Search

Objectives: To investigate the consequence of restricting antimalarial treatment to febrile children that test positive to a malaria rapid diagnostic test (MRDT) only in an area of intense malaria transmission., Methods: Febrile children aged 3-59 months were screened with an MRDT at health facilities in south-west Nigeria. MRDT-positive children received artesunate-amodiaquine (ASAQ), while MRDT-negative children were treated based on the clinical diagnosis of non-malaria febrile illness. The primary endpoint was the risk of developing microscopy-positive malaria within 28 days post-treatment., Results: 309 (60.5%) of 511 children were MRDT-positive while 202 (39.5%) were MRDT-negative at enrolment. 18.5% (50/275) of MRDT-positive children and 7.6% (14/184) of MRDT-negative children developed microscopy-positive malaria by day 28 post-treatment (ρ = 0.001). The risk of developing clinical malaria by day 28 post-treatment was higher among the MRDT-positive group than the MRDT-negative group (adjusted OR 2.74; 95% CI, 1.4, 5.4). A higher proportion of children who were MRDT-positive at enrolment were anaemic on day 28 compared with the MRDT-negative group (12.6% vs. 3.1%; ρ = 0.001). Children in the MRDT-negative group made more unscheduled visits because of febrile illness than those in MRDT-positive group (23.2% vs. 12.0%; ρ = 0.001)., Conclusion: Restricting ACT treatment to MRDT-positive febrile children only did not result in significant adverse outcomes. However, the risk of re-infection within 28 days was significantly higher among MRDT-positive children despite ASAQ treatment. A longer-acting ACT may be needed as the first-line drug of choice for treating uncomplicated malaria in high-transmission settings to prevent frequent re-infections., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: To prevent malaria infection during pregnancy in endemic areas in Africa, the World Health Organization recommends the administration of intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (IPTp) as part of the focused antenatal care package. However, IPTp uptake in most countries remains low despite generally high antenatal care coverage and increased efforts by governments to address known bottlenecks such as drug stock-outs. The study explored factors that continue to impede uptake of IPTp among women who attend antenatal care. This paper focuses on demand-side barriers with regard to accessibility, affordability and acceptability., Methods: The research was conducted in 2013/2014 and involved 46 in-depth interviews with four types of respondents: (i) seven district health officials; (ii) 15 health workers; (iii) 19 women who attended antenatal care; (iv) five opinion leaders. Interviews were conducted in Eastern and West Nile regions of Uganda. Data was analysed by thematic analysis., Results: District health officials and health workers cited a range of barriers relating to knowledge and attitudes among pregnant women, including lack of awareness of pregnancy-related health risks, a tendency to initiate antenatal care late, reluctance to take medication and concerns about side effects of IPTp. However, women and opinion leaders expressed very positive views of antenatal care and IPTp. They also reported that the burden of travel and cost associated with antenatal care attendance was challenging, but did not keep them from accessing a service they perceived as beneficial. The role of trust in health workers' expertise was highlighted by all respondents and it was reported that women will typically accept IPTp if encouraged by a health worker., Conclusions: Given the positive views of antenatal care and IPTp, high antenatal care coverage and reported low refusal rates for IPTp, supply-side issues are likely to account for the majority of missed opportunities for the provision of IPTp when women attend antenatal care. However, to increase uptake of IPTp on the demand side, health workers should be encouraged to reassure eligible women that IPTp is safe.

Background: Case-management with artemether-lumefantrine (AL) is one of the key strategies to control malaria in many African countries. Yet, the reports on translation of AL implementation activities into clinical practice are scarce. Here the quality of AL case-management is reported from Uganda; approximately one year after AL replaced combination of chloroquine and sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine (CQ+SP) as recommended first line treatment for uncomplicated malaria., Methods: A cross-sectional survey, using a range of quality of care assessment tools, was undertaken at all government and private-not-for-profit facilities in four Ugandan districts. Main outcome measures were AL prescribing, dispensing and counseling practices in comparison with national guidelines, and factors influencing health workers decision to 1) treat for malaria, and 2) prescribe AL., Results: 195 facilities, 232 health workers and 1,763 outpatient consultations were evaluated. Of 1,200 patients who needed treatment with AL according to guidelines, AL was prescribed for 60%, CQ+SP for 14%, quinine for 4%, CQ for 3%, other antimalarials for 3%, and 16% of patients had no antimalarial drug prescribed. AL was prescribed in the correct dose for 95% of patients. Only three out of seven AL counseling and dispensing tasks were performed for more than 50% of patients. Patients were more likely to be treated for malaria if they presented with main complaint of fever (OR = 5.22; 95% CI: 3.61-7.54) and if they were seen by supervised health workers (OR = 1.63; 95% CI: 1.06-2.50); however less likely if they were treated by more qualified health workers (OR = 0.61; 95% CI: 0.40-0.93) and presented with skin problem (OR = 0.29; 95% CI: 0.15-0.55). AL was more likely prescribed if the appropriate weight-specific AL pack was in stock (OR = 6.15; 95% CI: 3.43-11.05) and when CQ was absent (OR = 2.16; 95% CI: 1.09-4.28). Routine AL implementation activities were not associated with better performance., Conclusion: Although the use of AL was predominant over non-recommended therapies, the quality of AL case-management at the point of care is not yet optimal. There is an urgent need for innovative quality improvement interventions, which should be rigorously tested. Adequate availability of ACTs at the point of care will, however, ultimately determine the success of any performance interventions and ACT policy transitions.