Cargando…

Universal coverage with insecticide-treated nets – applying the revised indicators for ownership and use to the Nigeria 2010 malaria indicator survey data

BACKGROUND: Until recently only two indicators were used to evaluate malaria prevention with insecticide-treated nets (ITN): “proportion of households with any ITN” and “proportion of the population using an ITN last night”. This study explores the potential of the expanded set of indicators recomme...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kilian, Albert, Koenker, Hannah, Baba, Ebenezer, Onyefunafoa, Emmanuel O, Selby, Richmond A, Lokko, Kojo, Lynch, Matthew
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3846735/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24020332
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-12-314
_version_ 1782293478006325248
author Kilian, Albert
Koenker, Hannah
Baba, Ebenezer
Onyefunafoa, Emmanuel O
Selby, Richmond A
Lokko, Kojo
Lynch, Matthew
author_facet Kilian, Albert
Koenker, Hannah
Baba, Ebenezer
Onyefunafoa, Emmanuel O
Selby, Richmond A
Lokko, Kojo
Lynch, Matthew
author_sort Kilian, Albert
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Until recently only two indicators were used to evaluate malaria prevention with insecticide-treated nets (ITN): “proportion of households with any ITN” and “proportion of the population using an ITN last night”. This study explores the potential of the expanded set of indicators recommended by the Roll Back Malaria Monitoring and Evaluation Reference Group (MERG) for comprehensive analysis of universal coverage with ITN by applying them to the Nigeria 2010 Malaria Indicator Survey data. METHODS: The two additional indicators of “proportion of households with at least one ITN for every two people” and “proportion of population with access to an ITN within the household” were calculated as recommended by MERG. Based on the estimates for each of the four ITN indicators three gaps were calculated: i) households with no ITN, ii) households with any but not enough ITN, iii) population with access to ITN not using it. In addition, coverage with at least one ITN at community level was explored by applying Lot Quality Assurance Sampling (LQAS) decision rules to the cluster level of the data. All outcomes were analysed by household background characteristics and whether an ITN campaign had recently been done. RESULTS: While the proportion of households with any ITN was only 42% overall, it was 75% in areas with a recent mass campaign and in these areas 66% of communities had coverage of 80% or better. However, the campaigns left a considerable intra-household ownership gap with 66% of households with any ITN not having enough for every family member. In contrast, the analysis comparing actual against potential use showed that ITN utilization was good overall with only 19% of people with access not using the ITN, but with a significant difference between the North, where use was excellent (use gap 11%), and the South (use gap 36%) indicating the need for enhanced behaviour change communication. CONCLUSIONS: The expanded ITN indicators to assess universal coverage provide strong tools for a comprehensive system effectiveness analysis that produces clear, actionable evidence of progress as well as the need for specific additional interventions clearly differentiating between gaps in ownership and use.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3846735
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-38467352013-12-03 Universal coverage with insecticide-treated nets – applying the revised indicators for ownership and use to the Nigeria 2010 malaria indicator survey data Kilian, Albert Koenker, Hannah Baba, Ebenezer Onyefunafoa, Emmanuel O Selby, Richmond A Lokko, Kojo Lynch, Matthew Malar J Research BACKGROUND: Until recently only two indicators were used to evaluate malaria prevention with insecticide-treated nets (ITN): “proportion of households with any ITN” and “proportion of the population using an ITN last night”. This study explores the potential of the expanded set of indicators recommended by the Roll Back Malaria Monitoring and Evaluation Reference Group (MERG) for comprehensive analysis of universal coverage with ITN by applying them to the Nigeria 2010 Malaria Indicator Survey data. METHODS: The two additional indicators of “proportion of households with at least one ITN for every two people” and “proportion of population with access to an ITN within the household” were calculated as recommended by MERG. Based on the estimates for each of the four ITN indicators three gaps were calculated: i) households with no ITN, ii) households with any but not enough ITN, iii) population with access to ITN not using it. In addition, coverage with at least one ITN at community level was explored by applying Lot Quality Assurance Sampling (LQAS) decision rules to the cluster level of the data. All outcomes were analysed by household background characteristics and whether an ITN campaign had recently been done. RESULTS: While the proportion of households with any ITN was only 42% overall, it was 75% in areas with a recent mass campaign and in these areas 66% of communities had coverage of 80% or better. However, the campaigns left a considerable intra-household ownership gap with 66% of households with any ITN not having enough for every family member. In contrast, the analysis comparing actual against potential use showed that ITN utilization was good overall with only 19% of people with access not using the ITN, but with a significant difference between the North, where use was excellent (use gap 11%), and the South (use gap 36%) indicating the need for enhanced behaviour change communication. CONCLUSIONS: The expanded ITN indicators to assess universal coverage provide strong tools for a comprehensive system effectiveness analysis that produces clear, actionable evidence of progress as well as the need for specific additional interventions clearly differentiating between gaps in ownership and use. BioMed Central 2013-09-10 /pmc/articles/PMC3846735/ /pubmed/24020332 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-12-314 Text en Copyright © 2013 Kilian et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Kilian, Albert
Koenker, Hannah
Baba, Ebenezer
Onyefunafoa, Emmanuel O
Selby, Richmond A
Lokko, Kojo
Lynch, Matthew
Universal coverage with insecticide-treated nets – applying the revised indicators for ownership and use to the Nigeria 2010 malaria indicator survey data
title Universal coverage with insecticide-treated nets – applying the revised indicators for ownership and use to the Nigeria 2010 malaria indicator survey data
title_full Universal coverage with insecticide-treated nets – applying the revised indicators for ownership and use to the Nigeria 2010 malaria indicator survey data
title_fullStr Universal coverage with insecticide-treated nets – applying the revised indicators for ownership and use to the Nigeria 2010 malaria indicator survey data
title_full_unstemmed Universal coverage with insecticide-treated nets – applying the revised indicators for ownership and use to the Nigeria 2010 malaria indicator survey data
title_short Universal coverage with insecticide-treated nets – applying the revised indicators for ownership and use to the Nigeria 2010 malaria indicator survey data
title_sort universal coverage with insecticide-treated nets – applying the revised indicators for ownership and use to the nigeria 2010 malaria indicator survey data
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3846735/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24020332
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-12-314
work_keys_str_mv AT kilianalbert universalcoveragewithinsecticidetreatednetsapplyingtherevisedindicatorsforownershipandusetothenigeria2010malariaindicatorsurveydata
AT koenkerhannah universalcoveragewithinsecticidetreatednetsapplyingtherevisedindicatorsforownershipandusetothenigeria2010malariaindicatorsurveydata
AT babaebenezer universalcoveragewithinsecticidetreatednetsapplyingtherevisedindicatorsforownershipandusetothenigeria2010malariaindicatorsurveydata
AT onyefunafoaemmanuelo universalcoveragewithinsecticidetreatednetsapplyingtherevisedindicatorsforownershipandusetothenigeria2010malariaindicatorsurveydata
AT selbyrichmonda universalcoveragewithinsecticidetreatednetsapplyingtherevisedindicatorsforownershipandusetothenigeria2010malariaindicatorsurveydata
AT lokkokojo universalcoveragewithinsecticidetreatednetsapplyingtherevisedindicatorsforownershipandusetothenigeria2010malariaindicatorsurveydata
AT lynchmatthew universalcoveragewithinsecticidetreatednetsapplyingtherevisedindicatorsforownershipandusetothenigeria2010malariaindicatorsurveydata