Cargando…

Assessing national vector control micro-planning in Zambia using the 2021 malaria indicator survey

BACKGROUND: In 2020, the Zambia National Malaria Elimination Centre targeted the distribution of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor-residual spraying (IRS) campaigns based on sub-district micro-planning, where specified geographical areas at the health facility catchment level were as...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kyomuhangi, Irene, Andrada, Andrew, Mao, Zhiyuan, Pollard, Derek, Riley, Christina, Bennett, Adam, Hamainza, Busiku, Slater, Hannah, Millar, Justin, Miller, John M., Eisele, Thomas P., Silumbe, Kafula
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10688488/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38037072
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-023-04807-9
_version_ 1785152183351640064
author Kyomuhangi, Irene
Andrada, Andrew
Mao, Zhiyuan
Pollard, Derek
Riley, Christina
Bennett, Adam
Hamainza, Busiku
Slater, Hannah
Millar, Justin
Miller, John M.
Eisele, Thomas P.
Silumbe, Kafula
author_facet Kyomuhangi, Irene
Andrada, Andrew
Mao, Zhiyuan
Pollard, Derek
Riley, Christina
Bennett, Adam
Hamainza, Busiku
Slater, Hannah
Millar, Justin
Miller, John M.
Eisele, Thomas P.
Silumbe, Kafula
author_sort Kyomuhangi, Irene
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In 2020, the Zambia National Malaria Elimination Centre targeted the distribution of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor-residual spraying (IRS) campaigns based on sub-district micro-planning, where specified geographical areas at the health facility catchment level were assigned to receive either LLINs or IRS. Using data from the 2021 Malaria Indicator Survey (MIS), the objectives of this analysis were to (1) assess how well the micro-planning was followed in distributing LLINs and IRS, (2) investigate factors that contributed to whether households received what was planned, and (3) investigate how overall coverage observed in the 2021 MIS compared to the 2018 MIS conducted prior to micro-planning. METHODS: Households’ receipt of ≥ 1 LLIN, and/or IRS within the past 12 months in the 2021 MIS, was compared against the micro-planning area under which the households fell. GPS points for 3,550 households were overlayed onto digitized micro-planning maps in order to determine what micro-plan the households fell under, and thus whether they received their planned intervention. Mixed-effects regression models were conducted to investigate what factors affected whether these households: (1) received their planned intervention, and (2) received any intervention. Finally, coverage indicators between the 2021 and 2018 MIS were compared. RESULTS: Overall, 60.0% (95%CI 55.4, 64.4) of households under a micro-plan received their assigned intervention, with significantly higher coverage of the planned intervention in LLIN-assigned areas (75.7% [95%CI 69.5, 80.9]) compared to IRS-assigned areas (49.4% [95%CI: 44.4, 54.4]). Regression analysis indicated that households falling under the IRS micro-plan had significantly reduced odds of receiving their planned intervention (OR: 0.34 [95%CI 0.24, 0.48]), and significantly reduced odds of receiving any intervention (OR: 0.51 [95%CI 0.37, 0.72] ), compared to households under the LLIN micro-plan. Comparison between the 2021 and 2018 MIS indicated a 27% reduction in LLIN coverage nationally in 2021, while IRS coverage was similar. Additionally, between 2018 and 2021, there was a 13% increase in households that received neither intervention. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis shows that although the micro-planning strategy adopted in 2020 worked much better for LLIN-assigned areas compared to IRS-assigned areas, there was reduced overall vector control coverage in 2021 compared to 2018 before micro-planning.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10688488
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106884882023-11-30 Assessing national vector control micro-planning in Zambia using the 2021 malaria indicator survey Kyomuhangi, Irene Andrada, Andrew Mao, Zhiyuan Pollard, Derek Riley, Christina Bennett, Adam Hamainza, Busiku Slater, Hannah Millar, Justin Miller, John M. Eisele, Thomas P. Silumbe, Kafula Malar J Research BACKGROUND: In 2020, the Zambia National Malaria Elimination Centre targeted the distribution of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor-residual spraying (IRS) campaigns based on sub-district micro-planning, where specified geographical areas at the health facility catchment level were assigned to receive either LLINs or IRS. Using data from the 2021 Malaria Indicator Survey (MIS), the objectives of this analysis were to (1) assess how well the micro-planning was followed in distributing LLINs and IRS, (2) investigate factors that contributed to whether households received what was planned, and (3) investigate how overall coverage observed in the 2021 MIS compared to the 2018 MIS conducted prior to micro-planning. METHODS: Households’ receipt of ≥ 1 LLIN, and/or IRS within the past 12 months in the 2021 MIS, was compared against the micro-planning area under which the households fell. GPS points for 3,550 households were overlayed onto digitized micro-planning maps in order to determine what micro-plan the households fell under, and thus whether they received their planned intervention. Mixed-effects regression models were conducted to investigate what factors affected whether these households: (1) received their planned intervention, and (2) received any intervention. Finally, coverage indicators between the 2021 and 2018 MIS were compared. RESULTS: Overall, 60.0% (95%CI 55.4, 64.4) of households under a micro-plan received their assigned intervention, with significantly higher coverage of the planned intervention in LLIN-assigned areas (75.7% [95%CI 69.5, 80.9]) compared to IRS-assigned areas (49.4% [95%CI: 44.4, 54.4]). Regression analysis indicated that households falling under the IRS micro-plan had significantly reduced odds of receiving their planned intervention (OR: 0.34 [95%CI 0.24, 0.48]), and significantly reduced odds of receiving any intervention (OR: 0.51 [95%CI 0.37, 0.72] ), compared to households under the LLIN micro-plan. Comparison between the 2021 and 2018 MIS indicated a 27% reduction in LLIN coverage nationally in 2021, while IRS coverage was similar. Additionally, between 2018 and 2021, there was a 13% increase in households that received neither intervention. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis shows that although the micro-planning strategy adopted in 2020 worked much better for LLIN-assigned areas compared to IRS-assigned areas, there was reduced overall vector control coverage in 2021 compared to 2018 before micro-planning. BioMed Central 2023-11-30 /pmc/articles/PMC10688488/ /pubmed/38037072 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-023-04807-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Kyomuhangi, Irene
Andrada, Andrew
Mao, Zhiyuan
Pollard, Derek
Riley, Christina
Bennett, Adam
Hamainza, Busiku
Slater, Hannah
Millar, Justin
Miller, John M.
Eisele, Thomas P.
Silumbe, Kafula
Assessing national vector control micro-planning in Zambia using the 2021 malaria indicator survey
title Assessing national vector control micro-planning in Zambia using the 2021 malaria indicator survey
title_full Assessing national vector control micro-planning in Zambia using the 2021 malaria indicator survey
title_fullStr Assessing national vector control micro-planning in Zambia using the 2021 malaria indicator survey
title_full_unstemmed Assessing national vector control micro-planning in Zambia using the 2021 malaria indicator survey
title_short Assessing national vector control micro-planning in Zambia using the 2021 malaria indicator survey
title_sort assessing national vector control micro-planning in zambia using the 2021 malaria indicator survey
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10688488/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38037072
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-023-04807-9
work_keys_str_mv AT kyomuhangiirene assessingnationalvectorcontrolmicroplanninginzambiausingthe2021malariaindicatorsurvey
AT andradaandrew assessingnationalvectorcontrolmicroplanninginzambiausingthe2021malariaindicatorsurvey
AT maozhiyuan assessingnationalvectorcontrolmicroplanninginzambiausingthe2021malariaindicatorsurvey
AT pollardderek assessingnationalvectorcontrolmicroplanninginzambiausingthe2021malariaindicatorsurvey
AT rileychristina assessingnationalvectorcontrolmicroplanninginzambiausingthe2021malariaindicatorsurvey
AT bennettadam assessingnationalvectorcontrolmicroplanninginzambiausingthe2021malariaindicatorsurvey
AT hamainzabusiku assessingnationalvectorcontrolmicroplanninginzambiausingthe2021malariaindicatorsurvey
AT slaterhannah assessingnationalvectorcontrolmicroplanninginzambiausingthe2021malariaindicatorsurvey
AT millarjustin assessingnationalvectorcontrolmicroplanninginzambiausingthe2021malariaindicatorsurvey
AT millerjohnm assessingnationalvectorcontrolmicroplanninginzambiausingthe2021malariaindicatorsurvey
AT eiselethomasp assessingnationalvectorcontrolmicroplanninginzambiausingthe2021malariaindicatorsurvey
AT silumbekafula assessingnationalvectorcontrolmicroplanninginzambiausingthe2021malariaindicatorsurvey