticides for indoor residual spraying and larviciding.  Unfortunately, “These projects encountered a spate of difficulties that foreshadowed the general retreat from malaria eradication efforts across tropical Africa by the mid-1960s.” What has changed now that we are in the days of rolling back malaria?

A newly published article on mosquito larval source management in areas experiencing flooding in The Gambia concluded that …

The intervention was associated with a reduction in habitats with late stage anopheline larvae and an 88% reduction in larval densities. The effect of the intervention on mosquito densities was not pronounced and was confounded by the distance of villages to the major breeding sites and year. There was no reduction in clinical malaria or anemia. Ground applications of non-residual larvicides with simple equipment are not effective in riverine areas with extensive flooding, where many habitats are poorly demarcated, highly mobile, and inaccessible on foot.

dscn7743sm.JPGA key approach to the use of larvicides may be integrated vector management, where there is not reliance on one control measure alone. In the Kenyan highlands researchers found that, “Vector control with microbial larvicides enhanced the malaria control achieved with ITNs alone. Anti-larval measures are a promising complement to ITN distribution in the economically important highland areas and similar transmission settings in Africa.”

Larviciding was found to have a positive effect in reducing childhood malaria in Tanzania where “larviciding reduced malaria prevalence and complemented existing protection provided by insecticide-treated nets. Larviciding may represent a useful option for integrated vector management in Africa, particularly in its rapidly growing urban centres.”

The two promising articles from Kenya and Tanzania would be strengthened if large scale operations like those described for Angola were better documented and published because as was seen in Liberia many years ago it was the basic operational issues that limited program effectiveness.

Devine and Killeen report in discuss some of the practical issues of larviciding in Malaria Journal and note that, “The effective operational implementation of these campaigns is difficult, time consuming, and expensive,” in part because of “The myriad and cryptic nature of aquatic habitats and the difficulty in identifying and targeting the most productive of these (which) makes maximizing that impact very challenging.”

Devine and Killeen recommend a “new auto-dissemination methodology” based on a “detailed characterization of oviposition behaviour and of the effective transfer distances between feeding, resting and aquatic resources.” Again, these are good ideas, but what of evaluation of current large scale approaches underway? In addition, as RTI suggests programs must establish “baseline information on the acute, intermediate, and chronic effects of chemicals used in malaria vector control on workers and the general population.”

The basic question remains – what can we learn about the right conditions for larvicide use as a major tool in integrated vector management for malaria? All partners in rolling back malaria have a responsibility for helping this learning process by documenting and publishing their experiences. Maybe the proceedings of the recent Labiofam Conference in Havana will be published soon.

Malaria – tis the season

In many parts of the tropical world malaria is seasonal, depending in large part upon rains.  If taken into account, seasonality can allow malaria program managers to plan better to serve different areas of their countries.  There are areas where a dry season or colder weather may appear to put a stop to transmission completely, but often minimal transmission manages to take place.

When we know that some areas have more intense malaria transmission during certain times of year, we can ensure that our interventions are in place well in advance of major rains.  Knowledge of seasonality can guide vector control efforts and help plan for increased stocks of medicines and diagnostic tests in clinics, for example.  Several examples of the need for such preparations have been in the news this weekend.

Malaria’s Day in Court

In India the Kolkata Municipal Corporation is apparently under legal investigation for inadequate supplies of malaria medicines in clinics in Bhowanipore, which is a malaria-prone area.  In a bid to find out what he needed to do, a medical officer unknowingly broke protocol and visited the judge hearing the case to get advice on how better to serve the people of the area.

Fortunately he was not reprimanded for his efforts to get ahead of impending malaria outbreaks.

Awaiting the Storm

gustav-hanna-ike-and-josephine-20080902.jpgAdding to Haiti’s existing medical chaos and suffering is the season of increasing rains.  People are still living in makeshift tents that given no protection when it comes to mosquitoes and malaria.

The Boston Globe reports that, “Some rain typically falls every month in Haiti, meteorologists say, but heavy downpours could begin as early as this month.”  As seen in the satellite photo from NOAA, Haiti was in the path of several major hurricanes and tropical storms in 2008 – so rains from these storms kill people directly through flooding, and those who survive can expect to be threatened with malaria.

ngamonthsrisk.jpgInterfaith Preparation

Nigeria accounts for at least one-fourth of the malaria deaths in Africa, according to AFP.  A major national net distribution is underway, which will hopefully make major inroads before the heavy rains start.

Planning is the key – we must understand the malaria transmission patterns in our countries and plan to get the material and human resources in place in a timely manner so that they will be effective in bringing down malaria morbidity and mortality.

Ghana’s private sector support against malaria

Last week we highlighted the global role of the private sector in malaria control. Today we share some specific country level examples from Ghana.

malaria-cases-sm.jpgFor the past few years AngloGold Ashanti has been operating a successful pilot indoor residual spray (IRS) program in Obuasi District.  The project reported downward trends in hospital attendance and admission due to malaria which were attributed to the twice yearly spraying efforts.  Some pilot larviciding was also included.

Based on these efforts US President’s Malaria Initiative working with the National Malaria Control Program and partners began planning to initiate IRS in five northern districts. “PMI expanded IRS from five to six districts, protecting over 708,000 residents,” and is now planning collaboration with Ghana’s Global Fund grant recipients to expand further.

Now Now AngloGold Ashanti is ready “to extend its anti-malaria control to 40 districts in the Upper East and West, Ashanti, Western and Northern regions of Ghana, come January 2010,” as a recipient of Global Fund support from Ghana’s Round 8 Malaria Grant.

Another private partner in Ghana is the Zoomlion Waste Management Company. The Ghanaian Chronicle reports that, “The Volta Region office of Zoomlion Waste Management Company Limited has intensified its efforts to spray gutters, toilets and refuse disposal sites in the districts, as a step to destroying the breeding grounds and resting places of mosquitoes, to curb the menace of malaria.”

While such spraying may be more likely to kill culex species of malaria more than the malaria-bearing anopheles, the effort does show how the private sector can play a direct role.

Another mining company, Newmont, while not providing direct services, does offer health education to “help all those in affected areas prevent the spread of this terrible yet preventable disease,” on its website.

The telecoms giant, “MTN Ghana, a leading telecom company in Ghana, has announced that since its entrance into the Ghanaian telecom market, the company has invested about $2 million in socio-economic development projects in the areas of health and education.” More specifically, as part of its malaria fund and awareness raising efforts leading up to the Football World Cup of 2010, MTN is including Ghana in its target countries.

These examples are not meant to be exhaustive, but to show the different roles the private sector can play at the country level ranging from direct control activities to raising awareness and educating people to protect themselves.  For long term benefit, all such efforts need to be coordinated, like the IRS project, with the National Malaria Control Program and its RBM Partners.