No abstract

BackgroundThere is no clear consensus on the most sustainable and effective distribution strategy for insecticide treated bed nets (ITNs). Tanzania has been a leader in social marketing but it is still not clear if this can result in high and equitable levels of coverage.MethodsA cluster-randomized survey of ITN and bed net ownership and use was conducted in a rural area exposed to intense Plasmodium falciparum transmission in NE Tanzania where ITN distribution had been subject to routine delivery of national strategies and episodic free distribution through local clinics. Data were collected on household assets to assess equity of ITN coverage and a rapid diagnostic test for malaria (RDT) was performed in all ages.ResultsAmong 598 households in four villages the use of any or insecticidal bed nets in children less than five years of age was 71% and 54% respectively. However there was a 19.8% increase in the number of bed nets per person (p < 0.001) and a 13.4% increase in the number of insecticidal nets per person (p < 0.001) for each quintile increase in household asset score. The odds of being RDT-positive were reduced by more than half in the least poor compared to the poorest households (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.35–0.70). Poorer households had paid less for their nets and acquired them more recently, particularly from non-commercial sources, and bed nets in the least poor households were less likely to be insecticidal compared to nets in the poorest households (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.26–0.74).ConclusionMarked inequity persists with the poorest households still experiencing the highest risk of malaria and the lowest ITN coverage. Abolition of this inequity within the foreseeable future is likely to require mass or targeted free distribution, but risks damaging what is otherwise an effective commercial market.

The Ebola outbreak in West Africa precipitated a renewed momentum to ensure global health security through the expedited and full implementation of the International Health Regulations (IHR) (2005) in all WHO member states. The updated IHR (2005) Monitoring and Evaluation Framework was shared with Member States in 2015 with one mandatory component, that is, States Parties annual reporting to the World Health Assembly (WHA) on compliance and three voluntary components: Joint External Evaluation (JEE), After Action Reviews and Simulation Exercises. In February 2016, Tanzania, was the first country globally to volunteer to do a JEE and the first to use the recommendations for priority actions from the JEE to develop a National Action Plan for Health Security (NAPHS) by February 2017. The JEE demonstrated that within the majority of the 47 indicators within the 19 technical areas, Tanzania had either ‘limited capacity’ or ‘developed capacity’. None had ‘sustainable capacity’. With JEE recommendations for priority actions, recommendations from other relevant assessments and complementary objectives, Tanzania developed the NAPHS through a nationwide consultative and participatory process. The 5-year cost estimate came out to approximately US$86.6 million (22 million for prevent, 50 million for detect, 4.8 million for respond and 9.2 million for other IHR hazards and points of entry). However, with the inclusion of vaccines for zoonotic diseases in animals increases the cost sevenfold. The importance of strong country ownership and committed leadership were identified as instrumental for the development of operationally focused NAPHS that are aligned with broader national plans across multiple sectors. Key lessons learnt by Tanzania can help guide and encourage other countries to translate their JEE priority actions into a realistic costed NAPHS for funding and implementation for IHR (2005).

Approximately 1500 people die annually due to rabies in the United Republic of Tanzania. Moshi, in the Kilimanjaro Region, reported sporadic cases of human rabies between 2017 and 2018. In response and following a One Health approach, we implemented surveillance, monitoring, as well as a mass vaccinations of domestic pets concurrently in >150 villages, achieving a 74.5% vaccination coverage (n = 29, 885 dogs and cats) by September 2018. As of April 2019, no single human or animal case has been recorded. We have observed a disparity between awareness and knowledge levels of community members on rabies epidemiology. Self-adherence to protective rabies vaccination in animals was poor due to the challenges of costs and distances to vaccination centers, among others. Incidence of dog bites was high and only a fraction (65%) of dog bite victims (humans) received post-exposure prophylaxis. A high proportion of unvaccinated dogs and cats and the relative intense interactions with wild dog species at interfaces were the risk factors for seropositivity to rabies virus infection in dogs. A percentage of the previously vaccinated dogs remained unimmunized and some unvaccinated dogs were seropositive. Evidence of community engagement and multi-coordinated implementation of One Health in Moshi serves as an example of best practice in tackling zoonotic diseases using multi-level government efforts. The district-level establishment of the One Health rapid response team (OHRRT), implementation of a carefully structured routine vaccination campaign, improved health education, and the implementation of barriers between domestic animals and wildlife at the interfaces are necessary to reduce the burden of rabies in Moshi and communities with similar profiles.

Background: The USAID Preparedness and Response (P&R) project's publication on Multisectoral Coordination that Works identified five dimensions most critical to creating effective and sustainable One Health platforms: political commitment, institutional structure, management and coordination capacity, technical and financial resources, and joint planning and implementation. This case study describes Tanzania experience in using these dimensions to establish a functional One Health platform. The main objective of this case study was to document the process of institutionalizing the One Health approach in Tanzania. Methods: An analysis of the process used to establish and institutionalize the MCM in Tanzania through addressing the five dimensions mentioned above was conducted between August 2018 and January 2019. Progress activity reports, annual reports and minutes of meetings and consultations regarding the establishment of the Tanzania national One Health platform were examined. Relevant One Health publications were studied as reference material. Results: This case study illustrates the time and level of effort required of multiple partners to build a functional multi-sectoral coordinating mechanism (MCM). Key facilitating factors were identified and the importance of involving policy and decision makers at all stages of the process to facilitate policy decisions and the institutionalization process was underscored. The need for molding the implementation process using lessons learnt along the way-"sailing the ship as it was being built"-is demonstrated. Conclusions: Tanzania now has a functioning and institutionalized MCM with a sound institutional structure and capacity to prevent, detect early and respond to health events. The path to its establishment required the patient commitment of a core group of One Health champions and stakeholders along the way to examine carefully and iteratively how best to structure productive multisectoral coordination in the country. The five dimensions identified by the Preparedness and Response project may provide useful guidance to other countries working to establish functional MCM.