GPELF Sample Clauses

GPELF. In response to World Health Assembly resolution WHA50.29, which encouraged member states to work towards eliminating LF as a public health problem7, the World Health Organization (WHO) launched the Global Programme to Eliminate Lymphatic Filariasis (GPELF) in 2000 [4]. GPELF strategy is built around two primary objectives: 1) preventing transmission; and 2) alleviating the suffering of those already affected by LF through morbidity management and disability prevention. The WHO’s NTD roadmap sets 2020 as the target date for achieving global elimination of LF [37]. In what has been called a “mass uprising of compassion,” GPELF has been one of the most rapidly expanding global health programs in the history of public health and has been 7 “Elimination as a public health problem” refers to the achievement of measurable targets, set by WHO, in relation to a specific disease. After elimination is achieved and validated, action is still needed to maintain these targets [2]. highly successful in many areas around the world [38,39]. As of 2017, 7.1 billion single-dose antifilarial treatments have been administered to more than 890 million people in 68 countries. In its first 13 years alone, the program prevented or cured an estimated 96.71 million cases of LF [4]. Of the 68 countries initially targeted, 16 have now officially achieved elimination of LF as a public health problem. Although they have made commendable strides toward achieving elimination, the remaining countries face a variety of complex challenges in the last mile of the LF elimination effort, particularly in urban areas, that result in low coverage and non- compliance8 by the communities [40–45]. Challenges include the difficulty of convincing asymptomatic individuals to participate in MDA and maintaining sufficient coverage over the recommended 4-6 year time period [45]. Much of the literature on LF-MDA has focused on the issue of “systematic non-compliance” and individual’s specific rationales for not participating in MDA, with less attention paid to aspects of program design and how interactions between participants and these design elements impact the “user experience” (UX) of the program and ultimately affect MDA compliance and coverage [46].