Introducing field digital data collection systems into seasonal malaria chemoprevention campaigns: opportunities for robust evidence development and national e-health strategies.

Seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) is a World Health Organization-recommended intervention to protect children under the age of 5 in Africa's Sahel region. While SMC remains highly effective in decreasing malaria cases, implementing countries face several challenges regarding collecting quality data; monitoring coverage and compliance and overcoming delays in campaigns due to late payment to field distributors.To address these challenges, the National Malaria Control Programmes of Benin, The Gambia, Ghana and Nigeria introduced digital data collection (DDC) tools to support their SMC campaigns. To facilitate cross-country learning, this paper investigates the impact of using DDCs in SMC campaigns by comparing country responses.Country experience suggests that in comparison to paper-based data collection systems, using DDC tools help to overcome data quality and operational challenges; cloud-based features also made data more accessible. Thus, scaling up DDC tools and linking them with routine national health management systems could help generate robust evidence for malaria policy development and programming. Of note, evidence from Benin showed that using digital tools reduced the time to pay staff and volunteers by 5 weeks. In Benin's experience, DDC also offered cost benefits (1.5 times cheaper) versus the use of paper-based tools.The authors note that no application offers greater benefits than the other-countries will select a technology that best suits their needs. Several applications are currently being used and newer ones are also being developed. Another option is to develop in-house applications that can be adjusted to local health programmes.Cost-effectiveness studies to inform on whether DDCs offer cost advantages would be beneficial. More studies on DDC are needed from SMC-implementing countries to identify additional benefits and drawbacks of digital applications. These will similarly help national malaria policy and programming efforts.

Effectiveness of seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) treatments when SMC is implemented at scale: Case-control studies in 5 countries.

BACKGROUND: Seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) has shown high protective efficacy against clinical malaria and severe malaria in a series of clinical trials. We evaluated the effectiveness of SMC treatments against clinical malaria when delivered at scale through national malaria control programmes in 2015 and 2016. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Case-control studies were carried out in Mali and The Gambia in 2015, and in Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Nigeria, and The Gambia in 2016. Children aged 3-59 months presenting at selected health facilities with microscopically confirmed clinical malaria were recruited as cases. Two controls per case were recruited concurrently (on or shortly after the day the case was detected) from the neighbourhood in which the case lived. The primary exposure was the time since the most recent course of SMC treatment, determined from SMC recipient cards, caregiver recall, and administrative records. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratio (OR) associated with receipt of SMC within the previous 28 days, and SMC 29 to 42 days ago, compared with no SMC in the past 42 days. These ORs, which are equivalent to incidence rate ratios, were used to calculate the percentage reduction in clinical malaria incidence in the corresponding time periods. Results from individual countries were pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis. In total, 2,126 cases and 4,252 controls were included in the analysis. Across the 7 studies, the mean age ranged from 1.7 to 2.4 years and from 2.1 to 2.8 years among controls and cases, respectively; 42.2%-50.9% and 38.9%-46.9% of controls and cases, respectively, were male. In all 7 individual case-control studies, a high degree of personal protection from SMC against clinical malaria was observed, ranging from 73% in Mali in 2016 to 98% in Mali in 2015. The overall OR for SMC within 28 days was 0.12 (95% CI: 0.06, 0.21; p < 0.001), indicating a protective effectiveness of 88% (95% CI: 79%, 94%). Effectiveness against clinical malaria for SMC 29-42 days ago was 61% (95% CI: 47%, 72%). Similar results were obtained when the analysis was restricted to cases with parasite density in excess of 5,000 parasites per microlitre: Protective effectiveness 90% (95% CI: 79%, 96%; P<0.001), and 59% (95% CI: 34%, 74%; P<0.001) for SMC 0-28 days and 29-42 days ago, respectively. Potential limitations include the possibility of residual confounding due to an association between exposure to malaria and access to SMC, or differences in access to SMC between patients attending a clinic and community controls; however, neighbourhood matching of cases and controls, and covariate adjustment, attempted to control for these aspects, and the observed decline in protection over time, consistent with expected trends, argues against a major bias from these sources. CONCLUSIONS: SMC administered as part of routine national malaria control activities provided a very high level of personal protection against clinical malaria over 28 days post-treatment, similar to the efficacy observed in clinical trials. The case-control design used in this study can be used at intervals to ensure SMC treatments remain effective.