The use of artemether-lumefantrine by febrile children following national implementation of a revised drug policy in Kenya.

OBJECTIVES: To examine access to, timing and use of artemisinin-based combination therapy among rural Kenyan febrile children before and following the introduction of artemether-lumefantrine (AL) as first-line antimalarial drug policy. METHODS: In August 2006, a cohort was established within 72 rural clusters in four sentinel districts to monitor the period prevalence of fever and treatment in children aged 0-4 years through four repeat cross-sectional surveys (one prior to introduction of AL and three post-AL introduction: January-June 2007). Mothers/guardians of children were asked about fever in the last 14 days and related treatment actions including the timing, drugs used, dosing and adherence supported by visual aids of commonly available drug products. RESULTS: A total of 2526 child-observations were recorded during the four survey rounds. The period prevalence of fever was between 20% and 26% with little variation between survey rounds. The overall proportion of children with fever receiving antimalarial drugs for their fever was 31 % (95% CI, 26-36%) and the proportion of febrile children receiving antimalarial drugs within 48 h was 23.3% (95% CI, 18.6-28.0%). The proportion of febrile children who received first-line recommended AL within 48 h was 10.2% (95% CI, 7.0-13.4%), compared to only 4.6% (95% CI, 3.8-5.4%) of children receiving sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine first-line therapy in 2001. CONCLUSIONS: Although Kenya was less than a year into the new policy implementation and AL is restricted to the public formal sector, access to antimalarial drugs among children within 48 h and to the first-line therapy has improved. But it remains well below national and international targets. The continued use of amodiaquine and artemisinin monotherapies constrains effective implementation of artemisinin-based combination therapy policy in Kenya

Human rights, health and the state in Bangladesh

BACKGROUND: This paper broadly discusses the role of the State of Bangladesh in the context of the health system and human rights. The interrelation between human rights, health and development are well documented. The recognition of health as a fundamental right by WHO and subsequent approval of health as an instrument of welfare by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights (ICSECR) further enhances the idea. Moreover, human rights are also recognized as an expedient of human development. The state is entrusted to realize the rights enunciated in the ICSECR. DISCUSSION: In exploring the relationship of the human rights and health situation in Bangladesh, it is argued, in this paper, that the constitution and major policy documents of the Bangladesh government have recognized the health rights and development. Bangladesh has ratified most of the international treaties and covenants including ICCPR, ICESCR; and a signatory of international declarations including Alma-Ata, ICPD, Beijing declarations, and Millennium Development Goals. However the implementation of government policies and plans in the development of health institutions, human resources, accessibility and availability, resource distribution, rural-urban disparity, the male-female gap has put the health system in a dismal state. Neither the right to health nor the right to development has been established in the development of health system or in providing health care. SUMMARY: The development and service pattern of the health system have negative correlation with human rights and contributed to the underdevelopment of Bangladesh. The government should take comprehensive approach in prioritizing the health rights of the citizens and progressive realization of these rights