IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pntd00/0008301.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk factors associated with failing pre-transmission assessment surveys (pre-TAS) in lymphatic filariasis elimination programs: Results of a multi-country analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Clara R Burgert-Brucker
  • Kathryn L Zoerhoff
  • Maureen Headland
  • Erica A Shoemaker
  • Rachel Stelmach
  • Mohammad Jahirul Karim
  • Wilfrid Batcho
  • Clarisse Bougouma
  • Roland Bougma
  • Biholong Benjamin Didier
  • Nko'Ayissi Georges
  • Benjamin Marfo
  • Jean Frantz Lemoine
  • Helena Ullyartha Pangaribuan
  • Eksi Wijayanti
  • Yaya Ibrahim Coulibaly
  • Salif Seriba Doumbia
  • Pradip Rimal
  • Adamou Bacthiri Salissou
  • Yukaba Bah
  • Upendo Mwingira
  • Andreas Nshala
  • Edridah Muheki
  • Joseph Shott
  • Violetta Yevstigneyeva
  • Egide Ndayishimye
  • Margaret Baker
  • John Kraemer
  • Molly Brady

Abstract

Achieving elimination of lymphatic filariasis (LF) as a public health problem requires a minimum of five effective rounds of mass drug administration (MDA) and demonstrating low prevalence in subsequent assessments. The first assessments recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) are sentinel and spot-check sites—referred to as pre-transmission assessment surveys (pre-TAS)—in each implementation unit after MDA. If pre-TAS shows that prevalence in each site has been lowered to less than 1% microfilaremia or less than 2% antigenemia, the implementation unit conducts a TAS to determine whether MDA can be stopped. Failure to pass pre-TAS means that further rounds of MDA are required. This study aims to understand factors influencing pre-TAS results using existing programmatic data from 554 implementation units, of which 74 (13%) failed, in 13 countries. Secondary data analysis was completed using existing data from Bangladesh, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Ghana, Haiti, Indonesia, Mali, Nepal, Niger, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, and Uganda. Additional covariate data were obtained from spatial raster data sets. Bivariate analysis and multilinear regression were performed to establish potential relationships between variables and the pre-TAS result. Higher baseline prevalence and lower elevation were significant in the regression model. Variables statistically significantly associated with failure (p-value ≤0.05) in the bivariate analyses included baseline prevalence at or above 5% or 10%, use of Filariasis Test Strips (FTS), primary vector of Culex, treatment with diethylcarbamazine-albendazole, higher elevation, higher population density, higher enhanced vegetation index (EVI), higher annual rainfall, and 6 or more rounds of MDA. This paper reports for the first time factors associated with pre-TAS results from a multi-country analysis. This information can help countries more effectively forecast program activities, such as the potential need for more rounds of MDA, and prioritize resources to ensure adequate coverage of all persons in areas at highest risk of failing pre-TAS.Author summary: Achieving elimination of lymphatic filariasis (LF) as a public health problem requires a minimum of five rounds of mass drug administration (MDA) and being able to demonstrate low prevalence in several subsequent assessments. LF elimination programs implement sentinel and spot-check site assessments, called pre-TAS, to determine whether districts are eligible to implement more rigorous population-based surveys to determine whether MDA can be stopped or if further rounds are required. Reasons for failing pre-TAS are not well understood and have not previously been examined with data compiled from multiple countries. For this analysis, we analyzed data from routine USAID and WHO reports from Bangladesh, Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Ghana, Haiti, Indonesia, Mali, Nepal, Niger, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, and Uganda. In a model that included multiple variables, high baseline prevalence and lower elevation were significant. In models comparing only one variable to the outcome, the following were statistically significantly associated with failure: higher baseline prevalence at or above 5% or 10%, use of the FTS, primary vector of Culex, treatment with diethylcarbamazine-albendazole, lower elevation, higher population density, higher Enhanced Vegetation Index, higher annual rainfall, and six or more rounds of mass drug administration. These results can help national programs plan MDA more effectively, e.g., by focusing resources on areas with higher baseline prevalence and/or lower elevation.

Suggested Citation

  • Clara R Burgert-Brucker & Kathryn L Zoerhoff & Maureen Headland & Erica A Shoemaker & Rachel Stelmach & Mohammad Jahirul Karim & Wilfrid Batcho & Clarisse Bougouma & Roland Bougma & Biholong Benjamin , 2020. "Risk factors associated with failing pre-transmission assessment surveys (pre-TAS) in lymphatic filariasis elimination programs: Results of a multi-country analysis," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-17, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0008301
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0008301
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0008301
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0008301&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pntd.0008301?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0008301. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosntds (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.