Using community-based, participatory qualitative research to identify determinants of routine vaccination drop-out for children under 2 in Lilongwe and Mzimba North Districts, Malawi.

OBJECTIVE: In recent years, full childhood routine immunisation coverage has fallen by 5% to levels not seen since 2008; between 2019 and 2021, 67 million children were undervaccinated. We aimed to identify and describe the determinants of vaccination drop-out from the perspectives of caregivers and health workers in Malawi. DESIGN: We used a community-based participatory research approach to collect data through photo elicitation, short message service exchanges, in-depth interviews and observations. We used a team-based approach for thematic analysis, guided by the Behavioural and Social Drivers of Vaccination framework. SETTING: The study was conducted in Lilongwe and Mzimba North Districts in Malawi, representing urban and rural settings, respectively. PARTICIPANTS: Participants included caregivers of partially vaccinated (n=38) and fully vaccinated (n=12) children between 25 and 34 months and Community Health Workers (n=20) who deliver vaccines. Caregiver participants were identified through health facility vaccination registers and with the assistance of community health volunteers. RESULTS: We identified five principal drivers of routine vaccination drop-out: (1) poor caregiver knowledge of the vaccine schedule and how many vaccines are needed for full vaccination; (2) caregivers' fear of repercussions after not following vaccination guidelines; (3) rumours and concerns if vaccines are repeated or new ones are introduced; (4) high opportunity cost of health facility visits, exacerbated by wait times, stockouts and missed opportunities and (5) limited family support and vaccination burden placed largely on mothers. Key differences between rural and urban settings related to practices around health cards and vaccine wastage, wait times, migrant and tenant communities, and social support systems. CONCLUSIONS: Immunisation interventions should be tailored to address drivers of drop-out in the community, the health facility and beyond. Service quality, timeliness and reliability need to be improved, and tailored messaging and education are needed, especially in response to COVID-19-related misinformation and introductions of new, routine vaccines.

Update on Wild Poliovirus Type 1 Outbreak - Southeastern Africa, 2021-2022.

Since the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) began in 1988, the number of wild poliovirus (WPV) cases has declined by >99.99%. Five of the six World Health Organization (WHO) regions have been certified free of indigenous WPV, and WPV serotypes 2 and 3 have been declared eradicated globally (1). WPV type 1 (WPV1) remains endemic only in Afghanistan and Pakistan (2,3). Before the outbreak described in this report, WPV1 had not been detected in southeastern Africa since the 1990s, and on August 25, 2020, the WHO African Region was certified free of indigenous WPV (4). On February 16, 2022, WPV1 infection was confirmed in one child living in Malawi, with onset of paralysis on November 19, 2021. Genomic sequence analysis of the isolated poliovirus indicated that it originated in Pakistan (5). Cases were subsequently identified in Mozambique. This report summarizes progress in the outbreak response since the initial report (5). During November 2021-December 2022, nine children and adolescents with paralytic polio caused by WPV1 were identified in southeastern Africa: one in Malawi and eight in Mozambique. Malawi, Mozambique, and three neighboring countries at high risk for WPV1 importation (Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe) responded by increasing surveillance and organizing up to six rounds of national and subnational polio supplementary immunization activities (SIAs).* Although no cases of paralytic WPV1 infection have been reported in Malawi since November 2021 or in Mozambique since August 2022, undetected transmission might be ongoing because of poliovirus surveillance gaps and testing delays. Efforts to further enhance poliovirus surveillance sensitivity, improve SIA quality, and strengthen routine immunization are needed to ensure that WPV1 transmission has been interrupted within 12 months of the first case, thereby preserving the WHO African Region's WPV-free status.

Cost of introducing and delivering RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine within the malaria vaccine implementation program.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) recommended widespread use of the RTS,S/AS01 (RTS,S) malaria vaccine among children residing in regions of moderate to high malaria transmission. This recommendation is informed by RTS,S evidence, including findings from the pilot rollout of the vaccine in Ghana, Kenya, and Malawi. This study estimates the incremental costs of introducing and delivering the malaria vaccine within routine immunization programs in the context of malaria vaccine pilot introduction, to help inform decision-making. METHODS: An activity-based, retrospective costing was conducted from the governments' perspective. Vaccine introduction and delivery costs supported by the donors during the pilot introduction were attributed as costs to the governments under routine implementation. Detailed resource use data were extracted from the pilot program expenditure and activity reports for 2019-2021. Primary data from representative health facilities were collected to inform recurrent operational and service delivery costs.Costs were categorized as introduction or recurrent costs. Both financial and economic costs were estimated and reported in 2020 USD. The cost of donated vaccine doses was evaluated at $2, $5 and $10 per dose and included in the economic cost estimates. Financial costs include the procurement add on costs for the donated vaccines and immunization supplies, along with other direct expenses. FINDINGS: At a vaccine price of $5 per dose, the incremental cost per dose administered across countries ranges from $2.30 to $3.01 (financial), and $8.28 to $10.29 (economic). The non-vaccine cost of delivery ranges between $1.04 and $2.46 (financial) and $1.52 and $4.62 (economic), by country. Considering only recurrent costs, the non-vaccine cost of delivery per dose ranges between $0.29 and $0.89 (financial) and $0.59 and $2.29 (economic), by country. Introduction costs constitute between 33% and 71% of total financial costs. Commodity and procurement add-on costs are the main cost drivers of total cost across countries. Incremental resource needs for implementation are dependent on country's baseline immunization program capacity constraints. INTERPRETATION: The financial costs of introducing RTS,S are comparable with costs of introducing other new vaccines. Country resource requirements for malaria vaccine introduction are most influenced by vaccine price and potential donor funding for vaccine purchases and introduction support.

'Vaccinate my village' strategy in Malawi: an effort to boost COVID-19 vaccination.

OBJECTIVES: To boost COVID-19 vaccine uptake, an innovative 'vaccinate my village' (VMV) strategy using door-to-door vaccination by Health Surveillance Assistants (HSA) was adopted. In this study, we assessed the impact of the 'vaccinate my village' strategy on COVID-19 vaccine uptake. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional review of the data on COVID-19 vaccination obtained from the Ministry of Health, Malawi, from 11 March 2021 to September 2022. RESULTS: From March 2021-4 September 2022,091,551 COVID-19 vaccine doses were administered, out of which 2,253,546 were administered over just six months as a part of VMV as compared to 1,838,005 doses were administered over 13 months as a part of other strategies. The proportion of Malawi's population receiving at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine increased substantially from 4.66 to 15.4 with the implementation of the VMV strategy (p = 0.0001). District-wise coverage of the COVID-19 vaccine also increased significantly after its implementation (p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Door-to-door vaccination involving HSAs benefitted the COVID-19 vaccination program in Malawi by ensuring accessibility, availability, and acceptability.

Key lessons learned from the immunization supply chain of Malawi, an African country using EVM2.0.

Objectives: A country's immunization system's effectiveness depends on its supply chain's efficacy. To assess the challenges of maintaining an efficient vaccine supply chain, Malawi conducted its assessment using The EVM2.0 tool (Effective Vaccine Management). Methods: It is a cross-sectional study in which all EVM requirements were assessed between September and October 2021. Data were collected from eighty-two randomly selected sites using the site selection tool of the EVM. Data were entered into the EVM assessment tool 2.0 version 1.12 for analysis. This tool generates performance indicators and criteria scores for assessed sites, compared with a WHO minimum score of 80%. Results: Overall criteria scores across all levels of the immunization supply chain showed a statistically significant mean difference of 5.92 (t = 2.58, P = 0.02). Comparative overall mean criteria scores across different levels of the immunization supply chain showed no statistically significant difference for primary (p = 0.76), sub-national (p = 0.69), and lowest distribution stores (p = 0.12). However, a substantial gap was found in the overall mean scores of the health facility's service point (SP) (t = 4.12, P = 0.001). The overall category scores across all immunization supply chain levels did not show a statistically significant difference. However, among individual category scores, Infrastructure (76 %), Equipment (67 %), Policies and procedures (62 %), Financial (47 %), and Resources (64 %) were found to be below the WHO minimum score. Conclusion: Though the 2021 Malawi EVM assessment findings are promising, they still identified the gaps to be improved to ensure the vaccine availability in the right amount, at the right time, and at the right cost.

Association between childhood immunisation coverage and proximity to health facilities in rural settings: a cross-sectional analysis of Service Provision Assessment 2013-2014 facility data and Demographic and Health Survey 2015-2016 individual data in Malawi.

OBJECTIVES: Despite significant progress in childhood vaccination coverage globally, substantial inequality remains. Remote rural populations are recognised as a priority group for immunisation service equity. We aimed to link facility and individual data to examine the relationship between distance to services and immunisation coverage empirically, specifically using a rural population. DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of facility data from the 2013-2014 Malawi Service Provision Assessment and individual data from the 2015-2016 Malawi Demographic and Health Survey, linking children to facilities within a 5 km radius. We examined associations between proximity to health facilities and vaccination receipt via bivariate comparisons and logistic regression models. PARTICIPANTS: 2740 children aged 12-23 months living in rural areas. OUTCOME MEASURES: Immunisation coverage for the six vaccines included in the Malawi Expanded Programme on Immunization schedule for children under 1 year at time of study, as well as two composite vaccination indicators (receipt of basic vaccines and receipt of all recommended vaccines), zero-dose pentavalent coverage, and pentavalent dropout. FINDINGS: 72% (706/977) of facilities offered childhood vaccination services. Among children in rural areas, 61% were proximal to (within 5 km of) a vaccine-providing facility. Proximity to a vaccine-providing health facility was associated with increased likelihood of having received the rotavirus vaccine (93% vs 88%, p=0.004) and measles vaccine (93% vs 89%, p=0.01) in bivariate tests. In adjusted comparisons, how close a child was to a health facility remained meaningfully associated with how likely they were to have received rotavirus vaccine (adjusted OR (AOR) 1.63, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.33) and measles vaccine (AOR 1.62, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.37). CONCLUSION: Proximity to health facilities was significantly associated with likelihood of receipt for some, but not all, vaccines. Our findings reiterate the vulnerability of children residing far from static vaccination services; efforts that specifically target remote rural populations living far from health facilities are warranted to ensure equitable vaccination coverage.

COVID-19 vaccine express strategy in Malawi: An effort to reach the un-reach.

OBJECTIVES: To establish the impact of "Covid-19 Vaccination express" (CVE) on vaccine uptake in Malawi. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study to compare the daily vaccine administration rate in CVE and routine covid vaccination (RCV). RCV data was collected from March 2021 to October 2021. The data regarding CVE was collected from 5 November 2021 to 31 December 2021. Data was collected regarding (1) the total number and type of vaccine doses administered and (2) Demographic details like age, gender, occupation, presence of comorbidities, the first dose, or the second dose of the people who received a vaccine. RESULTS: From March-December 2021, a total of 1,866,623 COVID-19 vaccine doses were administered, out of which 1,290,145 doses were administered at a mean daily vaccination rate of 1854 (95 % CI: 1292-2415) doses as a part of RCV, and 576,478 doses were administered at a mean daily vaccination rate of 3312 (95 % CI: 2377-4248) doses as a part of CVE. Comparing the mean daily doses (Astra Zeneca, AZ doses 1 & 2) administered in the CVE and RCV showed that the mean daily doses of AZ vaccine administered were significantly higher in the CVE (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: CVE successfully increased the uptake of the Covid-19 vaccine.

Projecting the cost of introducing typhoid conjugate vaccine (TCV) in the national immunization program in Malawi using a standardized costing framework.

BACKGROUND: There is a substantial typhoid burden in sub-Saharan Africa, and TCV has been introduced in two African countries to date. Decision-makers in Malawi decided to introduce TCV and applied for financial support from Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance in 2020. The current plan is to introduce TCV as part of the national immunization program in late 2022. The introduction will include a nationwide campaign targeting all children aged 9 months to 15 years. Following the campaign, TCV will be provided through routine immunization at 9 months. This study aims to estimate the cost of TCV introduction and recurrent delivery as part of the national immunization program. METHODS: This costing analysis is conducted from the government's perspective and focuses on projecting the incremental cost of TCV introduction and delivery for Malawi's existing immunization program before vaccine introduction. The study uses a costing tool developed by Levin & Morgan through a partnership between the International Vaccine Institute and the World Health Organization and leverages primary and secondary data collected through key informant interviews with representatives of the Malawi Expanded Programme on Immunization team at various levels. RESULTS: The total financial and economic costs of TCV introduction over three years in Malawi are projected to be US$8.5 million and US$29.8 million, respectively. More than two-thirds of the total cost is made up of recurrent costs. Major cost drivers include the procurement of vaccines and injection supplies and service delivery costs. Without vaccine cost, we estimate the cost per child immunized to be substantially lower than US$1. DISCUSSION: Findings from this analysis may be used to assess the economic implications of introducing TCV in Malawi. Major cost drivers highlighted by the analysis may also inform decision-makers in the region as they assess the value and feasibility of TCV introduction in their national immunization program.

Feasibility of implementing the World Health Organization case management guideline for possible serious bacterial infection among young infants in Ntcheu district, Malawi.

BACKGROUND: Neonatal sepsis is a leading cause of mortality, yet the recommended inpatient treatment options are inaccessible to most families in low-income settings. In 2015, the World Health Organization released a guideline for outpatient treatment of young infants (0-59 days of age) with possible serious bacterial infection (PSBI) with simplified antibiotic regimens when referral was not feasible. If implemented widely, this guideline could prevent many deaths. Our implementation research evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of implementing the WHO guideline through the existing health system in Malawi. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted in 12 first-level health facilities in Ntcheu district. Trained health workers identified and treated young infants with PSBI signs with injection gentamicin for 2 days and oral amoxicillin for 7 days, whereas those with only fast breathing were treated with oral amoxicillin for 7 days. Health Surveillance Assistants (HSAs) were trained to promote care-seeking and to conduct home visits on day 3 and 6 to assess infants under treatment, encourage treatment adherence and remind the caregiver to return for facility follow up. Infants receiving outpatient treatment were followed up at health facility on day 4 and 8. The primary outcome was proportion of outpatient cases completing treatment per protocol. FINDINGS: A total of 358 infants received outpatient treatment (202 clinical severe infection, 156 only fast breathing) from February to September 2017. Of these, 92.7% (332/358) met criteria for treatment completion and 88.8% (318/358) completed the day 4 follow-up. Twelve (3.4%) young infants clinically failed treatment with no reported deaths in those treated at outpatient level. This treatment failure rate was lower than those reported for the simplified regimens tested in the SATT (8-10%) and AFRINEST (5-8%) equivalency trials. More than half of infants (58.1%; 208/358) received HSA follow-up visits on days 3 and 6. CONCLUSION: Study results demonstrate the feasibility of outpatient treatment for sick young infants when referral is not feasible in Malawi, which will inform scale-up in other parts of Malawi and countries with similar health system constraints.

Home visits by community health workers for pregnant mothers and newborns: coverage plateau in Malawi.

BACKGROUND: Home visits by community health workers (CHWs) during pregnancy and soon after delivery are recommended to improve newborn survival. However, as the roles of CHWs expand, there are concerns regarding the capacity of community health systems to deliver high effective coverage of home visits. The WHO's Rapid Access Expansion (RAcE) program supported the Malawi Ministry of Health to align their Community-Based Maternal and Newborn Care (CBMNC) package with the latest WHO guidelines and to implement and evaluate the feasibility and coverage of home visits in Ntcheu district. METHODS: A population-based survey of 150 households in Ntcheu district was conducted in July-August 2016 after approximately 10 months of CBMNC implementation. Thirty clusters were selected proportional-to-size using the most recent census. In selected clusters, five households with mothers of children under six months of age were randomly selected for interview. The Health Surveillance Assistants (HSAs) providing community-based services to the same clusters were purposively selected for a structured interview and register review. RESULTS: Less than one third of pregnant women (30.7%; 95% confidence interval CI = 21.7%-41.5%) received a home visit during pregnancy and only 20.7% (95% CI = 13.0%-29.4%) received the recommended two visits. Coverage of postnatal visits was even lower: 11.4% (95%CI = 6.8%-18.5%) of mothers and newborns received a visit within three days of delivery and 20.7% (95%CI = 12.7%-32.0%) received a visit within the first eight days. Reaching newborns soon after delivery requires timely participation of the family and/or health facility staff to notify the HSA - yet only 42.9% (95% CI = 33.4%-52.9%) of mothers reported that the HSA was informed of the delivery. Coverage of postnatal home visits among those who informed the HSA was significantly higher than among those in which the HSA was not informed (46.7% compared to 1.3%; P = 0.00). Most HSAs had the necessary equipment and supplies and were active in CBMNC: 83.9% (95% CI = 70.2%-97.6%) of HSAs had pregnancy home visits and 77.4% (95% CI = 61.8%-93.0%) had postnatal home visits documented in their registers for the previous three months. CONCLUSIONS: We found low coverage of home visits during pregnancy and soon after delivery in a well-supported program delivery environment. Most HSAs were conducting home visits, but not at the level needed to reach high coverage. These findings were similar to previous studies, calling into question the feasibility of the current visitation schedule. It is time to re-align the CBMNC package with what the existing platform can deliver and identify strategies to better support HSAs to implement home visits to those who would benefit most.