Impact of changing the measles vaccine vial size on Niger's vaccine supply chain: a computational model.

BACKGROUND: Many countries, such as Niger, are considering changing their vaccine vial size presentation and may want to evaluate the subsequent impact on their supply chains, the series of steps required to get vaccines from their manufacturers to patients. The measles vaccine is particularly important in Niger, a country prone to measles outbreaks. METHODS: We developed a detailed discrete event simulation model of the vaccine supply chain representing every vaccine, storage location, refrigerator, freezer, and transport device (e.g., cold trucks, 4 × 4 trucks, and vaccine carriers) in the Niger Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI). Experiments simulated the impact of replacing the 10-dose measles vial size with 5-dose, 2-dose and 1-dose vial sizes. RESULTS: Switching from the 10-dose to the 5-dose, 2-dose and 1-dose vial sizes decreased the average availability of EPI vaccines for arriving patients from 83% to 82%, 81% and 78%, respectively for a 100% target population size. The switches also changed transport vehicle's utilization from a mean of 58% (range: 4-164%) to means of 59% (range: 4-164%), 62% (range: 4-175%), and 67% (range: 5-192%), respectively, between the regional and district stores, and from a mean of 160% (range: 83-300%) to means of 161% (range: 82-322%), 175% (range: 78-344%), and 198% (range: 88-402%), respectively, between the district to integrated health centres (IHC). The switch also changed district level storage utilization from a mean of 65% to means of 64%, 66% and 68% (range for all scenarios: 3-100%). Finally, accounting for vaccine administration, wastage, and disposal, replacing the 10-dose vial with the 5 or 1-dose vials would increase the cost per immunized patient from $0.47US to $0.71US and $1.26US, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The switch from the 10-dose measles vaccines to smaller vial sizes could overwhelm the capacities of many storage facilities and transport vehicles as well as increase the cost per vaccinated child.

Distributing insecticide-treated bednets during measles vaccination: a low-cost means of achieving high and equitable coverage.

OBJECTIVE: To achieve high and equitable coverage of insecticide-treated bednets by integrating their distribution into a measles vaccination campaign. METHODS: In December 2002 in the Lawra district in Ghana, a measles vaccination campaign lasting 1 week targeted all children aged 9 months-15 years. Families with one or more children less than five years old were targeted to receive a free insecticide-treated bednet. The Ghana Health Service, with support from the Ghana Red Cross and UNICEF, provided logistical support, volunteer workers and social mobilization during the campaign. Volunteers visited homes to inform caregivers about the campaign and encourage them to participate. We assessed pre-campaign coverage of bednets by interviewing caregivers leaving vaccination and distribution sites. Five months after distribution, a two-stage cluster survey using population-proportional sampling assessed bednet coverage, retention and use. Both the pre-campaign and post-campaign survey assessed household wealth using an asset inventory. FINDINGS: At the campaign exit interview 636/776 (82.0%) caregivers reported that they had received a home visit by a Red Cross volunteer before the campaign and that 32/776 (4.1%) of the youngest children in each household who were less than 5 years of age slept under an insecticide-treated bednet. Five months after distribution caregivers reported that 204/219 (93.2%) of children aged 9 months to 5 years had been vaccinated during the campaign; 234/248 (94.4%) of households were observed to have an insecticide-treated bednet; and 170/249 (68.3%) were observed to have a net hung over a bed. Altogether 222/248 (89.5%) caregivers reported receiving at least one insecticide-treated bednet during the campaign, and 153/254 (60.2%) said that on the previous night their youngest child had slept under a bednet received during the campaign. For households in the poorest quintile, post-campaign coverage of insecticide-treated bednets was 10 times higher than pre-campaign coverage of households in the wealthiest quintile (46/51 (90.2%) versus 14/156 (9.0%)). The marginal operational cost was 0.32 US dollars per insecticide-treated bednet delivered. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that linking bednet distribution to measles vaccination campaigns may provide an important opportunity for achieving high and equitable coverage of bednets.