Dataset Information

The effect of community-driven larval source management and house improvement on malaria transmission when added to the standard malaria control strategies in Malawi: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Current standard interventions are not universally sufficient for malaria elimination. The effects of community-based house improvement (HI) and larval source management (LSM) as supplementary interventions to the Malawi National Malaria Control Programme (NMCP) interventions were assessed in the context of an intensive community engagement programme.

Methods

The study was a two-by-two factorial, cluster-randomized controlled trial in Malawi. Village clusters were randomly assigned to four arms: a control arm; HI; LSM; and HI + LSM. Malawi NMCP interventions and community engagement were used in all arms. Household-level, cross-sectional surveys were conducted on a rolling, 2-monthly basis to measure parasitological and entomological outcomes over 3 years, beginning with one baseline year. The primary outcome was the entomological inoculation rate (EIR). Secondary outcomes included mosquito density, Plasmodium falciparum prevalence, and haemoglobin levels. All outcomes were assessed based on intention to treat, and comparisons between trial arms were conducted at both cluster and household level.

Results

Eighteen clusters derived from 53 villages with 4558 households and 20,013 people were randomly assigned to the four trial arms. The mean nightly EIR fell from 0.010 infectious bites per person (95% CI 0.006-0.015) in the baseline year to 0.001 (0.000, 0.003) in the last year of the trial. Over the full trial period, the EIR did not differ between the four trial arms (p = 0.33). Similar results were observed for the other outcomes: mosquito density and P. falciparum prevalence decreased over 3 years of sampling, while haemoglobin levels increased; and there were minimal differences between the trial arms during the trial period.

Conclusions

In the context of high insecticide-treated bed net use, neither community-based HI, LSM, nor HI + LSM contributed to further reductions in malaria transmission or prevalence beyond the reductions observed over two years across all four trial arms. This was the first trial, as far as the authors are aware, to test the potential complementary impact of LSM and/or HI beyond levels achieved by standard interventions. The unexpectedly low EIR values following intervention implementation indicated a promising reduction in malaria transmission for the area, but also limited the usefulness of this outcome for measuring differences in malaria transmission among the trial arms. Trial registration PACTR, PACTR201604001501493, Registered 3 March 2016, https://pactr.samrc.ac.za/ .

SUBMITTER: McCann RS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8140568 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDue to outdoor and residual transmission and insecticide resistance, long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS) will be insufficient as stand-alone malaria vector control interventions in many settings as programmes shift toward malaria elimination. Combining additional vector control interventions as part of an integrated strategy would potentially overcome these challenges. Larval source management (LSM) and structural house improvements (HI) are appealing as additional components of an integrated vector management plan because of their long histories of use, evidence on effectiveness in appropriate settings, and unique modes of action compared to LLINs and IRS. Implementation of LSM and HI through a community-based approach could provide a path for rolling-out these interventions sustainably and on a large scale.Methods/designWe will implement community-based LSM and HI, as additional interventions to the current national malaria control strategies, using a randomised block, 2 × 2 factorial, cluster-randomised design in rural, southern Malawi. These interventions will be continued for two years. The trial catchment area covers about 25,000 people living in 65 villages. Community participation is encouraged by training community volunteers as health animators, and supporting the organisation of village-level committees in collaboration with The Hunger Project, a non-governmental organisation. Household-level cross-sectional surveys, including parasitological and entomological sampling, will be conducted on a rolling, 2-monthly schedule to measure outcomes over two years (2016 to 2018). Coverage of LSM and HI will also be assessed throughout the trial area.DiscussionCombining LSM and/or HI together with the interventions currently implemented by the Malawi National Malaria Control Programme is anticipated to reduce malaria transmission below the level reached by current interventions alone. Implementation of LSM and HI through a community-based approach provides an opportunity for optimum adaptation to the local ecological and social setting, and enhances the potential for sustainability.Trial registrationRegistered with The Pan African Clinical Trials Registry on 3 March 2016, trial number PACTR201604001501493.

Project description:BackgroundIncreased engagement of communities has been emphasized in global plans for malaria control and elimination. Three interventions to reinforce and complement national malaria control recommendations were developed and applied within the context of a broad-based development initiative, targeting a rural population surrounding a wildlife reserve. The interventions, which were part of a 2-year research trial, and assigned to the village level, were implemented through trained local volunteers, or 'health animators', who educated the community and facilitated collective action.ResultsCommunity workshops on malaria were designed to increase uptake of national recommendations; a manual was developed, and training of health animators conducted, with educational content and analytical tools for a series of fortnightly community workshops in annual cycles at village level. The roll-back malaria principle of diagnosis, treatment and use of long-lasting insecticidal nets was a central component of the workshops. Structural house improvement to reduce entry of malaria vectors consisted of targeted activities in selected villages to mobilize the community into voluntarily closing the eaves and screening the windows of their houses; the project provided wire mesh for screening. Corrective measures were introduced to respond to field challenges. Committees were established at village level to coordinate the house improvement activities. Larval source management (LSM) in selected villages consisted of two parts: one on removal of standing water bodies by the community at large; and one on larviciding with bacterial insecticide Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis by trained village committees. Community workshops on malaria were implemented as 'core intervention' in all villages. House improvement and LSM were implemented in addition to community workshops on malaria in selected villages.ConclusionsThree novel interventions for community mobilization on malaria prevention and control were described. The interventions comprised local organizational structure, education and collective action, and incorporated elements of problem identification, planning and evaluation. These methods could be applicable to other countries and settings.

Project description:BackgroundHouse improvement (HI) to prevent mosquito house entry, and larval source management (LSM) targeting aquatic mosquito stages to prevent development into adult forms, are promising complementary interventions to current malaria vector control strategies. Lack of evidence on costs and cost-effectiveness of community-led implementation of HI and LSM has hindered wide-scale adoption. This study presents an incremental cost analysis of community-led implementation of HI and LSM, in a cluster-randomized, factorial design trial, in addition to standard national malaria control interventions in a rural area (25,000 people), in southern Malawi.MethodsIn the trial, LSM comprised draining, filling, and Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis-based larviciding, while house improvement (henceforth HI) involved closing of eaves and gaps on walls, screening windows/ventilation spaces with wire mesh, and doorway modifications. Communities implemented all interventions. Costs were estimated retrospectively using the 'ingredients approach', combining 'bottom-up' and 'top-down approaches', from the societal perspective. To estimate the cost of independently implementing each intervention arm, resources shared between trial arms (e.g. overheads) were allocated to each consuming arm using proxies developed based on share of resource input quantities consumed. Incremental implementation costs (in 2017 US$) are presented for HI-only, LSM-only and HI + LSM arms. In sensitivity analyses, the effect of varying costs of important inputs on estimated costs was explored.ResultsThe total economic programme costs of community-led HI and LSM implementation was $626,152. Incremental economic implementation costs of HI, LSM and HI + LSM were estimated as $27.04, $25.06 and $33.44, per person per year, respectively. Project staff, transport and labour costs, but not larvicide or screening material, were the major cost drivers across all interventions. Costs were sensitive to changes in staff costs and population covered.ConclusionsIn the trial, the incremental economic costs of community-led HI and LSM implementation were high compared to previous house improvement and LSM studies. Several factors, including intervention design, year-round LSM implementation and low human population density could explain the high costs. The factorial trial design necessitated use of proxies to allocate costs shared between trial arms, which limits generalizability where different designs are used. Nevertheless, costs may inform planners of similar intervention packages where cost-effectiveness is known. Trial registration Not applicable. The original trial was registered with The Pan African Clinical Trials Registry on 3 March 2016, trial number PACTR201604001501493.

Project description:BackgroundTo further reduce malaria, larval source management (LSM) is proposed as a complementary strategy to the existing strategies. LSM has potential to control insecticide resistant, outdoor biting and outdoor resting vectors. Concerns about costs and operational feasibility of implementation of LSM at large scale are among the reasons the strategy is not utilized in many African countries. Involving communities in LSM could increase intervention coverage, reduce costs of implementation and improve sustainability of operations. Community acceptance and participation in community-led LSM depends on a number of factors. These factors were explored under the Majete Malaria Project in Chikwawa district, southern Malawi.MethodsSeparate focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with members from the general community (n = 3); health animators (HAs) (n = 3); and LSM committee members (n = 3). In-depth interviews (IDIs) were conducted with community members. Framework analysis was employed to determine the factors contributing to community acceptance and participation in the locally-driven intervention.ResultsNine FGDs and 24 IDIs were held, involving 87 members of the community. Widespread knowledge of malaria as a health problem, its mode of transmission, mosquito larval habitats and mosquito control was recorded. High awareness of an association between creation of larval habitats and malaria transmission was reported. Perception of LSM as a tool for malaria control was high. The use of a microbial larvicide as a form of LSM was perceived as both safe and effective. However, actual participation in LSM by the different interviewee groups varied. Labour-intensiveness and time requirements of the LSM activities, lack of financial incentives, and concern about health risks when wading in water bodies contributed to lower participation.ConclusionCommunity involvement in LSM increased local awareness of malaria as a health problem, its risk factors and control strategies. However, community participation varied among the respondent groups, with labour and time demands of the activities, and lack of incentives, contributing to reduced participation. Innovative tools that can reduce the labour and time demands could improve community participation in the activities. Further studies are required to investigate the forms and modes of delivery of incentives in operational community-driven LSM interventions.

Project description:BackgroundDespite significant success in the fight against malaria over the past two decades, malaria control programmes rely on only two insecticidal methods: indoor residual spraying and insecticidal-treated nets. House improvement (HI) can complement these interventions by reducing human-mosquito contact, thereby reinforcing the gains in disease reduction. This study assessed the implementation fidelity, which is the assessment of how closely an intervention aligns with its intended design, feasibility, and sustainability of community-led HI in southern Malawi.MethodsThe study, conducted in 22 villages (2730 households), employed a mixed-methods approach. Implementation fidelity was assessed using a modified framework, with longitudinal surveys collecting data on HI coverage indicators. Quantitative analysis, employing descriptive statistics, evaluated the adherence to HI implementation. Qualitative data came from in-depth interviews, key informant interviews, and focus groups involving project beneficiaries and implementers. Qualitative data were analysed using content analysis guided by the implementation fidelity model to explore facilitators, challenges, and factors affecting intervention feasibility.ResultsThe results show that HI was implemented as planned. There was good adherence to the intended community-led HI design; however, the adherence could have been higher but gradually declined over time. In terms of intervention implementation, 74% of houses had attempted to have eaves closed in 2016-17 and 2017-18, compared to 70% in 2018-19. In 2016-17, 42% of houses had all four sides of the eaves closed, compared to 33% in 2018-19. Approximately 72% of houses were screened with gauze wire in 2016-17, compared to 57% in 2018-19. High costs, supply shortages, labour demands, volunteers' poor living conditions and adverse weather were reported to hinder the ideal HI implementation. Overall, the community described community-led HI as feasible and could be sustained by addressing these socioeconomic and contextual challenges.ConclusionOur study found that although HI was initially implemented as planned, its fidelity declined over time. Using trained volunteers facilitated the fidelity and feasibility of implementing the intervention. A combination of rigorous community education, consistent training, information, education and communication, and intervention modifications may be necessary to address the challenges and enhance the intervention's fidelity, feasibility, and sustainability.

Project description:BackgroundNew vector control tools are required to sustain the fight against malaria. Lethal house lures, which target mosquitoes as they attempt to enter houses to blood feed, are one approach. Here we evaluated lethal house lures consisting of In2Care (Wageningen, Netherlands) Eave Tubes, which provide point-source insecticide treatments against host-seeking mosquitoes, in combination with house screening, which aims to reduce mosquito entry.MethodsWe did a two-arm, cluster-randomised controlled trial with 40 village-level clusters in central Côte d'Ivoire between Sept 26, 2016, and April 10, 2019. All households received new insecticide-treated nets at universal coverage (one bednet per two people). Suitable households within the clusters assigned to the treatment group were offered screening plus Eave Tubes, with Eave Tubes treated using a 10% wettable powder formulation of the pyrethroid ?-cyfluthrin. Because of the nature of the intervention, treatment could not be masked for households and field teams, but all analyses were blinded. The primary endpoint was clinical malaria incidence recorded by active case detection over 2 years in cohorts of children aged 6 months to 10 years. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN18145556.Findings3022 houses received screening plus Eave Tubes, with an average coverage of 70% across the intervention clusters. 1300 eligible children were recruited for active case detection in the control group and 1260 in the intervention group. During the 2-year follow-up period, malaria case incidence was 2·29 per child-year (95% CI 1·97-2·61) in the control group and 1·43 per child-year (1·21-1·65) in the intervention group (hazard ratio 0·62, 95% CI 0·51-0·76; p<0·0001). Cost-effectiveness simulations suggested that screening plus Eave Tubes has a 74·0% chance of representing a cost-effective intervention, compared with existing healthcare activities in Côte d'Ivoire, and is similarly cost-effective to other core vector control interventions across sub-Saharan Africa. No serious adverse events associated with the intervention were reported during follow-up.InterpretationScreening plus Eave Tubes can provide protection against malaria in addition to the effects of insecticide-treated nets, offering potential for a new, cost-effective strategy to supplement existing vector control tools. Additional trials are needed to confirm these initial results and further optimise Eave Tubes and the lethal house lure concept to facilitate adoption.FundingThe Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.