Is the neglected tropical disease mass drug administration campaign approach an effective strategy to deliver universal health coverage? A case study of the Liberia neglected tropical disease programme.

BACKGROUND: Access to affordable, quality healthcare is the key element of universal health coverage (UHC). This study examines the effectiveness of the neglected tropical disease (NTD) mass drug administration (MDA) campaign approach as a means to deliver UHC, using the example of the Liberia national programme. METHODS: We first mapped the location of 3195 communities from the 2019 national MDA treatment data reporting record of Liberia. The association between coverage for onchocerciasis and lymphatic filariasis treatment achieved in these communities was then explored using a binomial geo-additive model. This model employed three key determinants for community 'remoteness': population density and the modelled travel time of communities to their supporting health facility and to their nearest major settlement. RESULTS: Maps produced highlight a small number of clusters of low treatment coverage in Liberia. Statistical analysis suggests there is a complex relationship between treatment coverage and geographic location. CONCLUSIONS: We accept the MDA campaign approach is a valid mechanism to reach geographically marginal communities and, as such, has the potential to deliver UHC. We recognise there are specific limitations requiring further study.

Assessing the prevalence of refractive errors and accuracy of vision screening by schoolteachers in Liberia.

BACKGROUND: Evidence indicates that school-based vision screening by trained teachers is an effective way of identifying and addressing potential vision problems in schoolchildren. However, inconsistencies have been reported in both the testing methods and accuracy of the screeners. This study assessed the prevalence of refractive errors and accuracy of screening by teachers in Grand Kru County, Liberia. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of data from four schools where, in February 2019, children were screened for refractive errors by trained teachers and then re-examined by ophthalmic technicians. One row of five optotypes of the Snellen 6/9 (0.2 logMar) scale (tumbling E chart) was used at a distance of 3 m. The prevalence of visual impairment and associations with sex, age and school were explored. Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values were calculated. RESULTS: Data were available for 823 of 1095 eligible children with a mean age of 13.7 y (range 5-18) and male:female ratio of 1:0.8. Poor vision was identified in 24 (2.9%) children with no differences by either sex or age but small differences by school. Screening by teachers had a sensitivity of 0.25 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.077 to 0.423) and a specificity of 0.996 (95% CI 0.992 to 1.000). Positive and negative predictive values were 0.667 (95% CI 0.359 to 0.975) and 0.978 (95% CI 0.968 to 0.988), respectively. The results were influenced by a high number of misclassifications in one of the four schools. CONCLUSIONS: Teachers can be trained to conduct vision screening tests on schoolchildren to an acceptable level of accuracy, but strong monitoring and quality assurance systems should be built into screening programmes from the onset. In settings like Liberia, where many children do not attend school regularly, screening programmes should extend to community platforms to reach children out of school.