Evaluation of different deployment strategies for larviciding to control malaria: a simulation study

Cost and quality of operational larviciding using drones and smartphone technology

BACKGROUND

Larval Source Management (LSM) is an important tool for malaria vector control and is recommended by WHO as a supplementary vector control measure. LSM has contributed in many successful attempts to eliminate the disease across the Globe. However, this approach is typically labour-intensive, largely due to the difficulties in locating and mapping potential malarial mosquito breeding sites. Previous studies have demonstrated the potential for drone imaging technology to map malaria vector breeding sites. However, key questions remain unanswered related to the use and cost of this technology within operational vector control.

METHODS

Using Zanzibar (United Republic of Tanzania) as a demonstration site, a protocol was collaboratively designed that employs drones and smartphones for supporting operational LSM, termed the Spatial Intelligence System (SIS). SIS was evaluated over a four-month LSM programme by comparing key mapping accuracy indicators and relative costs (both mapping costs and intervention costs) against conventional ground-based methods. Additionally, malaria case incidence was compared between the SIS and conventional study areas, including an estimation of the incremental cost-effectiveness of switching from conventional to SIS larviciding.

RESULTS

The results demonstrate that the SIS approach is significantly more accurate than a conventional approach for mapping potential breeding sites: mean % correct per site: SIS = 60% (95% CI 32-88%, p = 0.02), conventional = 18% (95% CI - 3-39%). Whilst SIS cost more in the start-up phase, overall annualized costs were similar to the conventional approach, with a simulated cost per person protected per year of $3.69 ($0.32 to $15.12) for conventional and $3.94 ($0.342 to $16.27) for SIS larviciding. The main economic benefits were reduced labour costs associated with SIS in the pre-intervention baseline mapping of habitats. There was no difference in malaria case incidence between the three arms. Cost effectiveness analysis showed that SIS is likely to provide similar health benefits at similar costs compared to the conventional arm.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of drones and smartphones provides an improved means of mapping breeding sites for use in operational LSM. Furthermore, deploying this technology does not appear to be more costly than a conventional ground-based approach and, as such, may represent an important tool for Malaria Control Programmes that plan to implement LSM.

Sub-national tailoring of malaria interventions in Mainland Tanzania: simulation of the impact of strata-specific intervention combinations using modelling

Background

To accelerate progress against malaria in high burden countries, a strategic reorientation of resources at the sub-national level is needed. This paper describes how mathematical modelling was used in mainland Tanzania to support the strategic revision that followed the mid-term review of the 2015–2020 national malaria strategic plan (NMSP) and the epidemiological risk stratification at the council level in 2018.

Methods

Intervention mixes, selected by the National Malaria Control Programme, were simulated for each malaria risk strata per council. Intervention mixes included combinations of insecticide-treated bed nets (ITN), indoor residual spraying, larval source management, and intermittent preventive therapies for school children (IPTsc). Effective case management was either based on estimates from the malaria indicator survey in 2016 or set to a hypothetical target of 85%. A previously calibrated mathematical model in OpenMalaria was used to compare intervention impact predictions for prevalence and incidence between 2016 and 2020, or 2022.

Results

For each malaria risk stratum four to ten intervention mixes were explored. In the low-risk and urban strata, the scenario without a ITN mass campaign in 2019, predicted high increase in prevalence by 2020 and 2022, while in the very-low strata the target prevalence of less than 1% was maintained at low pre-intervention transmission intensity and high case management. In the moderate and high strata, IPTsc in addition to existing vector control was predicted to reduce the incidence by an additional 15% and prevalence by 22%. In the high-risk strata, all interventions together reached a maximum reduction of 76%, with around 70% of that reduction attributable to high case management and ITNs. Overall, the simulated revised NMSP was predicted to achieve a slightly lower prevalence in 2020 compared to the 2015–2020 NMSP (5.3% vs 6.3%).

Conclusion

Modelling supported the choice of intervention per malaria risk strata by providing impact comparisons of various alternative intervention mixes to address specific questions relevant to the country. The use of a council-calibrated model, that reproduces local malaria trends, represents a useful tool for compiling available evidence into a single analytical platform, that complement other evidence, to aid national programmes with decision-making processes.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12936-022-04099-5.