Dataset Information

Healthcare provider and pregnant women's perspectives on the implementation of intermittent screening and treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine for malaria in pregnancy in western Kenya: a qualitative study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In malaria endemic regions in Kenya, pregnant women are offered long-lasting insecticidal nets and intermittent preventive treatment (IPTp) with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) at antenatal care (ANC) to prevent the adverse effects of malaria. Fears of growing SP resistance have heightened the search for alternative strategies. The implementation feasibility of intermittent screening and treatment (ISTp) with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) in routine ANC settings was evaluated using qualitative and quantitative methods, including the exploration of healthcare provider and pregnant women's perceptions.

Methods

Qualitative methods included data from 13 focus group discussions (FGDs) with pregnant women and 43 in-depth interviews with healthcare providers delivering ANC services. FGDs were conducted with women who had received either ISTp-DP or current policy (IPTp-SP). Thematic analysis was used to explore experiences among women and providers and findings were used to provide insights into results of the parallel quantitative study.

Results

Women were accepting of testing with rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) and receiving treatment if malaria positive. Providers perceived DP to be an effective drug and well tolerated by women. Some providers indicated a preference for test and treat strategies to reduce unnecessary exposure to medication in pregnancy, others preferred a hybrid strategy combining screening at every ANC visit followed by IPTp-SP for women who tested negative, due to the perception that RDTs missed some infections and concerns about the growing resistance to SP. Testing with RDTs during ANC was appreciated as it was perceived to reduce wait times. The positive attitude of healthcare providers towards ISTp supports findings from the quantitative study that showed a high proportion (90%) of women were tested at ANC. There were concerns about affordability of DP and the availability of sufficient RDT stocks.

Conclusion

In ANC settings, healthcare providers and pregnant women found ISTp-DP to be an acceptable strategy for preventing malaria in pregnancy when compared with IPTp-SP. DP was considered an effective anti-malarial and a suitable alternative to IPTp-SP in the context of SP resistance. Despite providers' lack of confidence in RDT results at current levels of sensitivity and specificity, the quantitative findings show their willingness to test women routinely at ANC.

SUBMITTER: Hoyt J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8243500 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The World Health Organization recommends intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (IPTp) with sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) alongside long-lasting insecticide-treated nets (LLIN) and case management for reducing the risks associated with malaria in pregnancy in areas of moderate-to-high transmission in sub-Saharan Africa. Due to increasing Plasmodium falciparum resistance to SP, the search for alternative drugs or strategies to control malaria in pregnancy is a priority. We assessed the acceptability among pregnant women and health providers of intermittent screening and treatment (ISTp) and IPTp with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) as alternative strategies in the context of an un-blinded clinical trial. METHODS:Qualitative data were collected through ten focus group discussions with women participating in a randomized controlled trial to evaluate ISTp or IPTp with DP (multi-day regimen) versus IPTp with SP (single dose) in western Kenya. Individual in-depth interviews were conducted with 26 health providers working in the trial facilities and trial staff. RESULTS:Women appreciated the advantages of being tested with a rapid diagnostic test (RDT) at every ANC visit (although a few women disliked finger pricks) and accepted that they would not receive any antimalarial when tested RDT-negative. There were differences in women's experiences of the efficacy of antimalarials between the trial arms, with more women in the IPTp-SP arm reporting they had experienced malaria episodes. Side effects were experienced among women taking DP and SP. Although women and trial staff reported adherence to the full DP regimen within the trial, health providers were not confident that women would adhere to multi-day regimens in non-trial settings. Health providers recognized the advantages of ISTp in reducing unnecessary exposure to drugs, but lacked confidence in the reliability of RDTs compared to microscopy. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings indicate that, within a trial context, ISTp-DP and IPTp-DP were generally acceptable among both users and providers and were regarded as potentially valuable alternatives to IPTp-SP. Several challenges were identified the most important of which was concerns with achieving adherence to DP in non-trial settings, requiring operational feasibility studies in routine health systems. Policy adoption of ISTp with RDTs would require a major shift in thinking among health providers due to lack of confidence in RDTs.

Project description:Background: Prevention of malaria infection during pregnancy in HIV-negative women currently relies on the use of long-lasting insecticidal nets together with intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (IPTp-SP). Increasing sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance in Africa threatens current prevention of malaria during pregnancy. Thus, a replacement for IPTp-SP is urgently needed, especially for locations with high sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance. Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine is a promising candidate. We aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (IPTp-DP) versus IPTp-SP to prevent clinical malaria infection (and its sequelae) during pregnancy.Methods: We did a cost-effectiveness analysis using meta-analysis and individual trial results from three clinical trials done in Kenya and Uganda. We calculated disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) arising from stillbirths, neonatal death, low birthweight, mild and moderate maternal anaemia, and clinical malaria infection, associated with malaria during pregnancy. Cost estimates were obtained from data collected in observational studies, health-facility costings, and from international drug procurement databases. The cost-effectiveness analyses were done from a health-care provider perspective using a decision tree model with a lifetime horizon. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses using appropriate parameter ranges and distributions were also done. Results are presented as the incremental cost per DALY averted and the likelihood that an intervention is cost-effective for different cost-effectiveness thresholds.Findings: Compared with three doses of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, three doses of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, delivered to a hypothetical cohort of 1000 pregnant women, averted 892 DALYs (95% credibility interval 274 to 1517) at an incremental cost of US$7051 (2653 to 13?038) generating an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $8 (2 to 29) per DALY averted. Compared with monthly doses of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine, monthly doses of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine averted 534 DALYS (-141 to 1233) at a cost of $13?427 (4994 to 22?895), resulting in an ICER of $25 (-151 to 224) per DALY averted. Both results were highly robust to most or all variations in the deterministic sensitivity analysis.Interpretation: Our findings suggest that among HIV-negative pregnant women with high uptake of long-lasting insecticidal nets, IPTp-DP is cost-effective in areas with high malaria transmission and high sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance. These data provide a comprehensive overview of the current evidence on the cost-effectiveness of IPTp-DP. Nevertheless, before a policy change is advocated, we recommend further research into the effectiveness and costs of different regimens of IPTp-DP in settings with different underlying sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine resistance.Funding: Malaria in Pregnancy Consortium, which is funded through a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to the Liverpool School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.