Availability and price of malaria rapid diagnostic tests in the public and private health sectors in 2011: results from 10 nationally representative cross-sectional retail surveys.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the state of the public and private malaria diagnostics market shortly after WHO updated its guidelines for testing all suspected malaria cases prior to treatment. METHODS: Ten nationally representative cross-sectional cluster surveys were conducted in 2011 among public and private health facilities, community health workers and retail outlets (pharmacies and drug shops) in nine countries (Tanzania mainland and Zanzibar surveyed separately). Eligible outlets had antimalarials in stock on the day of interview or had stocked antimalarials in the past 3 months. RESULTS: Three thousand four hundred and thirty-nine rapid diagnostic test (RDT) products from 39 manufacturers were audited among 12,197 outlets interviewed. Availability was typically highest in public health facilities, although availability in these facilities varied greatly across countries, from 15% in Nigeria to >90% in Madagascar and Cambodia. Private for-profit sector availability was 46% in Cambodia, 20% in Zambia, but low in other countries. Median retail prices for RDTs in the private for-profit sector ranged from $0.00 in Madagascar to $3.13 in Zambia. The reported number of RDTs used in the 7 days before the survey in public health facilities ranged from 3 (Benin) to 50 (Zambia). CONCLUSIONS: Eighteen months after WHO updated its case management guidelines, RDT availability remained poor in the private sector in sub-Saharan Africa. Given the ongoing importance of the private sector as a source of fever treatment, the goal of universal diagnosis will not be achievable under current circumstances. These results constitute national baselines against which progress in scaling-up diagnostic tests can be assessed.

Communicating the AMFm message: exploring the effect of communication and training interventions on private for-profit provider awareness and knowledge related to a multi-country anti-malarial subsidy intervention.

BACKGROUND: The Affordable Medicines Facility - malaria (AMFm), implemented at national scale in eight African countries or territories, subsidized quality-assured artemisinin combination therapy (ACT) and included communication campaigns to support implementation and promote appropriate anti-malarial use. This paper reports private for-profit provider awareness of key features of the AMFm programme, and changes in provider knowledge of appropriate malaria treatment. METHODS: This study had a non-experimental design based on nationally representative surveys of outlets stocking anti-malarials before (2009/10) and after (2011) the AMFm roll-out. RESULTS: Based on data from over 19,500 outlets, results show that in four of eight settings, where communication campaigns were implemented for 5-9 months, 76%-94% awareness of the AMFm 'green leaf' logo, 57%-74% awareness of the ACT subsidy programme, and 52%-80% awareness of the correct recommended retail price (RRP) of subsidized ACT were recorded. However, in the remaining four settings where communication campaigns were implemented for three months or less, levels were substantially lower. In six of eight settings, increases of at least 10 percentage points in private for-profit providers' knowledge of the correct first-line treatment for uncomplicated malaria were seen; and in three of these the levels of knowledge achieved at endline were over 80%. CONCLUSIONS: The results support the interpretation that, in addition to the availability of subsidized ACT, the intensity of communication campaigns may have contributed to the reported levels of AMFm-related awareness and knowledge among private for-profit providers. Future subsidy programmes for anti-malarials or other treatments should similarly include communication activities.

The Affordable Medicines Facility-malaria--a success in peril.

The Affordable Medicines Facility-malaria (AMFm) has put into place a bold financing plan for artemisinin-combination therapy in a pilot phase in seven countries covering half the population at risk of malaria in Africa. A report of the AMFm independent evaluation, conducted by ICF International and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, describes the success of the programme in the pilot sites: Ghana, Kenya, Madagascar, Niger, Nigeria, Tanzania (mainland and Zanzibar) and Uganda, comparing availability and affordability of high-quality artemisinin-combination therapies before and after AMFm launched. Proof of concept was achieved: AMFm increased availability and kept prices low, meeting its initial, ambitious benchmarks in most settings. Despite this overwhelming success, opposition to the programme and dwindling resources for malaria control conspire to cripple or kill AMFm.

Effect of the Affordable Medicines Facility--malaria (AMFm) on the availability, price, and market share of quality-assured artemisinin-based combination therapies in seven countries: a before-and-after analysis of outlet survey data.

BACKGROUND: Malaria is one of the greatest causes of mortality worldwide. Use of the most effective treatments for malaria remains inadequate for those in need, and there is concern over the emergence of resistance to these treatments. In 2010, the Global Fund launched the Affordable Medicines Facility--malaria (AMFm), a series of national-scale pilot programmes designed to increase the access and use of quality-assured artemisinin based combination therapies (QAACTs) and reduce that of artemisinin monotherapies for treatment of malaria. AMFm involves manufacturer price negotiations, subsidies on the manufacturer price of each treatment purchased, and supporting interventions such as communications campaigns. We present findings on the effect of AMFm on QAACT price, availability, and market share, 6-15 months after the delivery of subsidised ACTs in Ghana, Kenya, Madagascar, Niger, Nigeria, Uganda, and Tanzania (including Zanzibar). METHODS: We did nationally representative baseline and endpoint surveys of public and private sector outlets that stock antimalarial treatments. QAACTs were identified on the basis of the Global Fund's quality assurance policy. Changes in availability, price, and market share were assessed against specified success benchmarks for 1 year of AMFm implementation. Key informant interviews and document reviews recorded contextual factors and the implementation process. FINDINGS: In all pilots except Niger and Madagascar, there were large increases in QAACT availability (25·8-51·9 percentage points), and market share (15·9-40·3 percentage points), driven mainly by changes in the private for-profit sector. Large falls in median price for QAACTs per adult equivalent dose were seen in the private for-profit sector in six pilots, ranging from US$1·28 to $4·82. The market share of oral artemisinin monotherapies decreased in Nigeria and Zanzibar, the two pilots where it was more than 5% at baseline. INTERPRETATION: Subsidies combined with supporting interventions can be effective in rapidly improving availability, price, and market share of QAACTs, particularly in the private for-profit sector. Decisions about the future of AMFm should also consider the effect on use in vulnerable populations, access to malaria diagnostics, and cost-effectiveness. FUNDING: The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Reviewing the literature on access to prompt and effective malaria treatment in Kenya: implications for meeting the Abuja targets.

BACKGROUND: Effective case management is central to reducing malaria mortality and morbidity worldwide, but only a minority of those affected by malaria, have access to prompt effective treatment.In Kenya, the Division of Malaria Control is committed to ensuring that 80 percent of childhood fevers are treated with effective anti-malarial medicines within 24 hours of fever onset, but this target is largely unmet. This review aimed to document evidence on access to effective malaria treatment in Kenya, identify factors that influence access, and make recommendations on how to improve prompt access to effective malaria treatment. Since treatment-seeking patterns for malaria are similar in many settings in sub-Saharan Africa, the findings presented in this review have important lessons for other malaria endemic countries. METHODS: Internet searches were conducted in PUBMED (MEDLINE) and HINARI databases using specific search terms and strategies. Grey literature was obtained by soliciting reports from individual researchers working in the treatment-seeking field, from websites of major organizations involved in malaria control and from international reports. RESULTS: The review indicated that malaria treatment-seeking occurs mostly in the informal sector; that most fevers are treated, but treatment is often ineffective. Irrational drug use was identified as a problem in most studies, but determinants of this behaviour were not documented. Availability of non-recommended medicines over-the-counter and the presence of substandard anti-malarials in the market are well documented. Demand side determinants of access include perception of illness causes, severity and timing of treatment, perceptions of treatment efficacy, simplicity of regimens and ability to pay. Supply side determinants include distance to health facilities, availability of medicines, prescribing and dispensing practices and quality of medicines. Policy level factors are around the complexity and unclear messages regarding drug policy changes. CONCLUSION: Kenya, like many other African countries, is still far from achieving the Abuja targets. The government, with support from donors, should invest adequately in mechanisms that promote access to effective treatment. Such approaches should focus on factors influencing multiple dimensions of access and will require the cooperation of all stakeholders working in malaria control.