↓ Skip to main content

A qualitative review of implementer perceptions of the national community-level malaria surveillance system in Southern Province, Zambia

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
129 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A qualitative review of implementer perceptions of the national community-level malaria surveillance system in Southern Province, Zambia
Published in
Malaria Journal, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12936-016-1455-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lynne Lohfeld, Tokozile Kangombe-Ngwenya, Anna M. Winters, Zunda Chisha, Busiku Hamainza, Mulakwa Kamuliwo, John M. Miller, Matthew Burns, Daniel J. Bridges

Abstract

Parts of Zambia with very low malaria parasite prevalence and high coverage of vector control interventions are targeted for malaria elimination through a series of interventions including reactive case detection (RCD) at community level. When a symptomatic individual presenting to a community health worker (CHW) or government clinic is diagnostically confirmed as an incident malaria case an RCD response is initiated. This consists of a CHW screening the community around the incident case with rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) and treating positive cases with artemether-lumefantrine (AL, Coartem™) in accordance with national policy. Since its inception in 2011, Zambia's RCD programme has relied on anecdotal feedback from staff to identify issues and possible solutions. In 2014, a systematic qualitative programme review was conducted to determine perceptions around malaria rates, incentives, operational challenges and solutions according to CHWs, their supervisors and district-level managers. A criterion-based sampling framework based on training regime and performance level was used to select nine rural health posts in four districts of Southern Province. Twenty-two staff interviews were completed to produce English or bilingual (CiTonga or Silozi + English) verbatim transcripts, which were then analysed using thematic framework analysis. CHWs, their supervisors and district-level managers strongly credited the system with improving access to malaria services and significantly reducing the number of cases in their area. The main implementation barriers included access (e.g., lack of rain gear, broken bicycles), insufficient number of CHWs for programme coverage, communication (e.g. difficulties maintaining cell phones and "talk time" to transmit data by phone), and inconsistent supply chain (e.g., inadequate numbers of RDT kits and anti-malarial drugs to test and treat uncomplicated cases). This review highlights the importance of a community surveillance system like RCD in shaping Zambia's malaria elimination campaign by identifying community-based infections that might otherwise remain undetected. At this stage the system must ensure it can meet growing public demand by providing CHWs the tools and materials they need to consistently carry out their work and expand programme reach to more isolated communities. Results from this review will be used to plan programme scale-up into other parts of Zambia.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 129 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 20%
Researcher 21 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 8%
Student > Postgraduate 9 7%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 33 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 15%
Social Sciences 10 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 4%
Other 21 16%
Unknown 33 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 August 2016.
All research outputs
#18,467,278
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#5,055
of 5,579 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#281,515
of 364,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#131
of 151 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,579 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 364,241 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 151 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.