D R Mumbengegwi1, H Sturrock2, M Hsiang2,3,4, K Roberts2, I Kleinschmidt5,6, M Nghipumbwa7, P Uusiku7, J Smith2, A Bennet2, W Kizito8, K Takarinda9,10, S Ade9, R Gosling2. 1. Science, Technology & Innovation Division, Multidisciplinary Research Center, University of Namibia, Windhoek, Namibia. 2. Malaria Elimination Initiative, Global Health Group, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), San Francisco, California, USA. 3. Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA. 4. Department of Pediatrics, UCSF, San Francisco, California, USA. 5. Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK. 6. Department of Pathology, School of Health Sciences, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. 7. National Vector-Borne Disease Control Programme, Namibia Ministry of Health and Social Services, Windhoek, Namibia. 8. Operational Centre of Brussels-Kenya Mission, Médecins Sans Frontières, Nairobi, Kenya. 9. International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, Paris, France. 10. AIDS and TB Department, Ministry of Health and Child Care, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Abstract
Setting: A comparison of routine Namibia National Malaria Programme data (reported) vs. household survey data (administrative) on indoor residual spraying (IRS) in western Zambezi region, Namibia, for the 2014-2015 malaria season. Objectives: To determine 1) IRS coverage (administrative and reported), 2) its effect on malaria incidence, and 3) reasons for non-uptake of IRS in western Zambezi region, Namibia, for the 2014-2015 malaria season. Design: This was a descriptive study. Results: IRS coverage in western Zambezi region was low, ranging from 42.3% to 52.2% for administrative coverage vs. 45.9-66.7% for reported coverage. There was no significant correlation between IRS coverage and malaria incidence for this region (r = -0.45, P = 0.22). The main reasons for households not being sprayed were that residents were not at home during spraying times or that spray operators did not visit the households. Conclusions: IRS coverage in western Zambezi region, Namibia, was low during the 2014-2015 malaria season because of poor community engagement and awareness of times for spray operations within communities. Higher IRS coverage could be achieved through improved community engagement. Better targeting of the highest risk areas by the use of malaria surveillance will be required to mitigate malaria transmission.
Setting: A comparison of routine Namibia National Malaria Programme data (reported) vs. household survey data (administrative) on indoor residual spraying (IRS) in western Zambezi region, Namibia, for the 2014-2015 malaria season. Objectives: To determine 1) IRS coverage (administrative and reported), 2) its effect on malaria incidence, and 3) reasons for non-uptake of IRS in western Zambezi region, Namibia, for the 2014-2015 malaria season. Design: This was a descriptive study. Results: IRS coverage in western Zambezi region was low, ranging from 42.3% to 52.2% for administrative coverage vs. 45.9-66.7% for reported coverage. There was no significant correlation between IRS coverage and malaria incidence for this region (r = -0.45, P = 0.22). The main reasons for households not being sprayed were that residents were not at home during spraying times or that spray operators did not visit the households. Conclusions: IRS coverage in western Zambezi region, Namibia, was low during the 2014-2015 malaria season because of poor community engagement and awareness of times for spray operations within communities. Higher IRS coverage could be achieved through improved community engagement. Better targeting of the highest risk areas by the use of malaria surveillance will be required to mitigate malaria transmission.
Entities:
Keywords:
IRS; Namibia; SORT IT; malaria elimination; operational research
Authors: Jamie T Griffin; T Deirdre Hollingsworth; Lucy C Okell; Thomas S Churcher; Michael White; Wes Hinsley; Teun Bousema; Chris J Drakeley; Neil M Ferguson; María-Gloria Basáñez; Azra C Ghani Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2010-08-10 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Immo Kleinschmidt; Christopher Schwabe; Murugasampilay Shiva; Jose Luis Segura; Victor Sima; Samuel Jose Alves Mabunda; Michael Coleman Journal: Am J Trop Med Hyg Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 2.345
Authors: Teun Bousema; Jamie T Griffin; Robert W Sauerwein; David L Smith; Thomas S Churcher; Willem Takken; Azra Ghani; Chris Drakeley; Roly Gosling Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2012-01-31 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Natasha M Laban; Tamaki Kobayashi; Harry Hamapumbu; David Sullivan; Sungano Mharakurwa; Philip E Thuma; Clive J Shiff; William J Moss Journal: Malar J Date: 2015-01-28 Impact factor: 2.979
Authors: Michael Ediau; Juliet N Babirye; Nazarius M Tumwesigye; Joseph K B Matovu; Simba Machingaidze; Olico Okui; Rhoda K Wanyenze; Peter Waiswa Journal: Malar J Date: 2013-05-27 Impact factor: 2.979
Authors: Mulakwa Kamuliwo; Emmanuel Chanda; Ubydul Haque; Mercy Mwanza-Ingwe; Chadwick Sikaala; Cecilia Katebe-Sakala; Victor M Mukonka; Douglas E Norris; David L Smith; Gregory E Glass; William J Moss Journal: Malar J Date: 2013-12-01 Impact factor: 2.979
Authors: Sofonias Tessema; Amy Wesolowski; Anna Chen; Maxwell Murphy; Jordan Wilheim; Anna-Rosa Mupiri; Nick W Ruktanonchai; Victor A Alegana; Andrew J Tatem; Munyaradzi Tambo; Bradley Didier; Justin M Cohen; Adam Bennett; Hugh Jw Sturrock; Roland Gosling; Michelle S Hsiang; David L Smith; Davis R Mumbengegwi; Jennifer L Smith; Bryan Greenhouse Journal: Elife Date: 2019-04-02 Impact factor: 8.140