Tag: Spotlight

Categories : Cardiovascular DiseaseTags :

90-60-50: Can SA Reach its Hypertension Targets?

On By ModernMedia
Photo by Hush Naidoo on Unsplash

By Elri Voigt for Spotlight

While HIV and tuberculosis (TB) rates in South Africa are slowly declining, indications are that rates of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) like hypertension and diabetes are on the rise. One response to this shift is to bring some of the strategies used in combatting HIV to NCDs.

Hypertension, more commonly known as high blood pressure, has been described as a “silent killer” because there are often no symptoms associated with having it. Hypertension is when someone’s blood pressure is consistently higher than normal, which can lead to a host of complications, including stroke, heart attack, and kidney disease. Someone’s risk of developing hypertension is influenced by a number of things, including lifestyle, genetics, age, and family history as well as conditions like diabetes. (Spotlight previously reported on the state of hypertension in South Africa.)

90-60-50

For much of the last decade, UNAIDS’s 90-90-90 targets have been central to how governments have kept track of their HIV responses. The first 90 measured the success of testing programmes, the second 90 measured the success of efforts to get people on to treatment, and the third 90 provided information on how well people are doing once on treatment.

South Africa’s National Strategic Plan (NSP) for the prevention and control of NCDs (2022-2027) sets out similar targets for hypertension and diabetes. As with HIV, the three hypertension indicators will paint a picture of how South Africa is doing on testing, getting people onto treatment, and finally how well people are doing once on treatment.

The hypertension targets are as follows:

  • 90% of people over 18 will know whether they have raised blood pressure.
  • 60% of people with raised blood pressure will receive interventions.
  • 50% of people receiving interventions for hypertension will have controlled blood pressure levels.

Implementation will be key

Local experts interviewed by Spotlight agree that the NSP is a step in the right direction but are clear that much more will be needed.

Professor Brian Rayner, Emeritus Professor in the Division of Nephrology and Hypertension at the University of Cape Town, says he finds the NSP lacking in practical details of how the targets will be achieved. “I’d love for the government to have the plan for how they can achieve this and not another document actually… they need to actually say how are we going do this,” he says.

Professor Angela Woodiwiss of the School of Physiology at the University of the Witwatersrand, and member of the board of the Southern African Hypertension Society has similar concerns. She says the objectives and deliverables in the NSP are sound, but it is short on details when it comes to implementation.

Ways to address this, according to Woodiwiss, is to include “examples of cost-effective practical approaches such as the establishment of cardiovascular screening centres at all district clinics where measurements of blood pressure are done; monthly screening drives at community centres over weekends to increase accessibility to those that work during the week; [and] awareness campaigns at shopping centres”. Another suggestion is for awareness and education campaigns on hypertension to be conducted on media platforms like TV and radio.

“In order to reduce the burden of disease, this target needs to be raised. I would therefore suggest 90-80-70 as the proportions,” she adds.

Professor Andre Kengne, the director of NCD research at the South African Medical Research Council, who was also part of the planning committee for this version of the NSP, says the plan is only a starting point. “The plan says that these [NSP targets] are the entry point, so it’s going to be a catalyst,” he says. “That’s why we just need to start somewhere and then improve on that and again, I think that’s exactly the approach that the plan is taking, This is let’s start small but with the aim of actually progressing.”

Screening: 90% of people over 18 will know whether they have raised blood pressure

A major challenge with NCDs such as hypertension and diabetes is that we don’t have very good epidemiological data in South Africa. Experts referred Spotlight to data from two sources.

Kengne says that based on data collected by the NCD Risk Factor Collaboration, a global network of health scientists that provide data on NCDs, which he is part of, about 40% of adult men and about 42% of adult women in South Africa had hypertension in 2019. Only about 38.5% of men with hypertension were diagnosed at the time and 61.5% of women.

Woodiwiss cites data collected through ‘May Measure Month’ (MMM) South Africa, of where she is a principal investigator. MMM is a global campaign run by the International Society of Hypertension to raise awareness. She cites data collected from screenings conducted from 2017 to 2022.

“The proportion of hypertensive adults aware that they have hypertension ranged from 42.5 to 56.7%,” she says.

When looking at the South African population as a whole, Woodiwiss calculates that this means that only around 13.6 to 19.6% of all people over the age of 18 are aware of whether they have hypertension or not. “We, therefore, have a long way to go in order to achieve the target of 90% of all adults being aware of whether they have raised blood pressure or not,” she adds.

Whichever of the two data sources you look at, South Africa seems to fall well short of the 90% target.

To improve the country’s performance on this measure, experts interviewed by Spotlight agree that there needs to be greater awareness of hypertension (including the importance of checking your blood pressure regularly) and better opportunities for screening.

“There will be no other way of actually improving the numbers without screening people,” Kengne says.

“The current screening approach is essentially hospital-based, and it’s not even yet comprehensive. Meaning only those in contact with the health system are likely, for a proportion, to get their blood pressure measured and then eventually diagnosed with hypertension,” he explains. “The first focus is really to optimise that hospital-based screening, to make sure that everything is in place to measure the blood pressure of whoever gets in contact with the health system.”

Ultimately, Kengne suggests what is needed is to implement community-based approaches to blood pressure screening. One way to do this would be to couple HIV community screening efforts with hypertension screening. As well as to empower community healthcare workers to check blood pressure when doing household visits and then refer people with elevated blood pressure to clinics if needed.

“There need to be national awareness campaigns on TV and radio. These campaigns can be used to encourage individuals to have their blood pressure measured at free screening sites such as community centres, shopping malls, and university campuses as is done as part of the May Measure Month campaign,” Woodiwiss suggests. She adds that a celebrity ambassador would be a great asset for such campaigns.

Treatment: 60% of people with raised blood pressure will receive interventions

“About 85% of those [men] who are diagnosed [with hypertension] are on treatment. And in women it’s about 86%,” Kengne says.

He adds that this is where the NSP targets are maybe not as ambitious as they could be because when you look at the data in the context of everyone who has hypertension (not just those with diagnosed hypertension), only 33% of men and 53% of women are on treatment.

In Woodiwiss’s data, the proportion of hypertensive adults who were receiving medication for hypertension ranged from 36.1 to 49.2%.

Either way, both data sources suggest that one of the biggest challenges to getting people onto treatment is actually diagnosing them in the first place. There is a question, however, whether the health system will be able to cope with the increased treatment load should diagnosis improve.

Kengne suggests that facilities, specifically public health sector facilities, may not be able to cope with the increased demand. “We’re going to need to prepare the health system to cope with the high demand for hypertension care subsequent to increased screening,” he says.

He thinks task-shifting may be part of the solution. Task-shifting was critical to the scaling up of South Africa’s HIV treatment programme, for example, by allowing qualifying nurses to prescribe antiretroviral treatment. Similarly, more healthcare workers, including community healthcare workers, nurses, and field workers can be trained to screen for and treat hypertension.

Woodiwiss stresses the importance of education and awareness when it comes to treatment.

“To facilitate the participation of individuals in the management of their blood pressure, education, and awareness are paramount… An important aspect is to empower individuals to be part of the management of their blood pressure; to re-enforce that hypertension is a chronic problem that requires daily management; and to dispel any notions of stigmatisation due to having high blood pressure,” she says.

Another important practical step would be to reduce the pill burden on hypertension patients in the public sector, according to Rayner. While medication is relatively cheap in this sector, there has not been a move towards combining multiple blood pressure drugs into a single pill, which would make patient adherence easier.

He adds that the process of prescribing blood pressure medication in the private sector needs to be simplified. In line with the idea of task-shifting, Rayner suggests allowing nurses to prescribe medication for straightforward hypertension cases in the public sector as a cost-effective way of treating hypertension.

Control: 50% of people receiving interventions are controlled

About 43% of men in South Africa with hypertension and who are on treatment have controlled blood pressure compared to 54.6% of women, according to Kengne. “Now taken as a proportion of all those with hypertension, I mean our target of 50% controlled will narrow down to about 27% of all people with hypertension [being controlled],” he says. “Using that as the estimate among men currently only 14% of all those with hypertension are controlled and among women, 29% are controlled.”

Data from Woodiwiss suggested that “the proportion of treated individuals with controlled blood pressure ranges from 49.6 to 57.5%.”

For this target then, the country isn’t too far off the 50% target.

But Kengne stresses that blood pressure control is not straightforward. “Diagnosing, it’s not that difficult. Starting treatment it’s not difficult, but actually treating to target it’s a challenge and a number of factors can come into play. Some factors [are] linked to people with hypertension [and] some linked to healthcare providers and the health system,” he says.

For patients, issues like adherence to treatment can be difficult. He suggests using mobile technology, like text messages, to remind patients to take their medication. As well as reducing the pill burden by investing in combination medications.

From the healthcare provider side, Kengne says there needs to be monitoring of patients so that changes to the treatment plan can be made if needed so that the patient can achieve blood pressure control.

“Improving the proportion of treated individuals who have controlled blood pressure requires ongoing monitoring and regular blood pressure checks. As the vast majority of South Africans cannot afford home blood pressure monitors, easy access to blood pressure checks at community clinics, pharmacies, etc. should be provided country-wide,” Woodiwiss says. “It would be ideal if companies could all have corporate wellness days for employees.”

Republished from Spotlight under a Creative Commons4.0 licence.

Source: Spotlight

Categories : General Interest Healthcare Politics and Regulations Medical IndustryTags :

OPINION: NHI Bill Must Still Clear Many Hurdles to Ensure Adequate Medicine Access

On By ModernMedia

By Yanga Nokhepheyi, Marlise Richter, and Fatima Hassan for Spotlight

A frightful piece of information came to light recently. The pharmaceutical giant Pfizer announced its 2022 revenue at $100 billion. This is more than the combined health spending of 108 countries in 2020 according to calculations of The People’s Vaccine Campaign. The Pfizer COVID vaccine, of course, helped the dollars roll in. In fact, some reports suggest that Pfizer charged some countries $130 per dose of vaccine, while it is estimated that it costs less than $2 per dose to make. That equated to a markup of a stupefying 10 000% but we don’t know the full pricing details because the contracts are marked ‘secret’.

Figures like these make one’s eyes water.

In this pandemic, tackling the pharmaceutical sector and the perversities of its pandemic profiteering has been the focus of an international movement of health activists united under the banner of the People Vaccine Campaign. Partly because of severe resistance by governments in the global north and inaction locally, access to timely supplies of affordable and essential COVID vaccines, medicines and diagnostics has not materialised. But the struggle continues not only to tackle these structural barriers to beat COVID and future pandemics but also to help ensure implementation of Universal Health Coverage (UHC) systems. UHC means that everyone would be able to get the quality health services they need and benefit from scientific progress – irrespective of their ability to pay and without having to face financial hardship.

A Herculean task

South Africa, too, has committed to attaining UHC by 2030 as part of a set of promises made on the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals. South Africa’s main strategy to attain UHC is to implement a National Health Insurance (NHI) system. Unfortunately, progress has been historically slow, but in the build-up to the 2024 elections, the African National Congress (ANC) Members of Parliament (MPs) are rushing the law reform process despite an acknowledgement even from the health ministry that progress and timelines are hampered by the socio and mainly economic impacts of the pandemic. This includes a fiscus crisis with additional pandemic-related debt, and according to Dr Nicholas Crisp, Deputy Director-General in the health department responsible for NHI, “the NHI could take decades to be implemented at full scale”.

It will require a Herculean task to unify our apartheid-era two-tiered healthcare system, with the right skills, funding base, and transparency in decision-making around health policy and medicine selection. The pandemic has highlighted why all these elements are critical for healthcare for everyone.

We provide a short overview of our research below.

Law reform

Last year, the Portfolio Committee on Health in Parliament deliberated on the ‘NHI Bill’, but there were no significant changes made to it. It needs major revision. Many serious concerns and recommendations from parliamentary submissions by multiple stakeholders have gone unaddressed. The Health Justice Initiative (HJI) has focused on medicine procurement provisions in the Bill and in 2022 raised at least 17 questions that require greater attention before the law is passed. Neglecting to address the public’s submissions is not surprising seeing that ANC MPs serving on the committee were resolute in having the National Assembly adopt the Bill before the ANC Conference in December 2022. However, time ran out before the adoption of the Bill by Parliament, and the Parliamentary process is seemingly going to resume this month.

Stakeholder submissions to Parliament on the Bill (of which there were 64 000 written submissions following Parliament’s call for comment in 2019) and various commentators have warned about the ‘looming disaster’ that the Bill in its current form poses, but they are often divided on the main reasons. A tiny minority resists the principle of unified health systems and Universal Health Care for all (meaning, also for the poor). Many more groups agree that NHI is an ethical necessity but are concerned about South Africa’s disintegrating public health system, energy crisis, high levels of state corruption involving health product procurement, and the in/ability of the Department of Health to actually implement NHI in its current proposed form.

Other groups have rightfully pointed out concerns over conferring too much power on the Minister of Health, inadequate financing models, the feasibility of NHI in SA post-COVID, and the exclusion of specific categories of people from NHI. (For a curated archive of critical submissions, please see here).

Risks to medicine access

Regrettably, the provisions in the Bill on Medicine Selection, Pricing, and Procurement are ambiguous at best, and as the HJI pointed out in 2022, the entire shift of our medicine selection, procurement, and reimbursement system to “NHI reimbursement” has not been adequately thought through, potentially posing a great risk for the future of medicine selection and access in the country for all people. This requires immediate attention at the highest levels of the executive and the legislature too – and likely needs a multi-department and stakeholder technical group to urgently determine the exact trajectory of this planned process.

The World Health Organization has emphasised that UHC programmes will only be successful if there is “affordable access to safe, effective, and quality medicines and health products”. In addition, the COVID pandemic has taught us that timely and fairly priced access to essential diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines is key to addressing any public health emergency and improving health outcomes. We cannot safeguard public health without access to medicines – procured fairly, delivered on time, and based on expert and transparent decision-making and approval.

The cost of medicine, as elsewhere in the world where there are national health systems, remains a key concern. The Minister of Health last November in the National Assembly said that the funds for the NHI would be collected through a combination of taxes, including the reallocation of medical scheme credits paid to medical schemes, provincial health budgets to the NHI Funds, and payroll tax.

The financial feasibility of implementing the NHI is still unclear and a huge risk to the fiscus in a post-COVID economy that is dealing with a recession, load shedding, and high unemployment rates.

In late 2022, HJI argued that the Bill does not adequately consider the complexities of medicines access and that our medicines system could be severely jeopardised if poorly drafted sections in the current Bill become law. We said that government should set up a task team to urgently determine the exact trajectory of this planned process.

The Health Department’s recent response to submissions and its own recommendations on amendments to the Bill sadly does not realise the gravity of the threat to the future of medicine selection and access.

17 questions

In HJI’s 2022 analysis of the Bill, we raised 17 key questions that we believe must be addressed by lawmakers in the next version of the Bill and before NHI comes into effect. These include:

  1. What specific measures are envisaged to enable and promote public transparency related to medicine selection, procurement, and contracting processes under the NHI?
  2. How will the price of medicines not included in or covered by the NHI be regulated? And what role will External Reference Pricing (ERP) methodology play in the NHI and beyond?
  3. How will the NHI Fund (e.g., the Office of Health Products Procurement, the NHI Board) negotiate with global pharmaceutical manufacturers and suppliers to procure for government and how will that process be transparent and accountable?
  4. How will the Minister determine that the NHI is ‘fully implemented’, and what will take place in terms of what medical schemes can and cannot offer members during the transition period, and after the (undefined) date?
  5. Has consideration been given to designing a competitive and different single medicine pricing system for SA?

(See the full list of questions here).

The need for safeguards

Drawing on our work on medicine access during the HIV and COVID pandemic, we appreciate that there are powerful vested interests located in the multi-trillion-dollar pharmaceutical industry – this is why there is a need for legal safeguards, sound legislation, and independent and transparent institutions to ensure access to affordable medicines for all of us living here.

The pandemic showed that a lack of transparency, autonomy, and information around expert advice can bedevil open government decision-making. Secret procurement contracts for essential vaccines could become the norm even under NHI as they did in COVID, something we are fighting in our courts to open up, later this year.

Figuring out a sound system for a unified medicine access system under NHI is a formidable undertaking that requires a multi-disciplinary task team with experts from various fields, experience, and technical know-how. It is not easy to simply merge two parallel medicine procurement and selection systems. The risk is that the status quo could continue – where the rich and insured access the best medicines at a higher price.

We believe that the principles underpinning NHI for our highly regressive, unequal two-tiered healthcare system are too important for our collective health, well-being, and our Constitutional democracy to have lacklustre legal provisions and worrying gaps on the essential issues of medicine procurement and selection.

As the Bill currently stands, it will strengthen the private healthcare sector’s stranglehold on us and our fiscus. It will leave us at the mercy of advisory committees that bear no duty to be transparent in deciding which medicines you and I will be able to access under NHI.

We can and need to do better.

* Nokhepheyi and Richter are researchers and Hassan the Director of the Health Justice Initiative.

Source: Spotlight

Categories : Diseases, Syndromes and Conditions PaediatricsTags :

In Depth: As Schools Open, will Measles Outbreaks get Worse?

On By ModernMedia

By Elri Voigt

In October last year, the National Institute for Communicable Diseases (NICD) alerted the public to a measles outbreak in Limpopo. Since then, four more provinces have reported outbreaks, and the number of positive cases in the country has climbed rapidly.

Last week’s measles report from the NICD indicated that between the first week of October 2022 and mid-week in the second week of January 2023, a total of 397 cases of measles were identified across the country. Of those, 382 cases were detected in five provinces – Limpopo 145, North West 125, Mpumalanga 79, Gauteng 18, and the Free State 15. These five provinces have all met the criteria for a measles outbreak (three or more cases in a district within a month).

The remaining 15 cases are spread around KwaZulu-Natal, Northern Cape, the Eastern Cape, and the Western Cape – none of which have so far met the criteria for an outbreak.

‘Biggest outbreak in 11 years’

Dr Kerrigan McCarthy, a pathologist from the Centre for Vaccines and Immunology at the NICD, tells Spotlight that this is the biggest outbreak in 11 years, surpassing the outbreak in 2017 when around 280 cases of measles were identified.

According to the NICD report, the total number of laboratory-confirmed measles cases and the total number of samples submitted for testing has decreased for the third consecutive week. However, McCarthy cautions that this apparent decline might actually be due to a decrease in the number of specimens sent to the NICD for testing, and not to the outbreak actually slowing down.

“The fact that we have seen a decrease in the number of positive cases could be attributed to the decrease in number of specimens that have been submitted, but there is a small possibility that it could represent a turnaround in the outbreak. However, a consensus amongst us in public health is that it is the former problem,” says McCarthy.

She adds that the true extent of this outbreak – and whether new cases have really declined or not – may only become clear in the next few weeks, as schools across the country resume activities.

While it isn’t possible to predict exactly where the outbreak is going, McCarthy says at the moment it is following a similar trend to the widespread measles outbreak that occurred just over a decade ago. “In 2009 to 2011 we had an outbreak of over 22 000 measles cases… and in fact, in that outbreak, we saw a similar pattern. The outbreak was declared in late 2009 and cases started increasing into December and then when the schools closed and December holidays happened, there was a lull in cases and then when the schools returned there was a massive increase in cases,” she says.

Fears of much larger outbreaks

In a Spotlight article published in July last year, Dr Haroon Saloojee, Professor and Head of the Division of Community Paediatrics at the University of the Witwatersrand, and other experts warned that low vaccination rates may lead to measles outbreaks of the type we are now seeing. Now they are concerned that things might get worse.

Saloojee agrees that it isn’t possible to predict exactly how this outbreak will behave. “There are obviously three possible outcomes,” he says, “An increase, levelling off, or decline. My fear and expectation [are] that the outbreak will continue to expand. There are more than a million unvaccinated children under five, and possibly about 2.5 million unvaccinated under 15 years.

“We should be greatly concerned. It is highly likely that the outbreak will extend beyond the five provinces and affect all provinces in the country,” he says.

He adds that children are protected from measles through vaccination and if 95% of children are vaccinated against measles, then this herd immunity will protect the 5% who are not vaccinated. But in South Africa, measles coverage is not at 95%.

“In South Africa, at best, about 80% of children are vaccinated [against measles]. The proportion is lower in some provinces. Thus, all children, but particularly unvaccinated children, are at risk of acquiring measles,” he says. “We haven’t had a serious problem [with] measles in South Africa for at least the last 20 years. But in other low- and middle-income countries, it is still one of the five major causes of child mortality.”

Mass measles immunisation campaign needed

Saloojee tells Spotlight the only way to curtail the outbreak at this point is through a national supplementary mass measles immunisation campaign.

“There is only one option at this stage, as we are facing a crisis. A national supplementary immunisation campaign is warranted, despite its high cost and resource demands,” he says. “Such activities have already commenced in the affected provinces and will be extended to other provinces if the outbreak continues to spread. The aim of the campaign is to boost measles vaccine coverage to the 95% mark in the short term, so that herd immunity can kick in.”

How did we get here?

While such an immunisation campaign should help mitigate the current spread of measles, the question remains how a widespread outbreak could occur in the first place given South Africa’s well-established childhood immunisation programme.

“The outbreak was entirely predictable and preventable,” says Saloojee. “We have had similar outbreaks [about] every five years since 2000. Paradoxically, COVID delayed this outbreak, which should have happened in 2020 because the isolation measures protected against measles spread too.”

“However, we cannot run away from the fact that too few children receive all their routine vaccinations, and there is little being done to systematically change this such as stopping vaccine stockouts, and clinics and hospitals reducing missed opportunities to vaccinate eligible children,” he says. “If nothing is done, we can count on another outbreak in 2028.”

Countries across the world are reporting measles outbreaks, according to the CDC, which is being attributed to a disruption in services like routine immunisation because of the COVID pandemic. However, according to Saloojee, South Africa’s outbreak cannot be attributed exclusively to the pandemic disrupting services, instead, it is also due to years of suboptimal measles vaccine coverage.

Spotlight previously reported in-depth on results from the 2019 Expanded Programme on Immunisation (EPI) National Coverage survey, which showed that only around 77% (76.8%) of the children surveyed had received all fourteen age-appropriate vaccines from birth to 18 months. This includes the two doses of the measles vaccine.

Dr Lesley Bamford, a child health specialist in youth and school health at the National Department of Health, provided Spotlight with a table showing measles vaccination coverage per province between 2017 and 2022.

graph - Note that the data only includes vaccinations provided in the public sector, whilst the denominator includes all children in South Africa. Graph courtesy of Dr Lesley Bamford, National Department of HealthNote that the data only includes vaccinations provided in the public sector, whilst the denominator includes all children in South Africa. Graph courtesy of Dr Lesley Bamford, National Department of Health

According to the figures provided by Bamford, national coverage for the first dose of the measles vaccine has improved from 80% in 2017-2018 to 88% in 2021-2022. However, coverage for the second measles dose remained stuck in a narrow band from 77% to 80%, until 2021-2022, when it improved to 84% – still well below the 95% coverage required for herd immunity.

Expanded vaccination campaign

The NICD report shows the highest number of measles cases so far have been in the five to nine-year age group, which represents 40% of cases. 29% of cases were in the one to four age group and 17% in the 10 to 14-year age group. The remaining cases occurred in children younger than one year and those aged 15 and older.

According to McCarthy, based on the distribution of cases in these age groups, the NICD recommended to the National Department of Health that it extend its planned mass measles vaccination campaign to include children between six months and 15 years of age – which the Department has agreed to do.

Bamford tells Spotlight that a mass measles immunisation campaign had already been planned across all provinces for February 2023. But for the five provinces experiencing outbreaks, the timeline has since moved up. The four remaining provinces will still start their campaigns in February as planned.

“The target age group for that campaign has been extended. So, the initial plan was targeting children under 5 years of age and now in most provinces, it has been extended to include all children six months to 15 years of age,” she says.

Spokesperson for the National Department of Health, Foster Mohale confirms that all children between the ages of six months and 15 years, regardless of documentation, are eligible to receive their measles vaccination in the catch-up drive. “Most provinces have been vaccinating all children between 6 months and 15 years, with [or] without documents because diseases have no discrimination. So, we haven’t received any concern or report about non-vaccination of children without documentation,” he says.

Bamford adds that a measles incident management team has been established by the National Department of Health, which meets with the NICD and the provinces on a weekly basis.

She says Limpopo started its campaign in November, Mpumalanga and North West started in December, and Gauteng and the Free State started in January. The campaigns have so far been conducted mainly at primary healthcare clinics and outreach to ECD centres but now that the school year has resumed, children will also be vaccinated at schools.

Because the provinces all started at different times, there is no specific timeline for the vaccination campaign to be completed, according to Bamford, but the expectation from the National Department is that all provinces will wrap up their campaigns by mid-February when the HPV vaccination campaign kicks off.

“We know that measles coverage is suboptimal, and that is why we were planning to run a campaign, but of course, that is the single biggest reason why we are now experiencing these outbreaks,” she says. “The only way really to stop measles outbreaks is to improve immunisation coverage.”

Republished from Spotlight under a Creative Commons 4.0 Licence.

Source: Spotlight