Abstract
Praziquantel (PZQ)-based mass drug administration (MDA) is the main approach for controlling schistosomiasis in endemic areas. Interventions such as provision and use of clean and safe water, minimizing contacts with infested water, disposal of human waste in latrines, and snail control provide additional key interventions to break the transmission cycle and could complement and perhaps sustain the benefits of MDA. However, all interventions deployed need to be accepted by the targeted communities. A qualitative study was conducted to examine factors that might differentiate villages which did not show a substantial decrease in Schistosoma mansoni prevalence despite repeated, high treatment coverage referred to as "persistent hotspot (PHS) villages" from villages which showed a substantial decrease in prevalence referred to as "responding (RES) villages." A convenient sample of adults was drawn from eight villages. Thirty-nine key informants were interviewed and 16 focus groups were held with a total of 123 participants. Data were analyzed manually using a thematic content approach. In both PHS and RES villages, schistosomiasis was not considered to be a priority health problem because of its chronic nature, lack of knowledge and awareness, and poverty among study communities. Persistent hotspot villages exhibited poor leadership style, lack of or insufficient social engagement, little or lack of genuine community participation, little motivation, and commitment to schistosomiasis control compared with RES villages where there were commitment and motivation to fight schistosomiasis. We support the view of scholars who advocate for the adoption of a biosocial approach for effective and sustainable PZQ-based MDA for schistosomiasis control.