an Eldis Resource
Will increased funding for neglected tropical diseases really make poverty history?
Improving current modes of implementing NTD control strategies
Authors:
T. Allen; M. Parker
Publisher:
The Lancet, 2012
In January 2012, The UK’s Department for International Development announced a fivefold increase in its support for programmes to control neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). However, there is a body of research that highlights hazards associated with current modes of implementing NTD control strategies, including undermining the already fragile health-care systems, facing serious logistical problems and medical risks, and contributing in administrative failure.
The authors of the this article agree with that statement, but add a different perspective. The article draws on insights emerging from anthropological fieldwork undertaken across Uganda and Tanzania and shows that:
- the specific political, economic, and social context in which mass drug administration (MDA) programmes are rolled out profoundly affects the uptake of drugs for the treatment of some NTDs
- results from more recent fieldwork have indicated an improved drug uptake in 2010 at some locations, though the average rate across study villages remains well below 50 per cent
- communication about the rationale for MDA with target populations remains a low priority
- local conspiracy theories questioning the “real” purposes of free drug distribution remain unaddressed.
The authors argue that the existence of some weaknesses doesn’t mean that a full rejection of NTD treatment is necessary. Nevertheless, the paper is concerned by the way in which competition for grants is restricting critical analysis of what is actually occurring on the ground.
The document’s conclusions include:
- the provision of free and subsidised drugs creates a window of opportunity to make a massive difference
- dealing with NTDs in a sustainable way will involve a range of factors, including behavioural change; the availability of tablets is not enough
- an integrated bio-social approach, and more adequate monitoring and surveillance are essential. This entails evidence-based assessment that draws insights from different perspectives.
