Correction: Health worker compliance with severe malaria treatment guidelines in the context of implementing pre-referral rectal artesunate in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nigeria, and Uganda: An operational study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004189.].

Health worker compliance with severe malaria treatment guidelines in the context of implementing pre-referral rectal artesunate in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nigeria, and Uganda: An operational study.

BACKGROUND: For a full treatment course of severe malaria, community-administered pre-referral rectal artesunate (RAS) should be completed by post-referral treatment consisting of an injectable antimalarial and oral artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT). This study aimed to assess compliance with this treatment recommendation in children under 5 years. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This observational study accompanied the implementation of RAS in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Nigeria, and Uganda between 2018 and 2020. Antimalarial treatment was assessed during admission in included referral health facilities (RHFs) in children under 5 with a diagnosis of severe malaria. Children were either referred from a community-based provider or directly attending the RHF. RHF data of 7,983 children was analysed for appropriateness of antimalarials; a subsample of 3,449 children was assessed additionally for dosage and method of ACT provision (treatment compliance). A parenteral antimalarial and an ACT were administered to 2.7% (28/1,051) of admitted children in Nigeria, 44.5% (1,211/2,724) in Uganda, and 50.3% (2,117/4,208) in DRC. Children receiving RAS from a community-based provider were more likely to be administered post-referral medication according to the guidelines in DRC (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 2.13, 95% CI 1.55 to 2.92, P < 0.001), but less likely in Uganda (aOR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.96, P = 0.04) adjusting for patient, provider, caregiver, and other contextual factors. While in DRC, inpatient ACT administration was common, ACTs were often prescribed at discharge in Nigeria (54.4%, 229/421) and Uganda (53.0%, 715/1,349). Study limitations include the unfeasibility to independently confirm the diagnosis of severe malaria due to the observational nature of the study. CONCLUSIONS: Directly observed treatment was often incomplete, bearing a high risk for partial parasite clearance and disease recrudescence. Parenteral artesunate not followed up with oral ACT constitutes an artemisinin monotherapy and may favour the selection of resistant parasites. In connection with the finding that pre-referral RAS had no beneficial effect on child survival in the 3 study countries, concerns about an effective continuum of care for children with severe malaria seem justified. Stricter compliance with the WHO severe malaria treatment guidelines is critical to effectively manage this disease and further reduce child mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03568344).

Pre-referral rectal artesunate is no "magic bullet" in weak health systems.

Severe malaria is a potentially fatal condition that requires urgent treatment. In a clinical trial, a sub-group of children treated with rectal artesunate (RAS) before being referred to a health facility had an increased chance of survival. We recently published in BMC Medicine results of the CARAMAL Project that did not find the same protective effect of pre-referral RAS implemented at scale under real-world conditions in three African countries. Instead, CARAMAL identified serious health system shortfalls that impacted the entire continuum of care, constraining the effectiveness of RAS. Correspondence to the article criticized the observational study design and the alleged interpretation and consequences of our findings.Here, we clarify that we do not dispute the life-saving potential of RAS, and discuss the methodological criticism. We acknowledge the potential for confounding in observational studies. Nevertheless, the totality of CARAMAL evidence is in full support of our conclusion that the conditions under which RAS can be beneficial were not met in our settings, as children often failed to complete referral and post-referral treatment was inadequate.The criticism did not appear to acknowledge the realities of highly malarious settings documented in detail in the CARAMAL project. Suggesting that trial-demonstrated efficacy is sufficient to warrant large-scale deployment of pre-referral RAS ignores the paramount importance of functioning health systems for its delivery, for completing post-referral treatment, and for achieving complete cure. Presenting RAS as a "magic bullet" distracts from the most urgent priority: fixing health systems so they can provide a functioning continuum of care and save the lives of sick children.The data underlying our publication is freely accessible on Zenodo.

Assessing caregivers' perceptions of treatment-seeking for suspected severe malaria in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

BACKGROUND: Malaria remains a major public health issue in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), accounting for 44% deaths among outpatient visits in children < 5 years of age, and 22% of facility deaths. Understanding determinants of caregivers' treatment-seeking patterns and decision-making is crucial in reducing the malaria burden. METHODS: In the frame of the Community Access to Rectal Artesunate for Malaria (CARAMAL) project, cross-sectional household surveys that randomly sampled villages and households were carried-out in three rural DRC health zones prior to the rollout of pre-referral Rectal Artesunate (RAS) and then 9 and 19 months after RAS rollout (post-RAS). Data were captured electronically through face-to-face interviews with the main caregivers of children < 5 years. Capillary blood samples of the children were tested for malaria and anaemia. The main study outcome was whether caregiver "sought treatment outside home" when the child had fever. Multilevel mixed effects logistic regression models using village as random effect and health zone as a fixed effect was performed to assess treatment-seeking predictors. RESULTS: 2439 household interviews were completed (pre-RAS 888 and post-RAS 1551), including 316 and 653 treatment-seeking interviews. Overall, 3499 children < 5 years were tested for malaria and anaemia (pre-RAS 1,315 and post-RAS 2184). Caregiver's recognition of severe malaria signs was poor, while knowledge of symptoms of uncomplicated malaria seemed high. Despite this, danger signs significantly increased the odds of seeking treatment (aOR = 2.12, 95%CI 1.03-4.38), the same was found for the "least poor" quintile (aOR = 3.01, 95%CI 1.03-8.82), as well as residents of Kingandu (aOR = 2.78, 95%CI 1.01-7.65). "Doing something at home" against fever negatively affected treatment-seeking in both study phases. RAS acceptance was high, at almost 100%. Malaria prevalence was higher post-RAS (45.2%) compared to pre-RAS (34.4%), p = 0.003, but anaemia, although high (≥ 75%), was similar in both study phases (p = 0.92). CONCLUSION: In remote communities with high malaria prevalence in the DRC, malaria remains a major problem. Improving the recognition of danger signs of severe disease and introducing pre-referral RAS may improve treatment-seeking and contribute to reducing malaria-related mortality among children-if quality of care can be guaranteed.

Effectiveness of rectal artesunate as pre-referral treatment for severe malaria in children under 5 years of age: a multi-country observational study.

BACKGROUND: To prevent child deaths from severe malaria, early parenteral treatment is essential. Yet, in remote rural areas, accessing facilities offering parenteral antimalarials may be difficult. A randomised controlled trial found pre-referral treatment with rectal artesunate (RAS) to reduce deaths and disability in children who arrived at a referral facility with delay. This study examined the effectiveness of pre-referral RAS treatment implemented through routine procedures of established community-based health care systems. METHODS: An observational study accompanied the roll-out of RAS in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Nigeria and Uganda. Children <5 years of age presenting to a community-based health provider with a positive malaria test and signs of severe malaria were enrolled and followed up during admission and after 28 days to assess their health status and treatment history. The primary outcome was death; covariates of interest included RAS use, referral completion, and post-referral treatment. RESULTS: Post-roll-out, RAS was administered to 88% of patients in DRC, 52% in Nigeria, and 70% in Uganda. The overall case fatality rate (CFR) was 6.7% (135/2011) in DRC, 11.7% (69/589) in Nigeria, and 0.5% (19/3686) in Uganda; 13.8% (865/6286) of patients were sick on day 28. The CFR was higher after RAS roll-out in Nigeria (16.1 vs. 4.2%) and stable in DRC (6.7 vs. 6.6%) and Uganda (0.7 vs. 0.3%). In DRC and Nigeria, children receiving RAS were more likely to die than those not receiving RAS (aOR=3.06, 95% CI 1.35-6.92 and aOR=2.16, 95% CI 1.11-4.21, respectively). Only in Uganda, RAS users were less likely to be dead or sick at follow-up (aOR=0.60, 95% CI 0.45-0.79). Post-referral parenteral antimalarials plus oral artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT), a proxy for appropriate post-referral treatment, was protective. However, in referral health facilities, ACT was not consistently administered after parenteral treatment (DRC 68.4%, Nigeria 0%, Uganda 70.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Implemented at scale to the recommended target group, pre-referral RAS had no beneficial effect on child survival in three highly malaria-endemic settings. RAS is unlikely to reduce malaria deaths unless health system issues such as referral and quality of care at all levels are addressed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT03568344.

Key factors predicting suspected severe malaria case management and health outcomes: an operational study in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that pre-referral Rectal Artesunate (RAS) can be a life-saving intervention for severe malaria in remote settings in Africa. Recognition of danger signs indicative of severe malaria is critical for prompt and appropriate case management. METHODS: This was an observational study conducted in three Health Zones of the Democratic Republic of the Congo to determine the distribution of dangers signs for severe malaria and assess their impact on RAS use, referral completion, injectable treatment and ACT provision, and health outcomes including death. An individual-level analysis was carried out, using multilevel-mixed effects logistic regression models. Severely ill febrile children < 5 years seeking care from community-based healthcare providers were recruited into a patient surveillance system based on the presence of key danger signs. Clinical and case management data were collected comprehensively over a 28 days period. Treatment seeking was elicited and health outcomes assessed during 28 days home visits. RESULTS: Overall, 66.4% of patients had iCCM general danger signs. Age of 2-5 years and iCCM general danger signs predicted RAS use (aOR = 2.77, 95% CI 2.04-3.77). RAS administration positively affected referral completion (aOR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.44-0.92). After RAS rollout, 161 children died (case fatality ratio: 7.1%, 95% CI 6.1-8.2). RAS improved the health status of the children on Day 28 (aOR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.45-0.92) and there was a non-significant trend that mortality was higher in children not receiving RAS (aOR = 1.50, 95% CI 0.86-2.60). Full severe malaria treatment at the RHF including injectable anti-malarial and a course of ACT was highly protective against death (aOR = 0.26, 95% CI 0.09-0.79). CONCLUSIONS: The main findings point towards the fact that danger signs are reasonably well recognized by health provider at the primary care level, and that RAS could influence positively health outcomes of such severe disease episodes and death. Its effectiveness is hampered by the insufficient quality of care at RHF, especially the provision of a full course of ACT following parenteral treatment. These are simple but important findings that requires urgent action by the health system planners and implementers.

Acceptability of pre-referral rectal artesunate for severe malaria in children under 5 years by health workers and caregivers in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nigeria and Uganda.

BACKGROUND: For children below 6 years with suspected severe malaria attending a health care provider unable to provide parenteral malaria treatment, pre-referral rectal artesunate (RAS) is recommended by the World Health Organization to prevent death and disability. A number of African countries are in the process of rolling out quality-assured RAS for pre-referral treatment of severe malaria at community-level. The success of RAS depends, among other factors, on the acceptability of RAS in the communities where it is being rolled-out. Yet to date, there is limited literature on RAS acceptability. This study aimed to determine the acceptability of RAS by health care providers and child caregivers in communities where quality assured RAS was rolled out. This study was nested within the comprehensive multi-country observational research project Community Access to Rectal Artesunate for Malaria (CARAMAL), implemented in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Nigeria, and Uganda between 2018 and 2020. Data from three different sources were analysed to understand RAS acceptability: interviews with health workers during three health care provider surveys (N = 341 community health workers and 467 primary health facility workers), with caregivers of children < 5 years of age during three household surveys (N = 9332 caregivers), and with caregivers of children < 5 years of age who were treated with RAS and enrolled in the CARAMAL Patient Surveillance System (N = 3645 caregivers). RESULTS: RAS acceptability was high among all interviewed stakeholders in the three countries. After the roll-out of RAS, 97-100% heath care providers in DRC, 98-100% in Nigeria and 93-100% in Uganda considered RAS as very good or good. Majority of caregivers whose children had received RAS for pre-referral management of severe malaria indicated that they would want to get the medication again, if their child had the same illness (99.8% of caregivers in DRC, 100% in Nigeria and 99.9% in Uganda). In three household surveys, 67-80% of caregivers whose children had not previously received RAS considered the medication as useful. CONCLUSION: RAS was well accepted by health workers and child caregivers in DRC, Nigeria and Uganda. Acceptability is unlikely to be an obstacle to the large-scale roll-out of RAS in the studied settings.

Low-dose aspirin for the prevention of preterm delivery in nulliparous women with a singleton pregnancy (ASPIRIN): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Preterm birth remains a common cause of neonatal mortality, with a disproportionately high burden in low-income and middle-income countries. Meta-analyses of low-dose aspirin to prevent pre-eclampsia suggest that the incidence of preterm birth might also be decreased, particularly if initiated before 16 weeks of gestation. METHODS: ASPIRIN was a randomised, multicountry, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial of low-dose aspirin (81 mg daily) initiated between 6 weeks and 0 days of pregnancy, and 13 weeks and 6 days of pregnancy, in nulliparous women with an ultrasound confirming gestational age and a singleton viable pregnancy. Participants were enrolled at seven community sites in six countries (two sites in India and one site each in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guatemala, Kenya, Pakistan, and Zambia). Participants were randomly assigned (1:1, stratified by site) to receive aspirin or placebo tablets of identical appearance, via a sequence generated centrally by the data coordinating centre at Research Triangle Institute International (Research Triangle Park, NC, USA). Treatment was masked to research staff, health providers, and patients, and continued until 36 weeks and 7 days of gestation or delivery. The primary outcome of incidence of preterm birth, defined as the number of deliveries before 37 weeks' gestational age, was analysed in randomly assigned women with pregnancy outcomes at or after 20 weeks, according to a modified intention-to-treat (mITT) protocol. Analyses of our binary primary outcome involved a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test stratified by site, and generalised linear models to obtain relative risk (RR) estimates and associated confidence intervals. Serious adverse events were assessed in all women who received at least one dose of drug or placebo. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02409680, and the Clinical Trial Registry-India, CTRI/2016/05/006970. FINDINGS: From March 23, 2016 to June 30, 2018, 14 361 women were screened for inclusion and 11 976 women aged 14-40 years were randomly assigned to receive low-dose aspirin (5990 women) or placebo (5986 women). 5780 women in the aspirin group and 5764 in the placebo group were evaluable for the primary outcome. Preterm birth before 37 weeks occurred in 668 (11·6%) of the women who took aspirin and 754 (13·1%) of those who took placebo (RR 0·89 [95% CI 0·81 to 0·98], p=0·012). In women taking aspirin, we also observed significant reductions in perinatal mortality (0·86 [0·73-1·00], p=0·048), fetal loss (infant death after 16 weeks' gestation and before 7 days post partum; 0·86 [0·74-1·00], p=0·039), early preterm delivery (<34 weeks; 0·75 [0·61-0·93], p=0·039), and the incidence of women who delivered before 34 weeks with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (0·38 [0·17-0·85], p=0·015). Other adverse maternal and neonatal events were similar between the two groups. INTERPRETATION: In populations of nulliparous women with singleton pregnancies from low-income and middle-income countries, low-dose aspirin initiated between 6 weeks and 0 days of gestation and 13 weeks and 6 days of gestation resulted in a reduced incidence of preterm delivery before 37 weeks, and reduced perinatal mortality. FUNDING: Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Health system readiness and the implementation of rectal artesunate for severe malaria in sub-Saharan Africa: an analysis of real-world costs and constraints.

BACKGROUND: Rectal artesunate, an efficacious pre-referral treatment for severe malaria in children, was deployed at scale in Uganda, Nigeria, and DR Congo. In addition to distributing rectal artesunate, implementation required additional investments in crucial but neglected components in the care for severe malaria. We examined the real-world costs and constraints to rectal artesunate implementation. METHODS: We collected primary data on baseline health system constraints and subsequent rectal artesunate implementation expenditures. We calculated the equivalent annual cost of rectal artesunate implementation per child younger than 5 years at risk of severe malaria, from a health system perspective, separating neglected routine health system components from incremental costs of rectal artesunate introduction. FINDINGS: The largest baseline constraints were irregular health worker supervisions, inadequate referral facility worker training, and inadequate malaria commodity supplies. Health worker training and behaviour change campaigns were the largest startup costs, while supervision and supply chain management accounted for most annual routine costs. The equivalent annual costs of preparing the health system for managing severe malaria with rectal artesunate were US$2·63, $2·20, and $4·19 per child at risk and $322, $219, and $464 per child treated in Uganda, Nigeria, and DR Congo, respectively. Strengthening the neglected, routine health system components accounted for the majority of these costs at 71·5%, 65·4%, and 76·4% of per-child costs, respectively. Incremental rectal artesunate costs accounted for the minority remainder. INTERPRETATION: Although rectal artesunate has been touted as a cost-effective pre-referral treatment for severe malaria in children, its real-world potential is limited by weak and under-financed health system components. Scaling up rectal artesunate or other interventions relying on community health-care providers only makes sense alongside additional, essential health system investments sustained over the long term. FUNDING: Unitaid. TRANSLATION: For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Cost-effectiveness of low-dose aspirin for the prevention of preterm birth: a prospective study of the Global Network for Women's and Children's Health Research.

BACKGROUND: Premature birth is associated with an increased risk of mortality and morbidity, and strategies to prevent preterm birth are few in number and resource intensive. In 2020, the ASPIRIN trial showed the efficacy of low-dose aspirin (LDA) in nulliparous, singleton pregnancies for the prevention of preterm birth. We sought to investigate the cost-effectiveness of this therapy in low-income and middle-income countries. METHODS: In this post-hoc, prospective, cost-effectiveness study, we constructed a probabilistic decision tree model to compare the benefits and costs of LDA treatment compared with standard care using primary data and published results from the ASPIRIN trial. In this analysis from a health-care sector perspective, we considered the costs and effects of LDA treatment, pregnancy outcomes, and neonatal health-care use. We did sensitivity analyses to understand the effect of the price of the LDA regimen, and the effectiveness of LDA in reducing both preterm birth and perinatal death. FINDINGS: In model simulations, LDA was associated with 141 averted preterm births, 74 averted perinatal deaths, and 31 averted hospitalisations per 10 000 pregnancies. The reduction in hospitalisation resulted in a cost of US$248 per averted preterm birth, $471 per averted perinatal death, and $15·95 per disability-adjusted life year. INTERPRETATION: LDA treatment in nulliparous, singleton pregnancies is a low-cost, effective treatment to reduce preterm birth and perinatal death. The low cost per disability-adjusted life year averted strengthens the evidence in support of prioritising the implementation of LDA in publicly funded health care in low-income and middle-income countries. FUNDING: Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

The impact of risk factors on aspirin's efficacy for the prevention of preterm birth.

BACKGROUND: The Aspirin Supplementation for Pregnancy Indicated Risk Reduction In Nulliparas trial was a landmark study that demonstrated a reduction in preterm birth and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in nulliparous women who received low-dose aspirin. All women in the study had at least 1 moderate-risk factor for preeclampsia (nulliparity). Unlike current US Preventative Service Task Force guidelines, which recommend low-dose aspirin for ≥2 moderate-risk factors, women in this study were randomized to receive low-dose aspirin regardless of the presence or absence of an additional risk factor. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare how low-dose aspirin differentially benefits nulliparous women with and without additional preeclampsia risk factors for the prevention of preterm birth and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN: This was a non-prespecified secondary analysis of the Aspirin Supplementation for Pregnancy Indicated Risk Reduction In Nulliparas trial that randomized nulliparous women with singleton pregnancies from 6 low-middle-income countries to receive low-dose aspirin or placebo. Our primary exposure was having an additional preeclampsia risk factor beyond nulliparity. Our primary outcome was preterm birth before 37 weeks of gestation, and our secondary outcomes included preterm birth before 34 weeks of gestation, preterm birth before 28 weeks of gestation, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, and perinatal mortality. RESULTS: Among 11,558 nulliparous women who met the inclusion criteria, 66.8% had no additional risk factors. Low-dose aspirin similarly reduced the risk of preterm birth at <37 weeks of gestation in women with and without additional risk factors (relative risk: 0.75 vs 0.85; P=.35). Additionally for our secondary outcomes, low-dose aspirin similarly reduced the risk of preterm birth at <28 weeks of gestation, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, and perinatal mortality in women with and without additional risk factors. The reduction of preterm birth at <34 weeks of gestation with low-dose aspirin was significantly greater in women without additional risk factors than those with an additional risk factor (relative risk: 0.69 vs 1.04; P=.04). CONCLUSION: Low-dose aspirin's ability to prevent preterm birth, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, and perinatal mortality was similar in nulliparous women with and without additional risk factors. Professional societies should consider recommending low-dose aspirin to all nulliparous women.

Community access to rectal artesunate for malaria (CARAMAL): A large-scale observational implementation study in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nigeria and Uganda.

The key to reducing malaria deaths in highly endemic areas is prompt access to quality case management. Given that many severe cases occur at peripheral level, rectal artesunate (RAS) in the form of suppositories was developed in the 1990s, allowing for rapid initiation of life-saving antimalarial treatment before referral to a health facility with full case management capabilities. One randomized controlled trial published in 2009 showed a protective effect of RAS pre-referral treatment against overall mortality of 26%, but with significant differences according to study sites and length of referral. Two important issues remained unaddressed: (1) whether the mortality impact of RAS observed under controlled trial conditions could be replicated under real-world circumstances; and (2) clear operational guidance for the wide-scale implementation of RAS, including essential health system determinants for optimal impact. From 2018 to 2020, the Community Access to Rectal Artesunate for Malaria (CARAMAL) project was conducted as a large-scale observational implementation study in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Nigeria, and Uganda (registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT03568344). CARAMAL aimed to provide high-quality field evidence on the two issues above, in three remote settings with high malaria endemicity. A number of complementary study components were implemented. The core of the CARAMAL study was the Patient Surveillance System (PSS), which allowed tracking of cases of severe febrile illness from first contact at the periphery to a referral health facility, and then on to a Day 28 visit at the home of the patient. Community and provider cross-sectional surveys complemented the PSS. Here we describe in some detail RAS implementation, as well as the key CARAMAL study components and basic implementation experience. This manuscript does not intend to present key study results, but provides an extensive reference document for the companion papers describing the impact, referral process, post-referral treatment and costing of the RAS intervention.

Prereferral rectal artesunate and referral completion among children with suspected severe malaria in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nigeria and Uganda.

INTRODUCTION: Children who receive prereferral rectal artesunate (RAS) require urgent referral to a health facility where appropriate treatment for severe malaria can be provided. However, the rapid improvement of a child's condition after RAS administration may influence a caregiver's decision to follow this recommendation. Currently, the evidence on the effect of RAS on referral completion is limited. METHODS: An observational study accompanied the roll-out of RAS in three malaria endemic settings in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Nigeria and Uganda. Community health workers and primary health centres enrolled children under 5 years with suspected severe malaria before and after the roll-out of RAS. All children were followed up 28 days after enrolment to assess their treatment-seeking pathways. RESULTS: Referral completion was 67% (1408/2104) in DRC, 48% (287/600) in Nigeria and 58% (2170/3745) in Uganda. In DRC and Uganda, RAS users were less likely to complete referral than RAS non-users in the pre-roll-out phase (adjusted OR (aOR)=0.48, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.77 and aOR=0.72, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.88, respectively). Among children seeking care from a primary health centre in Nigeria, RAS users were less likely to complete referral compared with RAS non-users in the post-roll-out phase (aOR=0.18, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.71). In Uganda, among children who completed referral, RAS users were significantly more likely to complete referral on time than RAS non-users enrolled in the pre-roll-out phase (aOR=1.81, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.79). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study raise legitimate concerns that the roll-out of RAS may lead to lower referral completion in children who were administered prereferral RAS. To ensure that community-based programmes are effectively implemented, barriers to referral completion need to be addressed at all levels. Alternative effective treatment options should be provided to children unable to complete referral. TRIAL REGISTRSTION NUMBER: NCT03568344; ClinicalTrials.gov.

Safety of daily low-dose aspirin use during pregnancy in low-income and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: The daily use of low-dose aspirin may be a safe, widely available, and inexpensive intervention for reducing the risk of preterm birth. Data on the potential side effects of low-dose aspirin use during pregnancy in low- and middle-income countries are needed. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess differences in unexpected emergency medical visits and potential maternal side effects from a randomized, double-blind, multicountry, placebo-controlled trial of low-dose aspirin use (81 mg daily, from 6 to 36 weeks' gestation). STUDY DESIGN: This study was a secondary analysis of data from the Aspirin Supplementation for Pregnancy Indicated Risk Reduction In Nulliparas trial, a trial of the Global Network for Women's and Children's Health conducted in India (2 sites), Pakistan, Guatemala, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kenya, and Zambia. The outcomes for this analysis were unexpected emergency medical visits and the occurrence of the following potential side effects-overall and separately-nausea, vomiting, rash or hives, diarrhea, gastritis, vaginal bleeding, allergic reaction, and any other potential side effects. Analyses were performed overall and by geographic region. RESULTS: Between the aspirin (n=5943) and placebo (n=5936) study groups, there was no statistically significant difference in the risk of unexpected emergency medical visits or the risk of any potential side effect (overall). Of the 8 potential side effects assessed, only 1 (rash or hives) presented a different risk by treatment group (4.2% in the aspirin group vs 3.5% in the placebo group; relative risk, 1.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.43; P=.042). CONCLUSION: The daily use of low-dose aspirin seems to be a safe intervention for reducing the risk of preterm birth and well tolerated by nulliparous pregnant women between 6 and 36 weeks' gestation in low- and middle-income countries.