Development of a District-Level Programmatic Assessment Tool for Risk of Measles Virus Transmission.

All six World Health Organization (WHO) regions have now set goals for measles elimination by or before 2020. To prioritize measles elimination efforts and use available resources efficiently, there is a need to identify at-risk areas that are offtrack from meeting performance targets and require strengthening of programmatic efforts. This article describes the development of a WHO measles programmatic risk assessment tool to be used for monitoring, guiding, and sustaining measles elimination efforts at the subnational level. We outline the tool development process; the tool specifications and requirements for data inputs; the framework of risk categories, indicators, and scoring; and the risk category assignment. Overall risk was assessed as a function of indicator scores that fall into four main categories: population immunity, surveillance quality, program performance, and threat assessment. On the basis of the overall score, the tool assigns each district a risk of either low, medium, high, or very high. The cut-off criteria for the risk assignment categories were based on the distribution of scores from all possible combinations of individual indicator cutoffs. The results may be used for advocacy to communicate risk to policymakers, mobilize resources for corrective actions, manage population immunity, and prioritize programmatic activities. Ongoing evaluation of indicators will be needed to evaluate programmatic performance and plan risk mitigation activities effectively. The availability of a comprehensive tool that can identify at-risk districts will enhance efforts to prioritize resources and implement strategies for achieving the Global Vaccine Action Plan goals for measles elimination.

Should outbreak response immunization be recommended for measles outbreaks in middle- and low-income countries? An update.

BACKGROUND: Measles caused mortality in >164,000 children in 2008, with most deaths occurring during outbreaks. Nonetheless, the impact and desirability of conducting measles outbreak response immunization (ORI) in middle- and low-income countries has been controversial. World Health Organization guidelines published in 1999 recommended against ORI in such settings, although recently these guidelines have been reversed for countries with measles mortality reduction goals. METHODS: We searched literature published during 1995-2009 for papers reporting on measles outbreaks. Papers identified were reviewed by 2 reviewers to select those that mentioned ORI. World Bank classification of country income was used to identify reports of outbreaks in middle- and low-income countries. RESULTS: We identified a total of 485 articles, of which 461 (95%) were available. Thirty-eight of these papers reported on a total of 38 outbreaks in which ORI was used. ORI had a clear impact in 16 (42%) of these outbreaks. In the remaining outbreaks, we were unable to independently assess the impact of ORI. CONCLUSIONS: These findings generally support ORI in middle- and low-income countries. However, the decision to conduct ORI and the nature and extent of the vaccination response need to be made on a case-by-case basis.

Success of Senegal's first nationwide distribution of long-lasting insecticide-treated nets to children under five - contribution toward universal coverage.

BACKGROUND: In 2009, the first national long-lasting insecticide-treated net (LLIN) distribution campaign in Senegal resulted in the distribution of 2.2 million LLINs in two phases to children aged 6-59 months. Door-to-door teams visited all households to administer vitamin A and mebendazole, and to give a coupon to redeem later for an LLIN. METHODS: A nationwide community-based two-stage cluster survey was conducted, with clusters selected within regions by probability proportional to size sampling, followed by GPS-assisted mapping, simple random selection of households in each cluster, and administration of a questionnaire using personal digital assistants (PDAs). The questionnaire followed the Malaria Indicator Survey format, with rosters of household members and bed nets, and questions on campaign participation. RESULTS: There were 3,280 households in 112 clusters representing 33,993 people. Most (92.1%) guardians of eligible children had heard about the campaign, the primary sources being health workers (33.7%), neighbours (26.2%), and radio (22.0%). Of eligible children, 82.4% received mebendazole, 83.8% received vitamin A, and 75.4% received LLINs. Almost all (91.4%) LLINs received during the campaign remained in the household; of those not remaining, 74.4% had been given away and none were reported sold. At least one insecticide-treated net (ITN) was present in 82.3% of all households, 89.2% of households with a child < 5 years and 57.5% of households without a child < 5 years. Just over half (52.4%) of ITNs had been received during the campaign. Considering possible indicators of universal coverage, 39.8% of households owned at least one ITN per two people, 21.6% owned at least one ITN per sleeping space and 34.7% of the general population slept under an ITN the night before the survey. In addition, 45.6% of children < 5 years, and 49.2% of pregnant women had slept under an ITN. CONCLUSIONS: The nationwide integrated LLIN distribution campaign allowed household ITN ownership of one or more ITNs to surpass the RBM target of 80% set for 2010, though additional distribution strategies are needed to reach populations missed by the targeted campaign and to reach the universal coverage targets of one ITN per sleeping space and 80% of the population using an ITN.