Integrated vector management for malaria control in Uganda: knowledge, perceptions and policy development.

dc.contributor.author

Mutero, Clifford M

dc.contributor.author

Schlodder, Dieter

dc.contributor.author

Kabatereine, Narcis

dc.contributor.author

Kramer, Randall

dc.coverage.spatial

England

dc.date.accessioned

2013-05-01T18:12:12Z

dc.date.issued

2012-01-14

dc.description.abstract

BACKGROUND: Integrated vector management (IVM) is increasingly being recommended as an option for sustainable malaria control. However, many malaria-endemic countries lack a policy framework to guide and promote the approach. The objective of the study was to assess knowledge and perceptions in relation to current malaria vector control policy and IVM in Uganda, and to make recommendations for consideration during future development of a specific IVM policy. METHODS: The study used a structured questionnaire to interview 34 individuals working at technical or policy-making levels in health, environment, agriculture and fisheries sectors. Specific questions on IVM focused on the following key elements of the approach: integration of chemical and non-chemical interventions of vector control; evidence-based decision making; inter-sectoral collaboration; capacity building; legislation; advocacy and community mobilization. RESULTS: All participants were familiar with the term IVM and knew various conventional malaria vector control (MVC) methods. Only 75% thought that Uganda had a MVC policy. Eighty percent (80%) felt there was inter-sectoral collaboration towards IVM, but that it was poor due to financial constraints, difficulties in involving all possible sectors and political differences. The health, environment and agricultural sectors were cited as key areas requiring cooperation in order for IVM to succeed. Sixty-seven percent (67%) of participants responded that communities were actively being involved in MVC, while 48% felt that the use of research results for evidence-based decision making was inadequate or poor. A majority of the participants felt that malaria research in Uganda was rarely used to facilitate policy changes. Suggestions by participants for formulation of specific and effective IVM policy included: revising the MVC policy and IVM-related policies in other sectors into a single, unified IVM policy and, using legislation to enforce IVM in development projects. CONCLUSION: Integrated management of malaria vectors in Uganda remains an underdeveloped component of malaria control policy. Cooperation between the health and other sectors needs strengthening and funding for MVC increased in order to develop and effectively implement an appropriate IVM policy. Continuous engagement of communities by government as well as monitoring and evaluation of vector control programmes will be crucial for sustaining IVM in the country.

dc.identifier

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22243516

dc.identifier

1475-2875-11-21

dc.identifier.eissn

1475-2875

dc.identifier.uri

https://hdl.handle.net/10161/6986

dc.language

eng

dc.publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

dc.relation.ispartof

Malar J

dc.relation.isversionof

10.1186/1475-2875-11-21

dc.subject

Animals

dc.subject

Attitude of Health Personnel

dc.subject

Disease Transmission, Infectious

dc.subject

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice

dc.subject

Health Policy

dc.subject

Health Services Research

dc.subject

Humans

dc.subject

Malaria

dc.subject

Mosquito Control

dc.subject

Policy Making

dc.subject

Surveys and Questionnaires

dc.subject

Uganda

dc.title

Integrated vector management for malaria control in Uganda: knowledge, perceptions and policy development.

dc.type

Journal article

duke.contributor.orcid

Kramer, Randall|0000-0002-1325-7425

pubs.author-url

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22243516

pubs.begin-page

21

pubs.organisational-group

Duke

pubs.organisational-group

Duke Science & Society

pubs.organisational-group

Economics

pubs.organisational-group

Environmental Sciences and Policy

pubs.organisational-group

Global Health Institute

pubs.organisational-group

Initiatives

pubs.organisational-group

Institutes and Provost's Academic Units

pubs.organisational-group

Nicholas School of the Environment

pubs.organisational-group

Trinity College of Arts & Sciences

pubs.organisational-group

University Institutes and Centers

pubs.publication-status

Published online

pubs.volume

11

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Mutero et al 2012.pdf
Size:
553.69 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Published version