Dust or disease? Perceptions of influenza in rural Southern Malawi.

Influenza virus infections cause between 291 243 and 645 832 deaths annually, with the highest burden in low-income settings. Research in high-income countries has examined public understanding of influenza, but there is little information on views and behaviours about influenza in low-income countries. We explored communities' ideas about the severity, causes, prevention and treatment of influenza in Chikwawa district, Malawi. We conducted 64 in-depth interviews with parents of children aged <5 years, and 7 focus groups with community health workers, parents, and traditional healers. Data were analysed thematically and using a framework matrix to compare views between groups. Respondents held varied ideas about influenza, and many were uncertain about its causes and treatment. Some parents, traditional healers and health workers thought influenza was not severe because they felt it did not cause death or limit activities, but others disagreed. Many saw influenza as a symptom of other conditions, especially malaria and pneumonia, rather than as a disease of its own. Most mentioned dust as the main cause of influenza and believed influenza could be prevented by cleaning the home thoroughly. Treatment seeking for influenza followed different stages, usually starting with home remedies followed by purchasing drugs from groceries and then visiting a health centre. Seeking a clinician tended to be triggered by severe symptoms like high fever or difficulty breathing, and suspicions of malaria or pneumonia. Community health workers provide health education for communities, but some lacked understanding of influenza. Our findings suggest uncertainty about the causes and control of influenza among parents and varied levels of understanding among health providers. Strengthening the capacity of community health workers to provide relevant information about influenza prevention and treatment could address parents' interest in further information and support informed health seeking and engagement with future influenza interventions.

"We are part of a family". Benefits and limitations of community ART groups (CAGs) in Thyolo, Malawi: a qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: In 2012 Community ART Groups (CAGs), a community-based model of antiretroviral therapy (ART) delivery were piloted in Thyolo District, Malawi as a way to overcome patient barriers to accessing treatment, and to decrease healthcare workers' workload. CAGs are self-formed groups of patients on ART taking turns to collect ART refills for all group members from the health facility. We conducted a qualitative study to assess the benefits and challenges of CAGs from patients' and healthcare workers' (HCWs) perspectives. METHODS: Data were collected by means of 15 focus group discussions, 15 individual in-depth interviews, and participant observation in 2 health centres. The 94 study participants included CAG members, ART patients eligible for CAGs who remained in conventional care, former CAG members who returned to conventional care and HCWs responsible for providing HIV care. Patient participants were purposively selected from ART registers, taking into account age and gender. Narratives were audio-recorded, transcribed, and translated from Chichewa to English. Data were analyzed through a thematic analysis. RESULTS: Patients and HCWs spoke favourably about the practical benefits of CAGs. Patient benefits included a reduced frequency of clinic visits, resulting in reduced transportation costs and time savings. HCW benefits included a reduced workload. Additionally peer support was perceived as an added value of the groups allowing not only sharing of the logistical constraints of drugs refills, but also enhanced emotional support. Identified barriers to joining a CAG included a lack of information on CAGs, unwillingness to disclose one's HIV status, change of residence and conflicts among CAG members. Participants reported that HIV-related stigma persists and CAGs were seen as an effective strategy to reduce exposure to discriminatory labelling by community members. CONCLUSION: In this setting, patients and HCWs perceived CAGs to be an acceptable model of ART delivery. Despite addressing important practical barriers to accessing ART, and providing peer support, CAGs were not well known by patients and had a limited impact on reducing HIV-related stigma. The CAG model of ART delivery should be considered in similar settings. Further measures need to be devised and implemented to address HIV-related stigma.