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

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>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 th...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mutero Clifford M, Schlodder Dieter, Kabatereine Narcis, Kramer Randall
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2012-01-01
Series:Malaria Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.malariajournal.com/content/11/1/21
id doaj-67259124865443a994a9ecfd7b25fa05
record_format Article
spelling doaj-67259124865443a994a9ecfd7b25fa052020-11-24T23:24:36ZengBMCMalaria Journal1475-28752012-01-011112110.1186/1475-2875-11-21Integrated vector management for malaria control in Uganda: knowledge, perceptions and policy developmentMutero Clifford MSchlodder DieterKabatereine NarcisKramer Randall<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>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.</p> http://www.malariajournal.com/content/11/1/21MalariaIntegrated vector managementPolicy developmentUganda
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Mutero Clifford M
Schlodder Dieter
Kabatereine Narcis
Kramer Randall
spellingShingle Mutero Clifford M
Schlodder Dieter
Kabatereine Narcis
Kramer Randall
Integrated vector management for malaria control in Uganda: knowledge, perceptions and policy development
Malaria Journal
Malaria
Integrated vector management
Policy development
Uganda
author_facet Mutero Clifford M
Schlodder Dieter
Kabatereine Narcis
Kramer Randall
author_sort Mutero Clifford M
title Integrated vector management for malaria control in Uganda: knowledge, perceptions and policy development
title_short Integrated vector management for malaria control in Uganda: knowledge, perceptions and policy development
title_full Integrated vector management for malaria control in Uganda: knowledge, perceptions and policy development
title_fullStr Integrated vector management for malaria control in Uganda: knowledge, perceptions and policy development
title_full_unstemmed Integrated vector management for malaria control in Uganda: knowledge, perceptions and policy development
title_sort integrated vector management for malaria control in uganda: knowledge, perceptions and policy development
publisher BMC
series Malaria Journal
issn 1475-2875
publishDate 2012-01-01
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>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.</p>
topic Malaria
Integrated vector management
Policy development
Uganda
url http://www.malariajournal.com/content/11/1/21
work_keys_str_mv AT muterocliffordm integratedvectormanagementformalariacontrolinugandaknowledgeperceptionsandpolicydevelopment
AT schlodderdieter integratedvectormanagementformalariacontrolinugandaknowledgeperceptionsandpolicydevelopment
AT kabatereinenarcis integratedvectormanagementformalariacontrolinugandaknowledgeperceptionsandpolicydevelopment
AT kramerrandall integratedvectormanagementformalariacontrolinugandaknowledgeperceptionsandpolicydevelopment
_version_ 1725559911403749376