Assessing knowledge about lymphatic filariasis and the implementation of mass drug administration amongst drug deliverers in three districts/cities of Indonesia

Abstract

BackgroundThis research assesses knowledge amongst drug deliverers about the implementation of mass drug administration (MDA) for lymphatic filariasis (LF) in Agam District (West Sumatera Province), the City of Depok (West Java Province) and the City of Batam (Kepulauan Riau Province), Indonesia.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted from January to March 2015 at these three sites. Respondents were identified using purposive sampling (i.e. cadre, health worker or community representatives). A total of 318 questionnaires were accepted for analysis. Three outcomes were assessed: knowledge about LF; knowledge about MDA implementation; and was informed about MDA coverage. Logistic regression analyses were employed to examine factors associated with these three outcomes.ResultsLess than half of respondents were charactersised as having a high level of LF knowledge and less than half a high level of knowledge about MDA. The odds of having a high level of knowledge of LF was significantly lower in Batam City than Agam District, yet higher amongst health workers than cadres. Deliverers living in urban areas reported more feedback on MDA outcomes than in the rural district. Health workers received more feedback than cadres (P < 0.001). Deliverers perceived the difference between coverage (drug receipt) and compliance (drug ingestion) in the community.ConclusionsThere are variations in knowledge about LF and MDA as well as feedback across drug deliverers in MDA across geographical areas. Adaptation of the MDA guidelines, supportive supervision, increasing the availability of supporting materials and directly-observed therapy might be beneficial to improve coverage and compliance in all areas.

Optimising the performance of frontline implementers engaged in the NTD programme in Nigeria: lessons for strengthening community health systems for universal health coverage

“…The performance of frontline implementers within NTD programmes is shaped by the need for a solid knowledge and skills base in relation to NTDs and MAM, confidence to educate communities and the motivation to achieve equitable programme coverage [13–15]. One of the key research questions within NTD programme implementation is how to sustain motivation and improve the performance of frontline implementers which is often influenced by logistics and support from the health system, adequacy of social sensitisation and mobilisation strategies, human resource capacity, financial and non-financial support, inefficient or weak health systems and more [16].…”

Lot quality assurance sampling to assess coverage and compliance following mass drug administration to eliminate lymphatic filariasis in Fiji: A methodological approach

“…In addition, this assessment is based on surveying ‘customers’ satisfaction’ with the delivery of services. Additional valuable and meaningful information could be gained by conducting focus group interviews or narrative surveys with the drug distributors who were involved in drug distribution [ 46 ] or the health staff who supervised them, to investigate the providers’ point of view [ 47 ]. Lastly, the study was designed before the global recommendation for rapid monitoring of MDA coverage was made available and, as for LQAS, we applied a smaller sample size with relatively large alpha and beta levels than other studies [ 16 , 21 ].…”

A multicenter, community-based, mixed methods assessment of the acceptability of a triple drug regimen for elimination of lymphatic filariasis

“…However, there is strong support for the research methodology of concurrent qualitative and quantitative data collections to ensure validity across the findings. In addition, the measure of acceptability was built upon a previously developed scale and was adjusted using validated questions used in LF MDA studies [44][45][46]. Results from the mean acceptability scores were further validated through the qualitative research collected concurrently by the research team.…”