"We were afraid of the lion that has roared next to us"; community response to reactive focal mass drug administration for malaria in Eswatini (formerly Swaziland).

BACKGROUND: Reactive focal mass drug administration (rfMDA), or presumptive treatment without malaria testing of household members and neighbours of a passively identified malaria case, is currently being explored as a possible malaria elimination strategy in low transmission settings. One of the primary factors determining the effectiveness of rfMDA on reducing or interrupting transmission is achieving high coverage of the target population with drug administration. This study aims to explore the acceptability of rfMDA and identify facilitators and barriers to its potential implementation, as well as the community's general knowledge, attitudes and beliefs with regard to malaria elimination. METHODS: A qualitative study was performed using focus group discussions (FGDs) among villagers that received rfMDA through the National Malaria Control Programme in the low transmission setting of Eswatini as part of a 2-year clinical trial. FGDs were audio-recorded, transcribed and translated into English. All transcripts were managed in Dedoose and underwent qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The majority of participants perceived their community to be at high risk of malaria. Witnessing others in their community suffer from malaria, proximity to Mozambique, various ecological factors, and the presence of mosquitoes contributed to this perception. The greatest motivator of participation in rfMDA was witnessing someone else suffer from malaria, since most participants had not personally experienced malaria themselves. Participants valued the education on rfMDA and on malaria in general, particularly when communicated by nurses and other health workers from the Ministry of Health. Participants were overwhelmingly motivated to participate in rfMDA in order to obtain protection from malaria. Most participants did not understand the concept of sub-clinical infection and, therefore, did not perceive the anti-malarial medication given in rfMDA to be a treatment medication. CONCLUSIONS: Perceived risk for malaria was a major driver of acceptability; therefore, future intervention campaigns could aim to better quantify risk to inform interventions and encourage uptake. There were misunderstandings about the asymptomatic reservoir of parasites in humans. Given that this phenomenon is the rationale for rfMDA, this misunderstanding could threaten the uptake of the intervention if it persists in the community. Using local authorities to deliver messaging, additional education on this concept with re-inforcement that risk of malaria is ongoing, even in the absence of frequent cases, may help to maximize and maintain acceptability.

Evaluating Vertical Malaria Community Health Worker Programs as Malaria Declines: Learning From Program Evaluations in Honduras and Lao PDR.

BACKGROUND: Across the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) and Central America, governments commonly employ community health workers (CHWs) to improve access to and uptake of malaria services. Many of these networks are vertical in design, organized to extend malaria-only services to those remaining communities in which malaria persists. METHODS: Between 2019 and 2020, national ministries of health (MOH) and Clinton Health Access Initiative conducted mixed-methods CHW program evaluations across the GMS and Central America. Routine surveillance and programmatic data were analyzed to quantify CHW contributions to malaria elimination objectives and identify gaps and challenges. Semistructured interviews were conducted with governmental and nongovernmental stakeholders from central to community level. This article draws comparisons between the Lao People's Democratic Republic (PDR) and Honduras CHW program evaluation results to distill broader hypotheses about how vertical CHW programs might evolve as their primary mission nears its end. RESULTS: CHWs contribute substantially to malaria case detection and surveillance, diagnosing and treating 27% of malaria cases in Lao PDR and 55% in the department of Gracias a Dios, Honduras in 2019. In the same year, malaria test positivity neared less than 1% in both countries. In 2019, 80% of CHWs in Lao PDR and 74% in Gracias a Dios, Honduras did not report a single malaria case. From inception, both programs were organized as vertical (malaria-only) CHW programs reliant upon Global Fund financing for malaria commodities, training, supervision and, where applicable, remuneration. CONCLUSIONS: Although community case management by CHWs has been highly impactful in reducing malaria cases to near zero, new challenges of acceptability and effectiveness of malaria-only service delivery, feasibility of continued vertical program management, and sustainable financing have emerged. To achieve and sustain reductions in malaria, surveillance and delivery platforms must be redesigned to encourage (and reward) care seeking based on experience of symptoms and not on a patient or caregiver's presumptive diagnosis of disease. By expanding the roles and responsibilities of currently vertical malaria CHWs, malarial interventions can be optimized and sustained. Such a shift will also position existing community-based platforms to be resilient and responsive as epidemiology of disease and community need shift.

Effectiveness and safety of reactive focal mass drug administration (rfMDA) using dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine to reduce malaria transmission in the very low-endemic setting of Eswatini: a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: To reduce malaria transmission in very low-endemic settings, screening and treatment near index cases (reactive case detection (RACD)), is widely practised, but the rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) used miss low-density infections. Reactive focal mass drug administration (rfMDA) may be safe and more effective. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial in Eswatini, a very low-endemic setting. 77 clusters were randomised to rfMDA using dihydroartemisin-piperaquine (DP) or RACD involving RDTs and artemether-lumefantrine. Interventions were delivered by the local programme. An intention-to-treat analysis was used to compare cluster-level cumulative confirmed malaria incidence among clusters with cases. Secondary outcomes included safety and adherence. RESULTS: From September 2015 to August 2017, 222 index cases from 47 clusters triggered 46 RACD events and 64 rfMDA events. RACD and rfMDA were delivered to 1455 and 1776 individuals, respectively. Index case coverage was 69.5% and 62.4% for RACD and rfMDA, respectively. Adherence to DP was 98.7%. No serious adverse events occurred. For rfMDA versus RACD, cumulative incidences (per 1000 person-years) of all malaria were 2.11 (95% CI 1.73 to 2.59) and 1.97 (95% CI 1.57 to 2.47), respectively; and of locally acquired malaria, they were 1.29 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.67) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.71 to 1.34), respectively. Adjusting for imbalance in baseline incidence, incidence rate ratio for rfMDA versus RACD was 0.95 (95% CI 0.55 to 1.65) for all malaria and 0.82 (95% CI 0.40 to 1.71) for locally acquired malaria. Similar results were obtained in a per-protocol analysis that excluded clusters with <80% index case coverage. CONCLUSION: In a very low-endemic, real-world setting, rfMDA using DP was safe, but did not lower incidence compared with RACD, potentially due to insufficient coverage and/or power. To assess impact of interventions in very low-endemic settings, improved coverage, complementary interventions and adaptive ring trial designs may be needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02315690.