Resources search

East African Network for Monitoring Antimalarial Treatment

February 2006

Expand view

The East African Network for Monitoring Antimalarial Treatment (EANMAT) is a local initiative to strengthen the regional information base on parasite chemosensitivity, on which rational treatment policy can be based. The Network was formed in 1997 with three countries: Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania. Rwanda joined in 2000 and Burundi in 2002. The network has high-level commitment and support from the Ministries of Health in the countries involved. EANMAT brings together representatives of the National Malaria Control Programmes (NMCPs) of the member countries, together with other operational and research expertise. This provides a dynamic assessment of current antimalarial treatment, and the data upon which policy change can be based. The website provides a seachable database of malaria treatment efficacy patterns, a map of sentinel sites where this data is gathered, the network's newsletter (including back issues), which comes out three times a year and includes articles about drug efficacy, recent research, and treatment programmes, and a fieldworkers' guide to in vivo anti-malarial drug efficacy testing

Willingness and ability to use TRIPs flexibilities : Kenya case study

LEWIS-LETTINGTON, Robert
MUNYI, Peter
September 2004

Expand view

This paper examines Kenyan legislation and policy in light of the international intellectual property rights framework, in particular the World Trade Oorganization’s Doha Ministerial Declaration decision. It considers the existing sources of supply and associated trends in pricing of pharmaceutical products in Kenya, placing the focus on medicines that are, or are likely to be, affected by these rights

Using evidence to change antimalarial drug policy in Kenya

SHRETTA, R
et al
November 2000

Expand view

This review analyses the range and quality of the evidence base that was used to change the drug policy in Kenya from chloroquine to SP and examines the process of consensus building and decision making. The review illustrates the difficulties in translating sensitivity data with gross geographical, temporal and methodological variations into national treatment policy. The process was complicated by limited options, unknown adverse effects of replacement therapies, cost, as well as limited guidance on factors pertinent to changing the drug policy for malaria. Although more than 50% of the studies showed parasitological failures by 1995, there was a general lack of consensus on the principles for assessing drug failures, the inclusion criteria for the study subjects and the relative benefits of parasitological and clinical assessments. A change in international recommendations for assessment of drug efficacy in 1996 from parasitological to clinical response further perplexed the decisions. There is an urgent need for international standards and evidence-based guidelines to provide a framework to assist the process by which decision-makers in malaria-endemic countries can make rational choices for antimalarial drug policy change

E-bulletin

Source e-bulletin on Disability and Inclusion

Subscribe to updates