Browsing by Author "Talisuna, Ambrose"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Artemether-Lumefantrine versus Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine for Treating Uncomplicated Malaria: A Randomized Trial to Guide Policy in Uganda
    (PloS one, 2008) Yeka, Adoke; Dorsey, Grant; Kamya, Moses R.; Talisuna, Ambrose; Lugemwa, Myers; Rwakimari, John Bosco; Staedke, Sarah G.; Rosenthal, Philip J.; Mangen, Fred Wabwire; Bukirwa, Hasifa
    Uganda recently adopted artemether-lumefantrine (AL) as the recommended first-line treatment for uncomplicated malaria. However, AL has several limitations, including a twice-daily dosing regimen, recommendation for administration with fatty food, and a high risk of reinfection soon after therapy in high transmission areas. Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) is a new alternative artemisinin-based combination therapy that is dosed once daily and has a long post-treatment prophylactic effect. We compared the efficacy and safety of AL with DP in Kanungu, an area of moderate malaria transmission.Patients aged 6 months to 10 years with uncomplicated falciparum malaria were randomized to therapy and followed for 42 days. Genotyping was used to distinguish recrudescence from new infection. Of 414 patients enrolled, 408 completed follow-up. Compared to patients treated with artemether-lumefantrine, patients treated with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine had a significantly lower risk of recurrent parasitaemia (33.2% vs. 12.2%; risk difference = 20.9%, 95% CI 13.0–28.8%) but no statistically significant difference in the risk of treatment failure due to recrudescence (5.8% vs. 2.0%; risk difference = 3.8%, 95% CI −0.2–7.8%). Patients treated with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine also had a lower risk of developing gametocytaemia after therapy (4.2% vs. 10.6%, p = 0.01). Both drugs were safe and well tolerated.DP is highly efficacious, and operationally preferable to AL because of a less intensive dosing schedule and requirements. Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine should be considered for a role in the antimalarial treatment policy of Uganda.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Artemisinin Combination Therapies for Treatment of Uncomplicated Malaria in Uganda
    (PLoS clinical trials, 2006) Bukirwa, Hasifa; Yeka, Adoke; Kamya, Moses R.; Talisuna, Ambrose; Banek, Kristin; Bakyaita, Nathan; Rwakimari, John Bosco; Rosenthal, Philip J.; Mangen, Fred Wabwire; Dorsey, Grant; Staedke, Sarah G.
    To compare the efficacy and safety of artemisinin combination therapies for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Uganda.Randomized single-blind controlled trial.Tororo, Uganda, an area of high-level malaria transmission.Children aged one to ten years with confirmed uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria.Amodiaquine + artesunate or artemether–lumefantrine.Risks of recurrent symptomatic malaria and recurrent parasitemia at 28 days, unadjusted and adjusted by genotyping to distinguish recrudescences and new infections.Of 408 participants enrolled, 403 with unadjusted efficacy outcomes were included in the per-protocol analysis. Both treatment regimens were highly efficacious; no recrudescences occurred in patients treated with amodiaquine + artesunate, and only two occurred in those treated with artemether–lumefantrine. However, recurrent malaria due to new infections was common. The unadjusted risk of recurrent symptomatic malaria was significantly lower for participants treated with artemether–lumefantrine than for those treated with amodiaquine + artesunate (27% versus 42%, risk difference 15%, 95% CI 5.9%–24.2%). Similar results were seen for the risk of recurrent parasitemia (51% artemether–lumefantrine versus 66% amodiaquine + artesunate, risk difference 16%, 95% CI 6.2%–25.2%). Amodiaquine + artesunate and artemether–lumefantrine were both well-tolerated. Serious adverse events were uncommon with both regimens.Amodiaquine + artesunate and artemether–lumefantrine were both highly efficacious for treatment of uncomplicated malaria. However, in this holoendemic area, despite the excellent performance of both regimens in terms of efficacy, many patients experienced recurrent parasitemia due to new infections. Artemether–lumefantrine was superior to amodiaquine + artesunate for prevention of new infections. To maximize the benefit of artemisinin combination therapy in Africa, treatment should be integrated with strategies to prevent malaria transmission. The impact of frequent repeated therapy on the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of new artemisinin regimens should be further investigated.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Managing Ebola from rural to urban slum settings: experiences from Uganda
    (African health sciences, 2015) Okware, Sam I.; Omaswa, Francis; Talisuna, Ambrose; Amandua, Jacinto; Amone, Jackson; Onek, Paul; Opio, Alex; Wamala, Joseph; Lubwama, Julius; Luswa, Lukwago; Kagwa, Paul; Tylleskar, Thorkild
    Five outbreaks of ebola occurred in Uganda between 2000-2012. The outbreaks were quickly contained in rural areas. However, the Gulu outbreak in 2000 was the largest and complex due to insurgency. It invaded Gulu municipality and the slum- like camps of the internally displaced persons (IDPs). The Bundigugyo district outbreak followed but was detected late as a new virus. The subsequent outbreaks in the districts of Luwero district (2011, 2012) and Kibaale (2012) were limited to rural areas. Methods: Detailed records of the outbreak presentation, cases, and outcomes were reviewed and analyzed. Each outbreak was described and the outcomes examined for the different scenarios. Results: Early detection and action provided the best outcomes and results. The ideal scenario occurred in the Luwero outbreak during which only a single case was observed. Rural outbreaks were easier to contain. The community imposed quarantine prevented the spread of ebola following introduction into Masindi district. The outbreak was confined to the extended family of the index case and only one case developed in the general population. However, the outbreak invasion of the town slum areas escalated the spread of infection in Gulu municipality. Community mobilization and leadership was vital in supporting early case detection and isolations well as contact tracing and public education. Conclusion: Palliative care improved survival. Focusing on treatment and not just quarantine should be emphasized as it also enhanced public trust and health seeking behavior.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Parasite-based malaria diagnosis: Are Health Systems in Uganda equipped enough to implement the policy?
    (BMC Public Health, 2012) Kyabayinze, Daniel J.; Achan, Jane; Nakanjako, Damalie; Mpeka, Betty; Mawejje, Henry; Mugizi, Rukaaka; Kalyango, Joan N.; D’Alessandro, Umberto; Talisuna, Ambrose; Jean-Pierre, Van geertruyden
    Malaria case management is a key strategy for malaria control. Effective coverage of parasite-based malaria diagnosis (PMD) remains limited in malaria endemic countries. This study assessed the health system's capacity to absorb PMD at primary health care facilities in Uganda. Methods: In a cross sectional survey, using multi-stage cluster sampling, lower level health facilities (LLHF) in 11 districts in Uganda were assessed for 1) tools, 2) skills, 3) staff and infrastructure, and 4) structures, systems and roles necessary for the implementing of PMD. Results: Tools for PMD (microscopy and/or RDTs) were available at 30 (24%) of the 125 LLHF. All LLHF had patient registers and 15% had functional in-patient facilities. Three months’ long stock-out periods were reported for oral and parenteral quinine at 39% and 47% of LLHF respectively. Out of 131 health workers interviewed, 86 (66%) were nursing assistants; 56 (43%) had received on-job training on malaria case management and 47 (36%) had adequate knowledge in malaria case management. Overall, only 18% (131/730) Ministry of Health approved staff positions were filled by qualified personnel and 12% were recruited or transferred within six months preceding the survey. Of 186 patients that received referrals from LLHF, 130(70%) had received pre-referral anti-malarial drugs, none received pre-referral rectal artesunate and 35% had been referred due to poor response to antimalarial drugs. Conclusion: Primary health care facilities had inadequate human and infrastructural capacity to effectively implement universal parasite-based malaria diagnosis. The priority capacity building needs identified were: 1) recruitment and retention of qualified staff, 2) comprehensive training of health workers in fever management, 3) malaria diagnosis quality control systems and 4) strengthening of supply chain, stock management and referral systems.