[ad_1]
- New study reveals large variation in spending across 106 countries, as countries seek to control or eliminate disease
- Development aid for malaria has reached a plateau, with 2018 levels virtually unchanged since 2010
- Lump-sum financing threatens to slow progress in some low-income countries
SEATTLE – A unique study shows that malaria spending in 2016 totaled $ 4.3 billion globally, well below the $ 6.6 billion target set by the World Health Organization. World Health Organization.
"The funds remain stagnant," said Dr. Joseph Dieleman, lead author of the study, health economist and badistant professor at the Institute of Metrics and Health Assessment (IHME) from the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Washington. "It takes more resources, especially in the poorest countries, especially when they are trying to control or even eliminate the disease."
An increase of more than 50% of the resources is needed each year to fill the considerable deficit of $ 2.3 billion and reach the goal of WHO.
Dieleman pointed out that the first study of this type fills a major gap in the understanding of spending on malaria in the world. Published today in the international medical journal The Lancet Infectious Diseases, the badysis provides complete and comparable estimates of total expenditures on the disease and also tracks government expenditures, out-of-pocket expenses for patients and donors.
"These estimates allow donors, including government agencies, businesses, foundations and philanthropists, as well as the National Malaria Control Program, to badess how best to bridge critical gaps between current funding and global targets in the near approach, "he said.
The study covers from 2000 to 2016 and covers 106 countries divided into three groups: malaria control countries, malaria elimination countries and countries that eliminated the disease after 2000. Malaria control countries are those seeking to control the disease aggressively in areas of high burden, while malaria elimination countries have formally declared, or are firmly considering, an evidence-based goal to end malaria transmission at the national level.
The researchers found that funding sources for malaria had evolved considerably over the 17 years of the study. Public spending accounted for more than half (55.3% or $ 643 million) of global spending on malaria in 2000, but accounted for a much smaller share in 2016, at 28.2% ($ 1.2 billion). ). In comparison, government expenditures accounted for 60.1% of global HIV / AIDS spending in the same year in the 106 countries in the study.
In contrast, development aid for malaria was one of the main drivers of overall growth in malaria spending between 2000 and 2016, with an increase of 18.0% per year. At $ 2.4 billion in 2016, development badistance accounted for more than half (56.5%) of total malaria expenditures that year, compared with 14.7% ($ 171 million) in 2000 .
While Malaria Development Assistance accounted for more than $ 10 billion in total spending between 2000 and 2010, it has plateaued in recent years, with levels close to 2018 virtually unchanged since 2010. To support progress, the authors of the study pointed out that funding was higher than current levels of development aid against malaria. necessary.
"We are 11 years from the date set by the United Nations to" end the malaria epidemic, "said lead author Annie Haakenstad. "The world is watching and, unless more financial resources are made available, this goal will be a great lost opportunity."
In addition, the study reveals large variations in spending on malaria in the 106 countries, depending on whether countries seek to control the spread of the disease or eliminate it. Between 2000 and 2016, nearly $ 30 billion was spent on malaria control in the 47 control countries, accounting for the majority (72.8%) of total spending on malaria worldwide. $ 2.6 billion was spent in these countries in 2016 alone.
The results show that when the incidence of malaria tends to zero, public funding becomes by far the largest source of funding. In 2016, the governments of the eliminated countries accounted for a larger share (47.9%) of malaria expenditures than those in the control countries (28.3%).
Additional results include:
- The United States government has been the largest source of malaria funding since 2008, with a contribution of $ 876 million in 2018 alone.
- In terms of disbursements, the bulk of malaria-related development badistance in 2018 was channeled through the Global Fund ($ 1.0 billion, or 42.6 per cent of the total) and by the agencies. US bilateral aid, including the Presidential Malaria Initiative ($ 374 million, or 15.5% of the total). total).
- The share of direct malaria spending increased from 26.4 per cent ($ 307 million) in 2000 to 13.0 per cent ($ 556 million) in 2016, and reaches its highest level in the world. where the burden of malaria is the heaviest.
- Between 2000 and 2016, a quarter ($ 10.1 billion) of total spending on malaria was spent in the 41 countries in elimination, with $ 854 million spent in 2016 alone.
- In 2016, malaria spending in control countries averaged $ 14 per incident; this amount was twice as high, $ 28, in the countries in elimination, partly because of a lower incidence.
- With four out of five cases of malaria in the world in sub-Saharan Africa, the share of malaria expenditures in the region in 2016 was $ 2.7 billion, or 62.8% of global malaria spending. .
Highest Total Expenditures for Malaria (USD), 2016
- Nigeria: $ 424.4 million
- Democratic Republic of Congo: $ 189.2 million
- Tanzania: $ 183.6 million
- Uganda: $ 173.9 million
- Ghana: $ 172.0 million
- Mozambique: $ 131.4 million
- Angola: $ 119.9 million
- Zambia: $ 119.5 million
- India: 118.6 million dollars
Countries where most of the expenditure on malaria is badumed (%), 2016
- Niger: 58.4%
- Cameroon: 51.6%
- Somalia: 47.6%
- Nigeria: 37.8%
- Equatorial Guinea: 35.0%
- Sierra Leone: 32.6%
- India: 28.4%
- Republic of Congo: 27.5%
- Yemen: 27.5%
- Ghana: 24.8%
Countries with the largest share of development aid for malaria (%), 2016
- Madagascar: 91.8%
- Haiti: 86.8%
- Afghanistan: 85.1%
- Comoros: 85.1%
- Laos: 84.9%
- Guinea-Bissau: 83.6%
- Senegal: 82.5%
- Rwanda: 82.4%
- Gambia: 81.4%
- Chad: 81.3%
The study entitled "Malaria Expenditure Tracking by Source in 106 Countries, 2000-2016: An Economic Modeling Study".
###
Media contacts:
IHME: Kelly Bienhoff, + 1-206-897-2884 (office); + 1-913-302-3817 (mobile); [email protected]
IHME: Dean Owen, + 1-206-897-2858 (office); +1 566-434-5630 (mobile); [email protected]
The Lancet: Emily Head + 44-207-424-4249 (office); + 44-7920-530-997 (mobile); [email protected]
About the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation
The Institute of Health Metrics and Assessment (IHME) is an independent global health research organization located at the University of Washington. It provides a rigorous and comparable measure of the world's most important health problems and badesses the strategies used to deal with them. IHME is committed to transparency and makes this information widely available so that decision-makers have the evidence to make informed decisions about how to allocate resources to improve the health of the population.
Warning: AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of the news releases published on EurekAlert! contributing institutions or for the use of any information via the EurekAlert system.
Source link
