AS/AQ treatment was followed by fewer recurrences than AL treatment, contrasting with older data. Each regimen selected for polymorphisms associated with decreased treatment response. Research should consider multiple or rotating regimens to maintain treatment efficacies.

BackgroundThe integrated approach to malaria prevention which advocates use of several methods in a holistic manner is being explored to complement existing strategies. A pilot project that promoted integrated malaria prevention established 40 demonstration households using the approach. As part of impact evaluation of the project 2 years after implementation, the experiences of these households using integrated malaria prevention were assessed.MethodsA qualitative cross-sectional survey was carried out in Wakiso district, Uganda which involved 40 in-depth interviews among households implementing integrated malaria prevention. The study assessed practices on malaria prevention, benefits and challenges of using integrated malaria prevention, preference of malaria prevention methods, and impact of the demonstration households on the community. Thematic analysis was employed using Atlas ti software.ResultsThe households continued to use many of the malaria prevention methods in the integrated approach including sleeping under long-lasting insecticidal nets, screening in windows and ventilators, removing mosquito breeding sites, and closing of doors early in the evenings. The major benefits reported from using integrated malaria prevention were reduction in mosquito populations in their houses and less occurrence of malaria particularly among children. Although several community members learnt about and admired various malaria prevention methods from the demonstration households especially screening in windows and ventilators, the majority could not afford to implement some of them due to lack of resources. The main challenge established in using integrated malaria prevention was the much time required to implement the several methods some of which had to be done regularly such as early closing of windows. In addition, complacency had led to some households not utilizing a number of methods in the integrated approach because of using others.ConclusionUse of the integrated approach to malaria prevention benefited the demonstration households mainly through observed reduction in mosquitoes indoors and malaria occurrence hence could be promoted in other areas. Other studies to quantify the protective effect of integrated malaria prevention particularly regarding malaria prevalence and contribution of each of the methods are required.

BackgroundIntegrated vector management (IVM) is the recommended approach for controlling some vector-borne diseases (VBD). In the face of current challenges to disease vector control, IVM is vital to achieve national targets set for VBD control. Though global efforts, especially for combating malaria, now focus on elimination and eradication, IVM remains useful for Uganda which is principally still in the control phase of the malaria continuum. This paper outlines the processes undertaken to consolidate tactical planning and implementation frameworks for IVM in Uganda.Case descriptionThe Uganda National Malaria Control Programme with its efforts to implement an IVM approach to vector control was the ‘case’ for this study. Integrated management of malaria vectors in Uganda remained an underdeveloped component of malaria control policy. In 2012, knowledge and perceptions of malaria vector control policy and IVM were assessed, and recommendations for a specific IVM policy were made. In 2014, a thorough vector control needs assessment (VCNA) was conducted according to WHO recommendations. The findings of the VCNA informed the development of the national IVM strategic guidelines. Information sources for this study included all available data and accessible archived documentary records on VBD control in Uganda. The literature was reviewed and adapted to the local context and translated into the consolidated tactical framework.DiscussionWHO recommends implementation of IVM as the main strategy to vector control and has encouraged member states to adopt the approach. However, many VBD-endemic countries lack IVM policy frameworks to guide implementation of the approach. In Uganda most VBD coexists and could be managed more effectively if done in tandem. In order to successfully control malaria and other VBD and move towards their elimination, the country needs to scale up proven and effective vector control interventions and also learn from the experience of other countries. The IVM strategy is important in consolidating inter-sectoral collaboration and coordination and providing the tactical direction for effective deployment of vector control interventions along the five key elements of the approach and to align them with contemporary epidemiology of VBD in the country.ConclusionsUganda has successfully established an evidence-based IVM approach and consolidated strategic planning and operational frameworks for VBD control. However, operating implementation arrangements as outlined in the national strategic guidelines for IVM and managing insecticide resistance, as well as improving vector surveillance, are imperative. In addition, strengthened information, education and communication/behaviour change and communication, collaboration and coordination will be crucial in scaling up and using vector control interventions.

Northern Uganda hosts a large population of refugees from South Sudan, and malaria is one of the major health problems in the area. In 2015, intermittent preventive treatment for malaria (IPTc) was implemented in two refugee camps among children aged 6 months to 14 years. Three distributions of dihydroartemisinin–piperaquine (DP) were conducted at 8-week intervals. The first dose was directly administered at IPTc distribution sites and the second and third doses were given to caregivers to administer at home. A multi-faceted evaluation was implemented, including coverage surveys, malaria prevalence surveys, reinforced surveillance, and pharmacovigilance. Programme coverage exceeded 90% during all three distributions with a total of 40,611 participants. Compared to same period during the previous year (only available data), the incidence of malaria in the target populations was reduced (IRR 0.73, 95% CI 0.69–0.77 among children under 5 years old; IRR 0.70, 95% CI 0.67–0.72 among children aged 5–14 years). Among those not targeted for intervention, the incidence between the 2 years increased (IRR 1.49, 95% CI 1.42–1.56). Cross-sectional surveys showed a prevalence of parasitaemia (microscopy or PCR) of 12.9–16.4% (95% CI 12.6–19.3) during the intervention, with the highest prevalence among children aged 5–14 years, but with a large increase 8 weeks after the final distribution. A total of 57 adverse events were reported during the intervention period, including one severe adverse event (death from varicella). Adverse events were of mild to moderate severity, and were mainly dermatologic and gastrointestinal. This is the first documentation of an IPTc programme in a refugee camp. The positive impact of DP on the incidence of malaria, together with its favourable safety profile, should lead to further use of IPTc in similar settings. Expanding coverage groups and decreasing intervals between distributions might provide more benefit, but would need to be balanced with the operational implications of a broader, more frequent distribution schedule.