Abstract

BackgroundMalaria control programmes currently face the challenge of maintaining, as well as accelerating, the progress made against malaria with fewer resources and uncertain funding. There is a critical need to determine what combination of malaria interventions confers the greatest protection against malaria morbidity and child mortality under routine conditions.MethodsThis study assesses intervention effectiveness experienced by children under the age of five exposed to both insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS), as compared to each intervention alone, based on nationally representative survey data collected from 17 countries in sub-Saharan Africa.ResultsLiving in households with both ITNs and IRS was associated with a significant risk reduction against parasitaemia in medium and high transmission areas, 53% (95% CI 37% to 67%) and 31% (95% CI 11% to 47%) respectively. For medium transmission areas, an additional 36% (95% CI 7% to 53%) protection was garnered by having both interventions compared with exposure to only ITNs or only IRS. Having both ITNs and IRS was not significantly more protective against parasitaemia than either intervention alone in low and high malaria transmission areas. In rural and urban areas, exposure to both interventions provided significant protection against parasitaemia, 57% (95% CI 48% to 65%) and 39% (95% CI 10% to 61%) respectively; however, this effect was not significantly greater than having a singular intervention. Statistically, risk for all-cause child mortality was not significantly reduced by having both ITNs and IRS, and no additional protectiveness was detected for having dual intervention coverage over a singular intervention.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that greater reductions in malaria morbidity and health gains for children may be achieved with ITNs and IRS combined beyond the protection offered by IRS or ITNs alone.

Highlights

  • Malaria control programmes currently face the challenge of maintaining, as well as accelerating, the progress made against malaria with fewer resources and uncertain funding

  • Intervention coverage varies substantially by transmission risk: for example, only 2.8% and 9.8% of children who live in high and medium transmission areas respectively have both Insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) for their homes, whereas 17.7% of children residing in low transmission regions have both interventions

  • Household application of only IRS is far more common for children residing in low transmission settings (17.7%) than in medium and high transmission areas (7.4% and 0.8%, respectively)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Malaria control programmes currently face the challenge of maintaining, as well as accelerating, the progress made against malaria with fewer resources and uncertain funding. There is a critical need to determine what combination of malaria interventions confers the greatest protection against malaria morbidity and child mortality under routine conditions. Insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) are two vector control measures currently used in the prevention of malaria transmission. As countries seek to further expand their malaria control programmes and several embark on the stage of achieving malaria elimination [1,11,12], there is a great need to better understand what combination of interventions are most effective under routine conditions

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call