Background: The current malaria control strategy of WHO centres on early diagnosis and prompt treatment using effective drugs. Children with severe malaria are often brought late to health facilities and traditional health practitioners are said to be the main cause of treatment delay. In the context of the Rectal Artesunate Project in Tanzania, the role of traditional healers in the management of severe malaria in children was studied.

In Tanzania malaria is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality, especially in children under 5 years. The disease ranks number one in both outpatient and inpatient statistics. The socio-economic impact of malaria is so high that it contributes highly to poverty and underdevelopment. Efforts made during the past century to combat and control malaria have not been successful. The prospects of achieving the Abuja declaration targets are uncertain within the remaining period of time. Currently, the Ministry of Health through a 5-year strategic plan advocates four main approaches in the fight against the disease. These include improved case management, vector control using insecticide treated mosquito nets, prevention and control of malaria in pregnancy and epidemic preparedness, prevention and control. However, these strategies face various challenges including inadequate human, financial, and material resources; inefficiency in the healthcare system that is incapable of providing quality health services and access to prompt diagnosis and treatment; lack of an effective disease surveillance system; and an inefficient health education communication mechanism. Tanzania is at the crossroads and is challenged with the need to introduce a new antimalarial treatment regimen and the reintroduction of DDT for indoor residual spray. Unless malaria control strategy adopts an integrated approach its success is far from being realized. This article reviews the current malaria control strategies and its challenges in Tanzania and proposes new strategies.

Background: Procedures for priority setting need to incorporate both scientific evidence and public values. The aim of this study was to test out a model for priority setting which incorporates both scientific evidence and public values, and to explore use of evidence by a selection of stakeholders and to study reasons for the relative ranking of health care interventions in a setting of extreme resource scarcity.

No abstract