Abstract

BackgroundSolving the problem of malaria requires a highly skilled workforce with robust infrastructure, financial backing and sound programme management coordinated by a strategic plan. Here, the capacity of National Malaria Control Programmes (NMCPs) was analysed to identify the strengths and weaknesses underpinning the implementation of vector surveillance and control activities by the core elements of programme capacity, being strategic frameworks, financing, human resources, logistics and infrastructure, and information systems.ResultsAcross nearly every country surveyed, the vector surveillance programmes were hampered by a lack of capacity and capability. Only 8% of NMCPs reported having sufficient capacity to implement vector surveillance. In contrast, 57%, 56% and 28% of NMCPs had the capacity to implement long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs), indoor residual spraying (IRS) and larval source management (LSM) activities, respectively. Largely underlying this was a lack of up-to-date strategic plans that prioritize vector surveillance and include frameworks for decision-making and action.ConclusionsStrategic planning and a lack of well-trained entomologists heavily hamper vector surveillance. Countries on the path to elimination generally had more operational/field staff compared to countries at the stage of control, and also were more likely to have an established system for staff training and capacity building. It is unlikely that controlling countries will make significant progress unless huge investments also go towards increasing the number and capacity of programmatic staff.

Highlights

  • Solving the problem of malaria requires a highly skilled workforce with robust infrastructure, financial backing and sound programme management coordinated by a strategic plan

  • Capacity for vector intervention deployment Of the 35 participating countries (in Africa (n = 18), Asia–Pacific (n = 14) and the Americas (n = 3)), seven were classified as “eliminating” based on their inclusion in the E2020 (n = 6) with one (Sri Lanka) certified as malaria-free in 2016, while the remaining 28 countries were categorized as controlling malaria

  • When the capacity limitations were analysed by the country malaria status, the countries controlling malaria more frequently expressed limitations than countries that were eliminating malaria (χ2 = 47.77, df = 3, p < 0.0001)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Solving the problem of malaria requires a highly skilled workforce with robust infrastructure, financial backing and sound programme management coordinated by a strategic plan. The capacity of National Malaria Control Programmes (NMCPs) will be further challenged by public health emergencies, such as the COVID-19 pandemic [11]; it is important to note here that most countries have been supported to develop and implement mitigation plans to prevent the potential negative impact of COVID-19. Solving the problem of malaria requires a high level political commitment together with a skilled workforce, supporting infrastructure, financial backing and sound programme management coordinated by a strategic plan [2, 4]. The limited and shrinking cadre of vector control officers (at both the technical and managerial levels) are hypothesized to be major threats to malaria control programme effectiveness [21] along with insufficient finances and infrastructure [22], but the scope and scale of these limitations is unverified

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call