4.5 Article

A community survey of coverage and adverse events following country-wide triple-drug mass drug administration for lymphatic filariasis elimination, Samoa 2018

期刊

PLOS NEGLECTED TROPICAL DISEASES
卷 14, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0008854

关键词

-

资金

  1. Coalition for Operational Research on Neglected Tropical Diseases - Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation [OPP1053230]
  2. United States Agency for International Development through its Neglected Tropical Diseases Program
  3. UK aid from the British people
  4. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council [1109035]
  5. Tasmanian Department of Health
  6. Commonwealth Specialist Training Program
  7. Australian National University Master of Applied Epidemiology Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Author summary Lymphatic filariasis is a disease caused by worms and transmitted between humans by mosquitoes. A global program underway aims to eliminate lymphatic filariasis as a public health problem by distributing two deworming drugs to the whole population once a year for at least five years. In some countries, including Samoa, this strategy has not been sufficient to eliminate transmission. A new drug has been added, and in 2018, Samoa was the first country in the world to distribute triple-drug mass drug administration (MDA) using ivermectin, diethylcarbamazine, and albendazole. This study reports on the coverage achieved (percentage of people who reported taking the drugs) and adverse events after taking the drugs. The study was a large community survey of over 4000 people, done 7-11 weeks after the distribution of the first round of triple-drug MDA. We found that the program reached and offered MDA to approximately 90% of the whole population, and approximately 80% of the whole population swallowed the drugs. We also collected data on whether people felt unwell after taking the pills, and found that 84% of people taking the pills did not feel unwell at all, while 13% reported feeling unwell afterwards but were able to do normal everyday activities, and 3% reported that they had felt unwell and that it stopped them doing normal everyday activities, such as going to school or work. The Global Programme to Eliminate Lymphatic Filariasis has made considerable progress but is experiencing challenges in meeting targets in some countries. Recent World Health Organization guidelines have recommended two rounds of triple-drug therapy with ivermectin, diethylcarbamazine (DEC), and albendazole (IDA), in areas where mass drug administration (MDA) results with two drugs (DEC and albendazole) have been suboptimal, as is the case in Samoa. In August 2018, Samoa was the first country in the world to implement countrywide triple-drug MDA. This paper aims to describe Samoa's experience with program coverage and adverse events (AEs) in the first round of triple-drug MDA. We conducted a large cross-sectional community survey to assess MDA awareness, reach, compliance, coverage and AEs in September/October 2018, 7-11 weeks after the first round of triple-drug MDA. In our sample of 4420 people aged >= 2 years (2.2% of the population), age-adjusted estimates indicated that 89.0% of the eligible population were offered MDA, 83.9% of the eligible population took MDA (program coverage), and 80.2% of the total population took MDA (epidemiological coverage). Overall, 83.8% (2986/3563) reported that they did not feel unwell at all after taking MDA. Mild AEs (feeling unwell but able to do normal everyday things) were reported by 13.3% (476/3563) and moderate or severe AEs (feeling unwell and being unable to do normal everyday activities such as going to work or school) by 2.9% (103/3563) of participants. This study following the 2018 triple-drug MDA in Samoa demonstrated a high reported program awareness and reach of 90.8% and 89.0%, respectively. Age-adjusted program coverage of 83.9% of the total population showed that MDA was well accepted and well tolerated by the community.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据