Indoor Residual Spraying Delivery Models to Prevent Malaria: Comparison of Community- and District-Based Approaches in Ethiopia

Johns, Benjamin; Yihdego, Yemane; Kolyada, Lena; Dengela, Dereje; Chibsa, Sheleme; Dissanayake, Gunawardena; George, Kristen; Taffese, Hiwot Solomon; Lucas, Bradford

doi:10.9745/ghsp-d-16-00165

Cited by 9 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In term of cost analysis, one study of malaria in Ethiopia compared cost data for community- based intersectoral IRS and traditional district “vertical” IRS [ 73 ]. This study did before-after analysis of overall cost, coverage, cost per structure sprayed, and cost per person protected.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of the 50 articles, intersectoral collaboration with an intervention to mobilize community and health education was the most common. The interventions implemented through the collaboration between the sectors varied from providing human or financial resources, designing to executing an intervention, developing policy and mobilizing communities (24 studies) [ 30 , 32 , 35 , 43 – 45 , 47 – 50 , 53 – 58 , 60 – 65 , 68 , 72 ], followed by diagnosis and treatment (12 studies) [ 35 , 36 , 39 – 43 , 49 , 52 , 68 – 71 ], prevention method (IRS and LLINs distribution (11 studies) [ 31 , 35 – 37 , 39 , 41 , 43 , 66 – 68 , 73 ], surveillance, monitoring and evaluation (nine studies) [ 35 , 38 – 42 , 52 , 68 , 69 ], mass drug administration (four studies) [ 48 , 72 , 75 , 76 ], cross border collaboration (four studies) [ 35 , 40 , 43 , 52 ], two studies for research [ 40 , 51 ] and one study for advocacy and legislation […”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Intersectoral collaboration for the prevention and control of vector borne diseases to support the implementation of a global strategy: A systematic review

Herdiana¹,

Sari²,

Whittaker

2018

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionVector Borne Diseases (VBDs) have a major impact on public health and socio-economic development. Inter-sectoral collaboration was recommended as one of the key elements of Integrated Vector Management (IVM), however limited evidence measures the effect and contribution of intersectoral approaches including but not only IVM. This systematic review aims to assess the existing evidence on all forms of inter-sectoral collaboration in VBD control and prevention, identify any gaps and develop a framework from a global perspective.MethodsArticles were identified through a search of PUBMED, Science of Direct, Web of Knowledge, Google Scholar and WHO archives using key words and excluded duplications (n = 2,034). The exclusion of non-VBDs control and prevention interventions resulted in 194 eligible titles/abstract/keywords for full text assessment. Further exclusion of non-peer reviewed articles, non-declaration of ethical clearance, reviews and expert opinion articles resulted in 50 articles finally being included for analysis with the extraction of data on outcome, factor/s influencing the effectiveness, indicators of collaboration and sustainability.ResultsOf the 50 articles included in the analysis, 19 articles were categorized as of moderate-strong quality. All articles compared pre- and post-intervention outcomes against disease or vector variables. Three papers included outcome variables on intersectoral collaboration and participation indicator. However, no paper undertook component analysis by different sectors or different activities. Only one paper compared cost data for community-intersectoral intervention for IRS and traditional “vertical” IRS. Six factors were identified as influencing the effectiveness of inter-sectoral collaboration. Five of six factors are the main ones, namely the approach (37/47), resources (34/47), relationships (33/47), management (29/47) and shared vision (20/47) factors. A conceptual framework has been developed based on this review.ConclusionThis review shows the importance of inter-sectoral collaboration to reduce VBDs or vector densities. However, very few studies measured how much inter-sectoral collaboration contributes to the impact. Further high-quality studies using inter-sectoral collaboration indicators are recommended to be undertaken.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intersectoral collaboration for the prevention and control of vector borne diseases to support the implementation of a global strategy: A systematic review

Herdiana¹,

Sari²,

Whittaker

2018

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Eighteen studies reporting IRS coverage were identified in the review [ 27 , 58 , 59 , 66 - 80 ]. Coverage estimates were more commonly obtained through post-campaign household surveys [ 27 , 66 , 69 - 71 , 74 , 76 , 79 , 80 ] than routine IRS program records [ 58 , 59 , 68 , 72 , 73 , 77 ] or study records [ 75 ]. Two studies reported coverage from both household surveys and program records [ 67 , 78 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimating malaria chemoprevention and vector control coverage using program and campaign data: A scoping review of current practices and opportunities

Nice¹,

Nahusenay²,

Eckert³

et al. 2020

Journal of Global Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Accurate estimation of intervention coverage is a vital component of malaria program monitoring and evaluation, both for process evaluation (how well program targets are achieved), and impact evaluation (whether intervention coverage had an impact on malaria burden). There is growing interest in maximizing the utility of program data to generate interim estimates of intervention coverage in the periods between large-scale cross-sectional surveys (the gold standard). As such, this study aimed to identify relevant concepts and themes that may guide future optimization of intervention coverage estimation using routinely collected data, or data collected during and following intervention campaigns, with a particular focus on strategies to define the denominator. Methods We conducted a scoping review of current practices to estimate malaria intervention coverage for insecticide-treated nets (ITNs); indoor residual spray (IRS); intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (IPTp); mass drug administration (MDA); and seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) interventions; case management was excluded. Multiple databases were searched for relevant articles published from January 1, 2015 to June 1, 2018. Additionally, we identified and included other guidance relevant to estimating population denominators, with a focus on innovative techniques. Results While program data have the potential to provide intervention coverage data, there are still substantial challenges in selecting appropriate denominators. The review identified a lack of consistency in how coverage was defined and reported for each intervention type, with denominator estimation methods not clearly or consistently reported, and denominator estimates rarely triangulated with other data sources to present the feasible range of denominator values and consequently the range of likely coverage estimates. Conclusions Though household survey-based estimates of intervention coverage remain the gold standard, efforts should be made to further standardize practices for generating interim measurements of intervention coverage from program data, and for estimating and reporting population denominators. This includes fully describing any projections or adjustments made to existing census or population data, exploring opportunities to validate available data by comparing with other sources, and explaining how the denominator has been restricted (or not) to reflect exclusion criteria.

show abstract

“…To reflect targeting of IRS at areas prone to outbreaks or identified as transmission sources the reference scenario assumed deployment in 50% of HFCAs. As transmission is further reduced across eliminating countries implementation of IRS might be shifted further down to HFCA level [29]. This would change the level and the distribution of costs and could be further explored with the costing model.…”

Section: Reference Implementation Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

Costing malaria interventions from pilots to elimination programmes

Galactionova

Velarde

Silumbe

et al. 2020

Malar J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Malaria programmes in countries with low transmission levels require evidence to optimize deployment of current and new tools to reach elimination with limited resources. Recent pilots of elimination strategies in Ethiopia, Senegal, and Zambia produced evidence of their epidemiological impacts and costs. There is a need to generalize these findings to different epidemiological and health systems contexts. Methods Drawing on experience of implementing partners, operational documents and costing studies from these pilots, reference scenarios were defined for rapid reporting (RR), reactive case detection (RACD), mass drug administration (MDA), and in-door residual spraying (IRS). These generalized interventions from their trial implementation to one typical of programmatic delivery. In doing so, resource use due to interventions was isolated from research activities and was related to the pilot setting. Costing models developed around this reference implementation, standardized the scope of resources costed, the valuation of resource use, and the setting in which interventions were evaluated. Sensitivity analyses were used to inform generalizability of the estimates and model assumptions. Results Populated with local prices and resource use from the pilots, the models yielded an average annual economic cost per capita of $0.18 for RR, $0.75 for RACD, $4.28 for MDA (two rounds), and $1.79 for IRS (one round, 50% households). Intervention design and resource use at service delivery were key drivers of variation in costs of RR, MDA, and RACD. Scale was the most important parameter for IRS. Overall price level was a minor contributor, except for MDA where drugs accounted for 70% of the cost. The analyses showed that at implementation scales comparable to health facility catchment area, systematic correlations between model inputs characterizing implementation and setting produce large gradients in costs. Conclusions Prospective costing models are powerful tools to explore resource and cost implications of policy alternatives. By formalizing translation of operational data into an estimate of intervention cost, these models provide the methodological infrastructure to strengthen capacity gap for economic evaluation in endemic countries. The value of this approach for decision-making is enhanced when primary cost data collection is designed to enable analysis of the efficiency of operational inputs in relation to features of the trial or the setting, thus facilitating transferability.

show abstract

Indoor Residual Spraying Delivery Models to Prevent Malaria: Comparison of Community- and District-Based Approaches in Ethiopia

Abstract: Integrating indoor residual spraying into the institutionalized community-based health system in 5 districts was more efficient than the district-based model and did not compromise quality or compliance with environmental standards.

Cited by 9 publications

References 13 publications

Intersectoral collaboration for the prevention and control of vector borne diseases to support the implementation of a global strategy: A systematic review

Intersectoral collaboration for the prevention and control of vector borne diseases to support the implementation of a global strategy: A systematic review

Estimating malaria chemoprevention and vector control coverage using program and campaign data: A scoping review of current practices and opportunities

Costing malaria interventions from pilots to elimination programmes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About