Search

Burundi has experienced an increase in malaria cases since 2000, reaching 843,000 cases per million inhabitants in 2019, a more than twofold increase compared to the early 2000s. Burundi thus contrasts the decreasing number of cases in many other African countries. To evaluate the impact of malaria control on this increase, data on interventions from 2000 to 2019 were compiled. Over this period, the number of health facilities increased threefold, and the number of tests 20-fold. The test positivity rate remained stable at around 50–60% in most years. Artemisinin-based combination therapy was introduced in 2003, initially using artesunate–amodiaquine and changed to artemether–lumefantrine in 2019/2020. Mass distribution campaigns of insecticide-treated bed nets were conducted, and indoor residual spraying and intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy introduced. Thus, the increase in cases was not the result of faltering control activities. Increased testing was likely a key contributor to higher case numbers. Despite the increase in testing, the test positivity rate remined high, indicating that current case numbers might still underestimate the true burden. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives and Methods In Burundi, the occurrence of the knock down resistance ( kdr) mutation in Anopheles gambiae sensu lato (s.l.) was determined for six consecutive years within the framework of a vector control programme. Findings were also linked with the insecticide resistance status observed with bioassay in An. gambiae s.l. and An. funestus. Results The proportion of An. gambiae s.l. carrying the East Leu-Ser kdr mutation was 1% before the spraying intervention in 2002; by 2007 it was 86% in sprayed valleys and 67% in untreated valleys. Multivariate analysis showed that increased risk of carrying the kdr mutation is associated with spraying interventions, location and time. In bioassays conducted between 2005 and 2007 at five sites, An. funestus was susceptible to permethrin, deltamethrin and DDT. Anopheles gambiae s.l. remained susceptible or tolerant to deltamethrin and resistant to DDT and permethrin, but only when kdr allele carriers reached 90% of the population. Conclusions The cross-resistance against DDT and permethrin in Karuzi suggests a possible kdr resistance mechanism. Nevertheless, the homozygous resistant genotype alone does not entirely explain the bioassay results, and other mechanisms conferring resistance cannot be ruled out. After exposure to all three insecticides, homozygote individuals for the kdr allele dominate among the surviving An. gambiae s.l. This confirms the potential selection pressure of pyrethroids on kdr mutation. However, the high occurrence of the kdr mutation, even at sites far from the sprayed areas, suggests a selection pressure other than that exerted by the vector control programme. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Prevention of malaria epidemics is a priority for African countries. The 2000 malaria epidemic in Burundi prompted the government to implement measures for preventing future outbreaks. Case management with artemisinin-based combination therapy and malaria surveillance were nationally improved. A vector control programme was initiated in one of the most affected highland provinces. The focal distribution of malaria vectors in the highlands was the starting point for designing a targeted vector control strategy. The objective of this study was to present the results of this strategy on malaria transmission in an African highland region. Methods: In Karuzi, in 2002-2005, vector control activities combining indoor residual spraying and long-lasting insecticidal nets were implemented. The interventions were done before the expected malaria transmission period and targeted the valleys between hills, with the expectation that this would also protect the populations living at higher altitudes. The impact on the Anopheles population and on malaria transmission was determined by nine cross-sectional surveys carried out at regular intervals throughout the study period. Results: Anopheles gambiae s.l. and Anopheles funestus represented 95% of the collected anopheline species. In the valleys, where the vector control activities were implemented, Anopheles density was reduced by 82% (95% CI: 69-90). Similarly, transmission was decreased by 90% (95% CI: 63%-97%, p = 0.001). In the sprayed valleys, Anopheles density was further reduced by 79.5% (95% CI: 51.7-91.3, p < 0.001) in the houses with nets as compared to houses without them. No significant impact on vector density and malaria transmission was observed in the hill tops. However, the intervention focused on the high risk areas near the valley floor, where 93% of the vectors are found and 90% of the transmission occurs. Conclusion: Spatial targeted vector control effectively reduced Anopheles density and transmission in this highland district. Bed nets have an additional effect on Anopheles density though this did not translate in an additional impact on transmission. Though no impact was observed in the hilltops, the programme successfully covered the areas most at risk. Such a targeted strategy could prevent the emergence and spread of an epidemic from these high risk foci. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: African highlands often suffer of devastating malaria epidemics, sometimes in conjunction with complex emergencies, making their control even more difficult. In 2000, Burundian highlands experienced a large malaria outbreak at a time of civil unrest, constant insecurity and nutritional emergency. Because of suspected high resistance to the first and second line treatments, the provincial health authority and Médecins Sans Frontières (Belgium) decided to implement vector control activities in an attempt to curtail the epidemic. There are few reported interventions of this type to control malaria epidemics in complex emergency contexts. Here, decisions and actions taken to control this epidemic, their impact and the lessons learned from this experience are reported. Case description: Twenty nine hills (administrative areas) were selected in collaboration with the provincial health authorities for the vector control interventions combining indoor residual spraying with deltamethrin and insecticide-treated nets. Impact was evaluated by entomological and parasitological surveys. Almost all houses (99%) were sprayed and nets use varied between 48% and 63%. Anopheles indoor resting density was significantly lower in treated as compared to untreated hills, the latter taken as controls. Despite this impact on the vector, malaria prevalence was not significantly lower in treated hills except for people sleeping under a net. Discussion: Indoor spraying was feasible and resulted in high coverage despite being a logistically complex intervention in the Burundian context (scattered houses and emergency situation). However, it had little impact on the prevalence of malaria infection, possibly because it was implemented after the epidemic's peak. Nevertheless, after this outbreak the Ministry of Health improved the surveillance system, changed its policy with introduction of effective drugs and implementation of vector control to prevent new malaria epidemics. Conclusion: In the absence of effective drugs and sufficient preparedness, present study failed to demonstrate any impact of vector control activities upon the course of a short-duration malaria epidemic. However, the experience gained lead to increased preparedness and demonstrated the feasibility of vector control measures in this specific context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]