No abstract

BackgroundGender remains a recognized but relatively unexamined aspect of the potential challenges for treatment programmes for Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs). We sought to explore the role of gender in access to treatment in the Uganda National Neglected Tropical Disease Control Programme.Methodology/Principal FindingsQuantitative and qualitative data was collected in eight villages in Buyende and Kamuli districts, Eastern Uganda. Quantitative data on the number of persons treated by age and gender was identified from treatment registers in each village. Qualitative data was collected through semi-structured interviews with sub-county supervisors, participant observation and from focus group discussions with community leaders, community medicine distributors (CMDs), men, women who were pregnant or breastfeeding at the time of mass-treatment, and adolescent males and females. Findings include the following: (i) treatment registers are often incomplete making it difficult to obtain accurate estimates of the number of persons treated; (ii) males face more barriers to accessing treatment than women due to occupational roles which keep them away from households or villages for long periods, and males may be more distrustful of treatment; (iii) CMDs may be unaware of which medicines are safe for pregnant and breastfeeding women, resulting in women missing beneficial treatments.Conclusions/SignificanceFindings highlight the need to improve community-level training in drug distribution which should include gender-specific issues and guidelines for treating pregnant and breastfeeding women. Accurate age and sex disaggregated measures of the number of community members who swallow the medicines are also needed to ensure proper monitoring and evaluation of treatment programmes.

BackgroundIn 2004 Niger established a large scale schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminths control programme targeting children aged 5–14 years and adults. In two years 4.3 million treatments were delivered in 40 districts using school based and community distribution.Method and FindingsFour districts were surveyed in 2006 to estimate the economic cost per district, per treatment and per schistosomiasis infection averted. The study compares the costs of treatment at start up and in a subsequent year, identifies the allocation of costs by activity, input and organisation, and assesses the cost of treatment. The cost of delivery provided by teachers is compared to cost of delivery by community distributers (CDD).The total economic cost of the programme including programmatic, national and local government costs and international support in four study districts, over two years, was US$ 456,718; an economic cost/treatment of $0.58. The full economic delivery cost of school based treatment in 2005/06 was $0.76, and for community distribution was $0.46. Including only the programme costs the figures are $0.47 and $0.41 respectively. Differences at sub-district are more marked. This is partly explained by the fact that a CDD treats 5.8 people for every one treated in school.The range in cost effectiveness for both direct and direct and indirect treatments is quantified and the need to develop and refine such estimates is emphasised.ConclusionsThe relative cost effectiveness of school and community delivery differs by country according to the composition of the population treated, the numbers targeted and treated at school and in the community, the cost and frequency of training teachers and CDDs. Options analysis of technical and implementation alternatives including a financial analysis should form part of the programme design process.

Further work is needed to forecast the effectiveness of alternative long-term integrated treatment strategies for control and/or elimination of neglected tropical diseases.

Background:In 2004 Niger established a large scale schistosomiasis and soil-transmitted helminths control programme targeting children aged 5-14 years and adults. In two years 4.3 million treatments were delivered in 40 districts using school based and community distribution.Method and Findings: Four districts were surveyed in 2006 to estimate the economic cost per district, per treatment and per schistosomiasis infection averted. The study compares the costs of treatment at start up and in a subsequent year, identifies the allocation of costs by activity, input and organisation, and assesses the cost of treatment. The cost of delivery provided by teachers is compared to cost of delivery by community distributers (CDD). The total economic cost of the programme including programmatic, national and local government costs and international support in four study districts, over two years, was US$ 456,718; an economic cost/treatment of $0.58. The full economic delivery cost of school based treatment in 2005/06 was $0.76, and for community distribution was $0.46. Including only the programme costs the figures are $0.47 and $0.41 respectively. Differences at sub-district are more marked. This is partly explained by the fact that a CDD treats 5.8 people for every one treated in school. The range in cost effectiveness for both direct and direct and indirect treatments is quantified and the need to develop and refine such estimates is emphasised. Conclusions:The relative cost effectiveness of school and community delivery differs by country according to the composition of the population treated, the numbers targeted and treated at school and in the community, the cost and frequency of training teachers and CDDs. Options analysis of technical and implementation alternatives including a financial analysis should form part of the programme design process.