Malaria elimination and the need for intensive inter-country cooperation. a critical evaluation of regional technical co-operation in Southern Africa.

BACKGROUND: Malaria elimination requires closely co-ordinated action between neighbouring countries. In Southern Africa several countries have reduced malaria to low levels, but the goal of elimination has eluded them thus far. The Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) Malaria Elimination Eight (E8) initiative was established in 2009 between Angola, Botswana, Eswatini, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Zambia, and Zimbabwe to coordinate malaria interventions aiming to eliminate malaria by 2030. Cross-border coordination is important in malaria elimination settings as it strengthens surveillance, joint planning and implementation, knowledge exchange and optimal use of resources. This paper describes how this collaboration is realized in practice, its achievements and challenges, and its significance for malaria elimination prospects. METHODS: The ministers of health of the E8 countries oversee an intergovernmental technical committee supported by specialist working groups consisting of technical personnel from member countries and partner institutions. These technical working groups are responsible for malaria elimination initiatives in key focus areas such as surveillance, vector control, diagnosis, case management, behaviour change and applied research. The technical working groups have initiated and guided several collaborative projects which lay essential groundwork for malaria elimination. RESULTS: The E8 collaboration has yielded achievements in the following key areas. (1) Establishment and evaluation of malaria border health posts to improve malaria services in border areas and reduce malaria among resident and, mobile and migrant populations. (2) The development of a regional malaria microscopy slide bank providing materials for diagnostic training and proficiency testing. (3) A facility for regional external competency assessment and training of malaria microscopy trainers in collaboration with the World Health Organization. (4) Entomology fellowships that improved capacity in entomological surveillance; an indoor residual spraying (IRS) training of trainers' scheme to enhance the quality of this core intervention in the region. (5) Capacity development for regional malaria parasite genomic surveillance. (6) A mechanism for early detection of malaria outbreak through near real time reporting and a quarterly bulletins of malaria incidence in border districts. CONCLUSIONS: The E8 technical working groups system embodies inter-country collaboration of malaria control and elimination activities. It facilitates sustained interaction between countries through a regional approach. The groundwork for elimination has been laid, but the challenge will be to maintain funding for collaboration at this level whilst reducing reliance on international donors and to build capacities necessary to prepare for malaria elimination.

District-level approach for tailoring and targeting interventions: a new path for malaria control and elimination.

Despite huge investments and implementation of effective interventions for malaria, progress has stalled, with transmission being increasingly localized among difficult-to-reach populations and outdoor-biting vectors. Targeting difficult pockets of transmission will require the development of tailored and targeted approaches suited to local context, drawing from insights close to the frontlines. Districts are best placed to develop tailored, locally appropriate approaches. We propose a reorganization of how malaria services are delivered. Firstly, enabling district health officers to serve as conduits between technical experts in national malaria control programmes and local community leaders with knowledge specific to local, at-risk populations; secondly, empowering district health teams to make malaria control decisions. This is a radical shift that requires the national programme to cede some control. Shifting towards a district or provincial level approach will necessitate deliberate planning, and repeated, careful assessment, starting with piloting and learning through experience. Donors will need to alter current practice, allowing for flexible funding to be controlled at sub-national levels, and to mix finances between case management, vector control and surveillance, monitoring and evaluation. System-wide changes proposed are challenging but may be necessary to overcome stalled progress in malaria control and elimination and introduce targeted interventions tailored to the needs of diverse malaria affected populations.

Review of the malaria epidemiology and trends in Zambia.

A comprehensive desk review of malaria trends was conducted between 2000-2010 in Zambia to study malaria epidemiology and trends to guide strategies and approaches for effective malaria control. This review considered data from the National Health Information Management System, Malaria Surveys and Programme Review reports and analyzed malaria in-patient cases and deaths in relation to intervention coverage for all ages. Data showed three distinct epidemiological strata after a notable malaria reduction (66%) in in-patient cases and deaths, particularly between 2000-2008. These changes occurred following the (re-)introduction and expansion of indoor residual spraying up to 90% coverage, scale-up of coverage of long-lasting insecticide-treated nets in household from 50% to 70%, and artemisin-based combination therapy nationwide. However, malaria cases and deaths re-surged, increasing in 2009-2010 in the northern-eastern parts of Zambia. Delays in the disbursement of funds affected the implementation of interventions, which resulted in resurgence of cases and deaths. In spite of a decline in malaria disease burden over the past decade in Zambia, a reversal in impact is notable in the year 2009-2010, signifying that control gains are fragile and must be sustained to eliminate malaria.

National malaria control and scaling up for impact: the Zambia experience through 2006.

With its 2006-2011 National Malaria Strategic Plan, Zambia committed to control malaria at a national scale. This scale-up for impact approach was facilitated by sound business planning and financing in 2006 of approximately US$35 million. Compared with surveys in 2001 and 2004, a 2006 national survey of 14,681 persons in 2,999 households at the end of the transmission season showed substantial coverage increases for preventive interventions. Ownership and use rates of insecticide-treated mosquito nets (ITNs) among vulnerable groups doubled, with 44% of households owning ITNs and 23% of children less than five years of age and 24% of pregnant women using them. Roll Back Malaria Abuja targets for intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (IPTp) were exceeded, with 62% of pregnant women receiving at least two doses of IPTp. As of 2006, Zambia is demonstrating substantial progress toward the national targets (80% population coverage rates for the interventions) and aspires to show that malaria need not be its leading health problem, and that malaria control is a sound national investment.

Integrating insecticide-treated bednets into a measles vaccination campaign achieves high, rapid and equitable coverage with direct and voucher-based methods.

Population coverage of insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) in Africa falls well below the Abuja target of 60% while coverage levels achieved during vaccination campaigns in the same populations typically exceed 90%. Household (HH) cost of ITNs is an important barrier to their uptake. We investigated the coverage, equity and cost of linking distribution of free ITNs to a measles vaccination campaign. During a national measles vaccination campaign in Zambia, children in four rural districts were given a free ITN when they received their measles vaccination. In one urban district, children were given a voucher, which could be redeemed for a net at a commercial distribution site. About 1700 HHs were asked whether they received vaccination and an ITN during a measles campaign, as well as questions on assets (e.g. type roofing material or bicycle ownership) to assess HH wealth. Net ownership was calculated for children in each wealth quintile. In the rural areas, ITN coverage among children rose from 16.7% to 81.1% and the equity ratio from 0.32 to 0.88 and in the urban area from 50.7% to 76.2% (equity ratio: 0.66-1.19). The operational cost per ITN delivered was dollar 0.35 in the rural area with direct distribution and $1.89 in the urban areas with voucher distribution. Mass distribution of ITNs through vaccination campaigns achieves rapid, high and equitable coverage at low cost.