Enabling Factors for Improved Malaria Chemoprophylaxis Compliance

Diara, Malick; Nowosiwsky, Andry; Harmen, Sonia; Burke, Nicholas; Alilio, Martin

doi:10.4269/ajtmh.2012.12-0277c

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result, interventions to improve chemoprophylaxis require a multifaceted approach. Health care providers need to tailor interventions to their particular populations to increase awareness, understanding, or acceptance of malaria chemoprophylaxis (36).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Malaria Surveillance — United States, 2013

Cullen¹,

Mace²,

Arguin³

2016

MMWR Surveill. Summ.

102

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Problem/Condition: Malaria in humans is caused by intraerythrocytic protozoa of the genus Plasmodium. These parasites are transmitted by the bite of an infective female Anopheles mosquito. The majority of malaria infections in the United States occur among persons who have traveled to regions with ongoing malaria transmission. However, malaria is also occasionally acquired by persons who have not traveled out of the country through exposure to infected blood products, congenital transmission, laboratory exposure, or local mosquitoborne transmission. Malaria surveillance in the United States is conducted to identify episodes of local transmission and to guide prevention recommendations for travelers.Period Covered: This report summarizes cases in persons with onset of illness in 2013 and summarizes trends during previous years.Description of System: Malaria cases diagnosed by blood film, polymerase chain reaction, or rapid diagnostic tests are mandated to be reported to local and state health departments by health care providers or laboratory staff. Case investigations are conducted by local and state health departments, and reports are transmitted to CDC through the National Malaria Surveillance System, National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System, or direct CDC consultations. CDC conducted antimalarial drug resistance marker testing on blood samples submitted to CDC by health care providers or local/state health departments. Data from these reporting systems serve as the basis for this report.Results: CDC received 1,727 reported cases of malaria, including two congenital cases, with an onset of symptoms in 2013 among persons in the United States. The total number of cases represents a 2% increase from the 1,687 cases reported for 2012. Plasmodium falciparum, P. vivax, P. malariae, and P. ovale were identified in 61%, 14%, 3%, and 4% of cases, respectively. Forty (2%) patients were infected by two species. The infecting species was unreported or undetermined in 17% of cases. Polymerase chain reaction testing determined or corrected the species for 85 of the 137 (62%) samples evaluated for drug resistance marker testing. Of the 904 patients who reported purpose of travel, 635 (70%) were visiting friends or relatives (VFR). Among the 961 cases in U.S. civilians for whom information on chemoprophylaxis use and travel region was known, 42 (4%) patients reported that they had initiated and adhered to a chemoprophylaxis drug regimen recommended by CDC for the regions to which they had traveled. Thirty-six cases were reported in pregnant women, none of whom had adhered to chemoprophylaxis. Among all reported cases, approximately 270 (16%) were classified as severe illnesses in 2013. Of these, 10 persons with malaria died in 2013, the highest number since 2001. In 2013, a total of 137 blood samples submitted to CDC were tested for molecular markers associated with antimalarial drug resistance. Of the 100 P. falciparum-positive samples, 95 were tested for pyrimethamine resistance: 88 (93%) had genetic polymor...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Malaria Surveillance — United States, 2013

Cullen¹,

Mace²,

Arguin³

2016

MMWR Surveill. Summ.

102

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Specifically, the Company's response was built on its existing framework for workplace infectious disease prevention and control and on the Emergency Support Group system to quickly deploy related mechanism and tools by the first quarter of 2014 (8,9). The early and steady engagement of Company executives triggered by the Global Medicine and Occupational Health (MOH) Department, helped mobilize internal and external resources, including funding and additional technical expertise for affiliates.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Global Effective Ebola Outbreak Preparedness and Response from an Oil and Gas Company Perspective

Diara

Ngunjiri

Aliyu³

et al. 2016

SPE International Conference and Exhibition on Health, Safety, Security, Environment, and Social Responsibility

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Company framework of workplace infectious disease control used for our global preparedness and response to the Ebola outbreak in West Africa is presented. Results and lessons learned are described from a global perspective; including their contribution in mitigating the Ebola outbreak risk for workers and disruption to Company's global operations (not just those in Ebola affected countries). Using the existing Company emergency support approach and integrating workplace infectious disease control aspects, headquarters interfaces were established for Ebola support to locations in West Africa and globally. Company management coordinated the support to sites while working with representatives from the medical, safety, security, law, human resources, and public and government affairs departments. The World Health Organization road map for Ebola was adapted for support to affiliates and for periodic reviews with operations in West Africa. Global scalable guidance measures included awareness, travel recommendations, site screening, case management and collaboration with industry, governments, international experts and health care providers. Early in 2014, Company disease surveillance system recognized the Ebola outbreak in West Africa. The management was engaged and a global coordinated response initiated. As a result, periodic communications across Company organizations and sites were organized. Emergency Support Groups (ESG) at headquarters and locations in West Africa were convened to monitor the outbreak, prevent workplace case occurrence and prepare for the response. The implementation of recommended measures was periodically reviewed, indicating effective execution and management of identified gaps. Targeted relocation of dependents and staff was arranged. The business continuity plans (BCP) for Company sites outside West Africa were revisited. Global guidance for travelers coming from or going to affected countries was issued. Guidelines for marine terminals receiving ships were developed. External interfaces with other International Oil Companies, expert community representatives such as the US Centers for Disease Control and local health authorities were instrumental in tailoring the Company approach for Ebola, including appropriate investments to help address community needs. Engagement of Company senior management was critical, as well as working with the business community, health experts and governments. Integrating an infectious disease control program within Company systems and processes was essential for a sustained and effective response. Considering Ebola and other infectious disease risks, using standardized measures built into Company organizations and levels is essential. ESGs and management engagement are necessary for adequate internal and external coordination. Leveraging existing tools such as BCP and disease outbreak management plans facilitates readiness and response. Workforce communications are fundamental for adequate workplace preparedness which is best verified through drills. External expert engagement is critical for technical knowledge and effective interface with country health systems.

show abstract