Reactive Case Detection (RACD) and foci investigation strategies in malaria control and elimination: a review.

BACKGROUND: Reactive case detection (RACD) and foci investigation are key strategies in malaria elimination and prevention of its re-establishment. They are a key part of surveillance that has been recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) to be considered as a core intervention and as one of the three pillars of the Global Technical Strategy for Malaria 2016-2030. METHODS: A search using the key words "Reactive Case Detection", "RACD", "RCD" and "Malaria" was carried out in PubMed, Scopus, Taylor and Francis online databases for studies published until 31st July 2019. The inclusion criteria for selection of articles for review included (1) how RACD is implemented in each country; (2) challenges faced in RACD implementation; (3) suggestions on how the effectiveness of RACD process can be improved. RESULTS: 411 titles were identified, 41 full text articles were screened and 29 were found eligible for inclusion in the review. Published literature on RACD, and case and foci investigations has mostly assessed the process of the activity. Most studies have documented that the yield of positives in RACD has been highest in the index case's household and the immediate neighbourhood of the index case. Microscopy and RDTs are the common tests used in RACD. The guidelines for case and foci investigation, and RACD and PACD, are not universally adopted and are country-specific. Some of the limitations and challenges identified include lack of proper guidelines, logistic issues and problems with public compliance. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is no documented evidence that RACD is useful in malaria elimination settings, most authors have opined that RACD is necessary for malaria elimination. Lack of knowledge in the target populations, a target radius and how to carry out the RACD process is a major challenge in the decision-making process.

Initial response to SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) outbreak in Sri Lanka; views of public health specialists through an International Health Regulations lens.

The COVID-19 pandemic affected Sri Lanka despite having developed an International Health Regulations (IHR) steering committee in 2016 and a national action plan for health security following the Joint External Evaluation in 2018. Many steps were taken to improve the disaster management skills of healthcare workers even before the COVID-19 outbreak. We interviewed seven public health specialists to obtain their views on the country's response to the pandemic. A thematic analysis was conducted, leading to the emergence of three major themes and seven subthemes. The major themes included health security preparedness; COVID-19 management; and effects of COVID-19. The subthemes were; preparedness prior to pandemic and gaps in the preparedness (under health security preparedness); dual burden for the curative sector, strategies to reduce transmission and barriers to managing COVID-19 (under COVID-19 management) and negative and positive effects of COVID-19 (under effects of COVID-19). When COVID-19 reached Sri Lanka, healthcare workers, border control authorities and those involved with infectious disease control were overwhelmed by the magnitude of the pandemic. Healthcare workers' hesitation to work amidst the pandemic due to fear of infection and possible transmission of infection to their families was a major issue; the demand for personal protective equipment by health workers when stocks were low was also a contributory factor. Lockdowns with curfew and quarantine at government regulated centers were implemented as necessary. Perceptions of the public including permitting healthcare workers to perform field public health services, logistical barriers and lack of human resources were a few of the barriers that were expressed. Some persons did not declare their symptoms, fearing that they would have to be quarantined. The pandemic severely affected the economy and Sri Lanka relied on donations and loans to overcome the situation. Pandemic also brought about innovative methods to maintain and upgrade health service provision. Individuals with non-communicable diseases received their regular medications through the post which reduced their risk of being infected by visiting hospitals. Improvement of laboratory services and quarantine services, a reduction of acute respiratory infections and diarrhoeal diseases, improved intersectoral coordination and public philanthropic response were other positive effects.

Malaria Control, Elimination, and Prevention as Components of Health Security: A Review.

International travel, a major risk factor for imported malaria, has emerged as an important challenge in sustaining malaria elimination and prevention of its reestablishment. To make travel and trade safe, the WHO adopted the International Health Regulations (IHR) which provides a legal framework for the prevention, detection, and containment of public health risks at source. We conducted a systematic review to assess the relevance and the extent of implementation of IHR practices that can play a role in reducing malaria transmission. Selected studies addressed control, elimination, and prevention of reestablishment of malaria. Study themes focused on appraisal of surveillance and response, updating national policies to facilitate malaria control and elimination, travel as a risk factor for malaria and risk mitigation methods, vector control, transfusion malaria, competing interests, malaria in border areas, and other challenges posed by emerging communicable diseases on malaria control and elimination efforts. Review results indicate that malaria has not been prioritized as part of the IHR nor has the IHR focused on vector-borne diseases such as malaria. The IHR framework in its current format can be applied to malaria and other vector-borne diseases to strengthen surveillance and response, overcome challenges at borders, and improve data sharing-especially among countries moving toward elimination-but additional guidelines are required. Application of the IHR in countries in the malaria control phase may not be effective until the disease burden is brought down to elimination levels. Considering existing global elimination goals, the application of IHR for malaria should be urgently reviewed and included as part of the IHR.