Glucose-6-Phosphate Dehydrogenase (G6PD) Measurement Using Biosensors by Community-Based Village Malaria Workers and Hospital Laboratory Staff in Cambodia: A Quantitative Study.

Vivax malaria can relapse after an initial infection due to dormant liver stages of the parasite. Radical cure can prevent relapses but requires the measurement of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase enzyme (G6PD) activity to identify G6PD-deficient patients at risk of drug-induced haemolysis. In the absence of reliable G6PD testing, vivax patients are denied radical curative treatment in many places, including rural Cambodia. A novel Biosensor, 'G6PD Standard' (SD Biosensor, Republic of Korea; Biosensor), can measure G6PD activity at the point of care. The objectives of this study were to compare the G6PD activity readings using Biosensors by village malaria workers (VMWs) and hospital-based laboratory technicians (LTs), and to compare the G6PD deficiency categorization recommended by the Biosensor manufacturer with categories derived from a locally estimated adjusted male median (AMM) in Kravanh district, Cambodia. Participants were enrolled between 2021 and 2022 in western Cambodia. Each of the 28 VMWs and 5 LTs received a Biosensor and standardized training on its use. The G6PD activities of febrile patients identified in the community were measured by VMWs; in a subset, a second reading was done by LTs. All participants were tested for malaria by rapid diagnostic test (RDT). The adjusted male median (AMM) was calculated from all RDT-negative participants and defined as 100% G6PD activity. VMWs measured activities in 1344 participants. Of that total, 1327 (98.7%) readings were included in the analysis, and 68 of these had a positive RDT result. We calculated 100% activity as 6.4 U/gHb (interquartile range: 4.5 to 7.8); 9.9% (124/1259) of RDT-negative participants had G6PD activities below 30%, 15.2% (191/1259) had activities between 30% and 70%, and 75.0% (944/1259) had activities greater than 70%. Repeat measurements among 114 participants showed a significant correlation of G6PD readings (rs = 0.784, p < 0.001) between VMWs and LTs. Based on the manufacturer's recommendations, 285 participants (21.5%) had less than 30% activity; however, based on the AMM, 132 participants (10.0%) had less than 30% activity. The G6PD measurements by VMWs and LTs were similar. With the provisions of training, supervision, and monitoring, VMWs could play an important role in the management of vivax malaria, which is critical for the rapid elimination of malaria regionally. Definitions of deficiency based on the manufacturer's recommendations and the population-specific AMM differed significantly, which may warrant revision of these recommendations.

Glucose 6 Phosphate Dehydrogenase (G6PD) quantitation using biosensors at the point of first contact: a mixed method study in Cambodia.

BACKGROUND: Quantitative measurement of Glucose-6-Phosphate Dehydrogenase (G6PD) enzyme activity is critical to decide on appropriate treatment and provision of radical cure regimens for vivax malaria. Biosensors are point-of-care semi-quantitative analysers that measure G6PD enzyme activity. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the operational aspects of biosensor deployment in the hands of village malaria workers (VMWs) in Cambodia over a year. METHODS: Following initial orientation and training at Kravanh Referral Hospital, each VMW (n = 28) and laboratory technician (n = 5) was provided a biosensor (STANDARD SD Biosensor, Republic of Korea) with supplies for routine use. Over the next 12 months VMWs convened every month for refresher training, to collect supplies, and to recalibrate and test their biosensors. A quantitative self-administered questionnaire was used to assess the skills necessary to use the biosensor after the initial training. Subsequently, VMWs were visited at their location of work for field observation and evaluation using an observer-administered questionnaire. All quantitative questionnaire-based data were analysed descriptively. Semi-structured interviews (SSIs) were conducted among all participants to explore their experience and practicalities of using the biosensor in the field. SSIs were transcribed and translated into English and underwent thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 33 participants completed the training and subsequently used the biosensor in the community. Quantitative assessments demonstrated progressive improvement in skills using the biosensor. VMWs expressed confidence and enthusiasm to use biosensors in their routine work. Providing G6PD testing at the point of first contact avoids a multitude of barriers patients have to overcome when travelling to health centres for G6PD testing and radical cure. Deploying biosensors in routine work of VMWs was also considered an opportunity to expand and strengthen the role of VMWs as health care providers in the community. VMWs reported practical concerns related to the use of biosensor such as difficulty in using two pipettes, difficulty in extracting the code chip from the machine, and the narrow base of buffer tube. CONCLUSIONS: VMWs considered the biosensor a practical and beneficial tool in their routine work. Providing VMWs with biosensors can be considered when followed by appropriate training and regular supervision. Providing community management of vivax malaria at the point of first contact could be key for elimination.

Acceptability and feasibility of malaria prophylaxis for forest goers: findings from a qualitative study in Cambodia.

BACKGROUND: In the Greater Mekong Subregion, adults are at highest risk for malaria, particularly those who visit forests. The absence of effective vector control strategies and limited periods of exposure during forest visits suggest that chemoprophylaxis could be an appropriate strategy to protect forest goers against malaria. METHODS: Alongside a clinical trial of anti-malarial chemoprophylaxis in northern Cambodia, qualitative research was conducted, including in-depth interviews and observation, to explore the acceptability of malaria prophylaxis for forest goers, the implementation opportunities, and challenges of this strategy. RESULTS: Prophylaxis with artemether-lumefantrine for forest goers was found to be acceptable under trial conditions. Three factors played a major role: the community's awareness and perception of the effectiveness of prophylaxis, their trust in the provider, and malaria as a local health concern. The findings highlight how uptake and adherence to prophylaxis are influenced by the perceived balance between benefits and burden of anti-malarials which are modulated by the seasonality of forest visits and its influence on malaria risk. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of anti-malarial prophylaxis needs to consider how the preventive medication can be incorporated into existing vector-control measures, malaria testing and treatment services. The next step in the roll out of anti-malarial prophylaxis for forest visitors will require support from local health workers.