Community acceptance of reactive focal mass drug administration and reactive focal vector control using indoor residual spraying, a mixed-methods study in Zambezi region, Namibia

Reactive Case Detection and Treatment and Reactive Drug Administration for Reducing Malaria Transmission: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Many countries pursuing malaria elimination implement "reactive" strategies targeting household members and neighbors of index cases to reduce transmission. These strategies include reactive case detection and treatment (RACDT; testing and treating those positive) and reactive drug administration (RDA; providing antimalarials without testing). We conducted systematic reviews of RACDT and RDA to assess their effect on reducing malaria transmission and gathered evidence about key contextual factors important to their implementation. Two reviewers screened titles/abstracts and full-text records using defined criteria (Patient = those in malaria-endemic/receptive areas; Intervention = RACDT or RDA; Comparison = standard of care; Outcome = malaria incidence/prevalence) and abstracted data for meta-analyses. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach was used to rate certainty of evidence (CoE) for each outcome. Of 1,460 records screened, reviewers identified five RACDT studies (three cluster-randomized controlled trials [cRCTs] and two nonrandomized studies [NRS]) and seven RDA studies (six cRCTs and one NRS); three cRCTs comparing RDA to RACDT were included in both reviews. Compared with RDA, RACDT was associated with nonsignificantly higher parasite prevalence (odds ratio [OR] = 1.85; 95% CI: 0.96-3.57; one study) and malaria incidence (rate ratio [RR] = 1.30; 95% CI: 0.94-1.79; three studies), both very low CoE. Compared with control or RACDT, RDA was associated with non-significantly lower parasite incidence (RR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.36-1.47; 2 studies, moderate CoE), prevalence (OR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.52-1.17; 4 studies, low CoE), and malaria incidence (RR = 0.93; 95% CI: 0.82-1.05; six studies, moderate CoE). Evidence for reactive strategies' impact on malaria transmission is limited, especially for RACDT, but suggests RDA might be more effective.

Reducing Malaria Transmission through Reactive Indoor Residual Spraying: A Systematic Review

In the final stages of malaria elimination, interventions to reduce malaria transmission are often centered around a confirmed case of malaria, as cases tend to cluster together at very low levels of transmission. The WHO commissioned a systematic review of the literature and synthesis of evidence for reactive indoor residual spraying (IRS) to develop official recommendations for countries. Several electronic databases were searched in November 2020. A total of 455 records were identified and screened; 20 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Two cluster-randomized trials met the inclusion criteria for epidemiological outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using standard criteria. Because one study was a superiority trial in which the comparator included reactive case detection or mass drug administration and the other was a noninferiority trial in which the comparator was proactive, focal IRS, results could not be pooled. In the superiority trial, reactive IRS reduced malaria prevalence by 68% (risk ratio [RR]: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.13-0.80; certainty of evidence: HIGH) compared with no reactive IRS. No difference was observed for clinical malaria (RR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.38-1.11; certainty of evidence: MODERATE). In the noninferiority study, the mean difference in incidence between reactive IRS and proactive IRS was 0.10 additional case per 1,000 person-years, which was within the prespecified noninferiority bound (95% CI: -0.38 to 0.58; certainty of evidence: MODERATE). The evidence indicates that reactive IRS may be a cost-effective tool for the prevention of malaria in elimination settings. As only two cluster-randomized controlled trials from sub-Saharan Africa were found, additional high-quality studies should be encouraged.

Assessing the acceptability and feasibility of reactive drug administration for malaria elimination in a Plasmodium vivax predominant setting: a qualitative study in two provinces in Thailand

BACKGROUND

Reactive case detection (RACD) or testing and treatment of close contacts of recent malaria cases, is commonly practiced in settings approaching malaria elimination, but standard diagnostics have limited sensitivity to detect low level infections. Reactive drug administration (RDA), or presumptive treatment without testing, is an alternative approach, but better understanding regarding community acceptability and operational feasibility are needed.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted as part of a two-arm cluster randomized-controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of RDA targeting high-risk villages and forest workers for reducing Plasmodium vivax and P. falciparum malaria in Thailand. Key informant interviews (KIIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted virtually among key public health staff, village health volunteers (VHVs), and household members that implemented or received RDA activities. Transcriptions were reviewed, coded, and managed manually using Dedoose qualitative data analysis software, then underwent qualitative content analysis to identify key themes.

RESULTS

RDA was well accepted by household members and public health staff that implemented it. RDA participation was driven by fear of contracting malaria, eagerness to receive protection provided by malaria medicines, and the increased access to health care. Concerns were raised about the safety of taking malaria medicines without having an illness, particularly if underlying health conditions existed. Health promotion hospital (HPH) staff implementing RDA noted its operational feasibility, but highlighted difficulty in traveling to remote areas, and requested additional travel resources and hiring more VHVs. Other challenges were highlighted including the need for additional training for VHVs on malaria activities and the inability of HPH staff to conduct RDA due to other health priorities (e.g., Covid-19). More training and practice for VHVs were noted as ways to improve implementation of RDA.

CONCLUSIONS

To maximize uptake of RDA, regular education and sensitization campaigns in collaboration with village leaders on the purpose and rationale of RDA will be critical. To alleviate safety concerns and increase participant safety, a rigorous pharmacovigilance program will be important. To accelerate uptake of RDA, trust between HPH staff and VHVs and the communities they serve must continue to be strengthened to ensure acceptance of the intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was approved by the Committee on Human Research at the University of California San Francisco (19-28,060) and the local Ethics Committee for Research in Human Subjects at Tak Provincial Health office (009/63) and Kanchanaburi Provincial health office (Kor Chor 0032.002/2185). Local authorities and health officers in the provinces, districts, and villages agreed upon and coordinated the implementation of the study. All methods in this study were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations.

Fine-scale-mapping of Schistosoma haematobium infections at the school and community levels and intermediate host snail abundance in the north of Pemba Island: baseline cross-sectional survey findings before the onset of a 3-year intervention study

Background

Schistosomiasis elimination has gained renewed priority in the WHO guidance documents published in 2020 and 2022. The SchistoBreak project, implemented in Pemba, Tanzania between 2020 and 2024, aims to assess new tools and strategies for shifting from elimination as a public health problem towards interruption of transmission. Here we report our baseline findings and discuss implications for future interventions.

Methods

In 2020, human water contact sites (HWCSs) in the study area were geolocated and snail surveys were conducted. A parasitological and questionnaire cross-sectional baseline survey was implemented in 20 communities and their 16 primary schools between November 2020 and February 2021. Urine samples were collected at the school and household levels from individuals aged ≥ 4 years. Schistosoma haematobium infection was detected by urine filtration microscopy. Snail, parasitological and questionnaire-derived data were analyzed descriptively, spatially and with generalized estimated equation models.

Results

The intermediate host snail Bulinus globosus was detected in 19.8% (33/167) of HWCSs. The overall S. haematobium prevalence was 1.2% (26/2196) in school-aged children and 0.8% (31/3893) in community members, with 0.2% (4/2196) and 0.1% (3/3893) heavy-intensity infections, respectively. Children who studied < 1 km away from HWCSs with B. globosus had significantly higher odds for a S. haematobium infection than those attending a school located > 2 km away (odds ratio [OR]: 5.0; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.3–11.1). Individuals living in a house located < 1 km away from HWCSs with B. globosus had higher odds than those residing in > 2 km distance (OR: 18.0; 95% CI: 2.9–111.0). Self-reported praziquantel treatment coverage was 83.2% (2015/2423) in schoolchildren in the mass drug administration (MDA) conducted in August 2020. Coverage among adult community members was 59.9% (574/958), but only 34.8% (333/958) took praziquantel correctly.

Conclusions

While the S. haematobium prevalence is very low in Pemba, there are many HWCSs with B. globosus situated close to schools or houses that pose a considerable risk of recrudescence. To maintain and accelerate the progress towards interruption of transmission, targeted and cost-effective interventions that are accepted by the community are needed; for example, snail control plus focal MDA, or test-and-treat in schools and households near infested waterbodies.

Graphical Abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13071-022-05404-6.

Implementation and acceptance of government-sponsored malaria control interventions in Meghalaya, India

Background

India has made considerable progress in malaria reduction over the past two decades, with government-sponsored indoor residual spraying (IRS) and insecticide-treated bed net (ITN) or long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLIN) distribution being the main vector-related prevention efforts. Few investigations have used non-participant observational methods to assess malaria control measures while they were being implemented, nor documented people’s perceptions and acceptance of IRS or LLINs in India, and none have done so in the northeast region. This study evaluated household (HH)-level operation of IRS and distribution of LLINs by India’s National Vector Borne Disease Control Programme (NVBDCP) in 50 villages of Meghalaya state, and documented their acceptance and use.

Methods

Study field teams accompanied the government health system teams during August-October, 2019 and 2020 to observe deployment of LLINs, and record HH-level data on LLIN numbers and use. In addition, NVBDCP spray teams were followed during 2019–2021 to observe IRS preparation and administration. HH members were interviewed to better understand reasons for acceptance or refusal of spraying.

Results

A total of 8386 LLINs were distributed to 2727 HHs in 24 villages from five Primary Health Centres, representing 99.5% of planned coverage. Interviews with 80 HH residents indicated that they appreciated the LLIN dissemination programme, and generally made regular and appropriate use of LLINs, except during overnight travel or when working in agricultural fields. However, HH-level IRS application, which was observed at 632 HHs, did not always follow standard insecticide preparation and safety protocols. Of 1,079 occupied HHs visited by the spray team, 632 (58.6%) refused to allow any spraying. Only 198 (18.4%) HHs agreed to be sprayed, comprising 152 (14.1%) that were only partly sprayed, and 46 (4.3%) that were fully sprayed. Reasons for refusal included: inadequate time to rearrange HH items, young children were present, annoying smell, staining of walls, and threat to bee-keeping or Eri silk moth cultivation.

Conclusions

These findings are among the first in India that independently evaluate people's perceptions and acceptance of ongoing government-sponsored IRS and LLIN programmes for malaria prevention. They represent important insights for achieving India's goal of malaria elimination by 2030.

Serological evaluation of the effectiveness of reactive focal mass drug administration and reactive vector control to reduce malaria transmission in Zambezi Region, Namibia: Results from a secondary analysis of a cluster randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Due to challenges in measuring changes in malaria at low transmission, serology is increasingly being used to complement clinical and parasitological surveillance. Longitudinal studies have shown that serological markers, such as Etramp5.Ag1, can reflect spatio-temporal differences in malaria transmission. However, these markers have yet to be used as endpoints in intervention trials.

METHODS

Based on data from a 2017 cluster randomised trial conducted in Zambezi Region, Namibia, evaluating the effectiveness of reactive focal mass drug administration (rfMDA) and reactive vector control (RAVC), this study conducted a secondary analysis comparing antibody responses between intervention arms as trial endpoints. Antibody responses were measured on a multiplex immunoassay, using a panel of eight serological markers of Plasmodium falciparum infection - Etramp5.Ag1, GEXP18, HSP40.Ag1, Rh2.2030, EBA175, PfMSP119, PfAMA1, and PfGLURP.R2.

FINDINGS

Reductions in sero-prevalence to antigens Etramp.Ag1, PfMSP119, Rh2.2030, and PfAMA1 were observed in study arms combining rfMDA and RAVC, but only effects for Etramp5.Ag1 were statistically significant. Etramp5.Ag1 sero-prevalence was significantly lower in all intervention arms. Compared to the reference arms, adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR) for Etramp5.Ag1 was 0.78 (95%CI 0.65 - 0.91, p = 0.0007) in the rfMDA arms and 0.79 (95%CI 0.67 - 0.92, p = 0.001) in the RAVC arms. For the combined rfMDA plus RAVC intervention, aPR was 0.59 (95%CI 0.46 - 0.76, p < 0.0001). Significant reductions were also observed based on continuous antibody responses. Sero-prevalence as an endpoint was found to achieve higher study power (99.9% power to detect a 50% reduction in prevalence) compared to quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) prevalence (72.9% power to detect a 50% reduction in prevalence).

INTERPRETATION

While the observed relative reduction in qPCR prevalence in the study was greater than serology, the use of serological endpoints to evaluate trial outcomes measured effect size with improved precision and study power. Serology has clear application in cluster randomised trials, particularly in settings where measuring clinical incidence or infection is less reliable due to seasonal fluctuations, limitations in health care seeking, or incomplete testing and reporting.

FUNDING

This study was supported by Novartis Foundation (A122666), the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1160129), and the Horchow Family Fund (5,300,375,400).