Suchergebnisse

Currently, malaria elimination efforts are ongoing in several locations across Southeast Asia, including in Kayin State (also known as Karen State), Myanmar . This paper describes the community engagement efforts for a pilot malaria elimination project, the challenges encountered and lessons learnt. Between May 2013 and June 2015, a study on targeted malaria elimination (TME) that included mass drug administration was conducted in four villages (TPN, TOT, KNH, and HKT) of Kayin State. Community engagement efforts included workshops, meetings and house-to-house visits with community members. Exhibitions related to malaria and fun activities were organized for children. In addition, we provided primary care, small individual incentives and village-level incentives. This paper is based on our analysis of data extracted from meeting minutes, field notes, feedback sessions among staff and with community members as well as our own reflections. Average participation across three rounds of MDA were 84.4%, 57.4%, 88.6% and 59.3% for TPN, TOT, KNH and HKT, respectively. Community engagement was fraught with practical challenges such as seasonal tasks of the villagers. There were challenges in explaining difficult concepts like drug resistance and submicroscopic infection. Another was understanding and navigating the politics of these villages, which are located in politically contested areas. Managing expectations of villagers was difficult as they assumed that the community team must know everything related to health. In the TME project, many different community engagement strategies were employed. We encountered many challenges which included logistical, scientific and political difficulties. An approach that is tailored to the local population is key.

Background Research ethics guidelines set a high bar for conducting research with vulnerable populations, often resulting in their exclusion from beneficial research. Our study aims to better characterise participants' vulnerabilities, agency, resourcefulness and sources of support. Methods We undertook qualitative research around two clinical studies involving migrant women living along the Thai–Myanmar border. We conducted 32 in-depth interviews and 10 focus group discussions with research participants, families, researchers and key informants. Results We found that being 'undocumented' is at the core of many structural vulnerabilities, reflecting political, economic, social and health needs. Although migrant women lead challenging lives, they have a support network that includes family, employers, community leaders, non-governmental organisations and research networks. Migrant women choose to participate in research to access quality healthcare, gain knowledge and obtain extra money. However, research has the potential to exacerbate existing vulnerabilities, such as the burdens of cross-border travel, foregoing work and being more visible as migrants. Conclusions Our study confirms that research is important to provide evidence-based care and was viewed by participants as offering many benefits, but it also has hidden burdens. Migrant women exercised agency and resourcefulness when navigating challenges in their lives and research participation.

Background: Any government needs to react quickly to a pandemic and make decisions on healthcare interventions locally and internationally with little information regarding the perceptions of people and the reactions they may receive during the implementation of restrictions. Methods: We report an anonymous online survey in Thailand conducted in May 2020 to assess public perceptions of three interventions in the Thai context: isolation, quarantine and social distancing. A total of 1,020 participants, of whom 52% were women, responded to the survey. Results: Loss of income was the main concern among respondents (>80% for all provinces in Thailand). Traditional media and social media were important channels for communication during the pandemic. A total of 92% of respondents reported that they changed their social behaviour even before the implementation of government policy with 94% reporting they performed social distancing, 97% reported using personal protective equipment such as masks and 95% reported using sanitizer products. Conclusions: This study showed a high level of compliance from individuals with government enforced or voluntarily controls such as quarantine, isolation and social distancing in Thailand. The findings from this study can be used to inform future government measures to control the pandemic and to shape communication strategies.

This qualitative study explores the impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), including social distancing, travel restrictions and quarantine, on lived experiences during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Thailand (TH), Malaysia (MY), Italy (IT) and the United Kingdom (UK). A total of 86 interviews (TH: n = 28; MY: n = 18; IT: n = 20; UK: n = 20) were conducted with members of the public, including healthcare workers (n = 13). Participants across countries held strong views on government imposed NPIs, with many feeling measures lacked clarity. Most participants reported primarily negative impacts of NPIs on their lives, including through separation, isolation and grief over missed milestones; work-related challenges and income loss; and poor mental health and wellbeing. Nonetheless, many also experienced inadvertent positive consequences, including more time at home to focus on what they most valued in life; a greater sense of connectedness; and benefits to working life. Commonly employed coping strategies focused on financial coping (e.g. reducing spending); psycho-emotional coping (e.g. engaging in spiritual practices); social coping and connectedness (e.g., maintaining relationships remotely); reducing and mitigating risks (e.g., changing food shopping routines); and limiting exposure to the news (e.g., checking news only occasionally). Importantly, the extent to which participants' lived experiences were positive or negative, and their ability to cope was underpinned by individual, social and economic factors, with the analysis indicating some salient differences across countries and participants. In order to mitigate negative and unequal impacts of NPIs, COVID-19 policies will benefit from paying closer attention to the social, cultural and psychological-not just biological-vulnerabilities to, and consequences of public health measures.

Background: Artemisinin and partner-drug resistance in Plasmodium falciparum are major threats to malaria control and elimination. Triple artemisinin-based combination therapies (TACTs), which combine existing co-formulated ACTs with a second partner drug that is slowly eliminated, might provide effective treatment and delay emergence of antimalarial drug resistance. Methods: In this multicentre, open-label, randomised trial, we recruited patients with uncomplicated P falciparum malaria at 18 hospitals and health clinics in eight countries. Eligible patients were aged 2–65 years, with acute, uncomplicated P falciparum malaria alone or mixed with non-falciparum species, and a temperature of 37·5°C or higher, or a history of fever in the past 24 h. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to one of two treatments using block randomisation, depending on their location: in Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, and Myanmar patients were assigned to either dihydroartemisinin–piperaquine or dihydroartemisinin–piperaquine plus mefloquine; at three sites in Cambodia they were assigned to either artesunate–mefloquine or dihydroartemisinin–piperaquine plus mefloquine; and in Laos, Myanmar, Bangladesh, India, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo they were assigned to either artemether–lumefantrine or artemether–lumefantrine plus amodiaquine. All drugs were administered orally and doses varied by drug combination and site. Patients were followed-up weekly for 42 days. The primary endpoint was efficacy, defined by 42-day PCR-corrected adequate clinical and parasitological response. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. A detailed assessment of safety and tolerability of the study drugs was done in all patients randomly assigned to treatment. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02453308, and is complete. Findings: Between Aug 7, 2015, and Feb 8, 2018, 1100 patients were given either dihydroartemisinin–piperaquine (183 [17%]), dihydroartemisinin–piperaquine plus mefloquine (269 [25%]), artesunate–mefloquine (73 ...