Okwundu Charles I, Nagpal Sukrti, Musekiwa Alfred, Sinclair David
Centre for Evidence-based Health Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Tygerberg, South Africa.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 May 31;2013(5):CD009527. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009527.pub2.
Malaria is an important cause of morbidity and mortality, in particular among children and pregnant women in sub-Saharan Africa. Prompt access to diagnosis and treatment with effective antimalarial drugs is a central component of the World Health Organization's (WHO) strategy for malaria control. Home- or community-based programmes for managing malaria are one strategy that has been proposed to overcome the geographical barrier to malaria treatment.
To evaluate home- and community-based management strategies for treating malaria.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials published in The Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; EMBASE; Science Citation Index; PsycINFO/LIT; CINAHL; WHO clinical trial registry platform; and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials up to September 2012.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs that evaluated the effects of a home- or community-based programme for treating malaria in a malaria endemic setting.
Two authors independently screened and selected studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. Where possible the effects of interventions are compared using risk ratios (RR), and presented with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.
We identified 10 trials that met the inclusion criteria. The interventions involved brief training of basic-level health workers or mothers, and most provided the antimalarial for free or at a highly subsidized cost. In eight of the studies, fevers were treated presumptively without parasitological confirmation with microscopy or a rapid diagnostic test (RDT). Two studies trained community health workers to use RDTs as a component of community management of fever.Home- or community-based strategies probably increase the number of people with fever who receive an appropriate antimalarial within 24 hours (RR 2.27, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.88 in one trial; RR 9.79, 95% CI 6.87 to 13.95 in a second trial; 3099 participants, moderate quality evidence). They may also reduce all-cause mortality, but to date this has only been demonstrated in rural Ethiopia (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.77, one trial, 13,677 participants, moderate quality evidence).Hospital admissions in children were reported in one small trial from urban Uganda, with no effect detected (437 participants, very low quality evidence). No studies reported on severe malaria. For parasitaemia prevalence, the study from urban Uganda demonstrated a reduction in community parasite prevalence (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.64, 365 participants), but a second study in rural Burkina Faso did not (1006 participants). Home- or community-based programmes may have little or no effect on the prevalence of anaemia (three trials, 3612 participants, low quality evidence). None of the included studies reported on adverse effects of using home- or community-based programmes for treating malaria.In two studies which trained community health workers to only prescribe antimalarials after a positive RDT, prescriptions of antimalarials were reduced compared to the control group where community health workers used clinical diagnosis (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.84, two trials, 5944 participants, moderate quality evidence). In these two studies, mortality and hospitalizations remained very low in both groups despite the lower use of antimalarials (two trials, 5977 participants, low quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Home- or community-based interventions which provide antimalarial drugs free of charge probably improve prompt access to antimalarials, and there is moderate quality evidence from rural Ethiopia that they may impact on childhood mortality when implemented in appropriate settings.Programmes which treat all fevers presumptively with antimalarials lead to overuse antimalarials, and potentially undertreat other causes of fever such as pneumonia. Incorporating RDT diagnosis into home- or community-based programmes for malaria may help to reduce this overuse of antimalarials, and has been shown to be safe under trial conditions.
疟疾是发病和死亡的一个重要原因,在撒哈拉以南非洲的儿童和孕妇中尤为如此。及时获得有效的抗疟药物进行诊断和治疗是世界卫生组织(WHO)疟疾控制战略的核心组成部分。以家庭或社区为基础的疟疾管理方案是为克服疟疾治疗的地理障碍而提出的一种策略。
评估以家庭和社区为基础的疟疾治疗策略。
我们检索了截至2012年9月发表在《Cochrane图书馆》中的Cochrane对照试验中心注册库;MEDLINE;EMBASE;科学引文索引;PsycINFO/LIT;CINAHL;WHO临床试验注册平台;以及对照试验元注册库。
评估在疟疾流行地区以家庭或社区为基础的疟疾治疗方案效果的随机对照试验(RCT)和非RCT。
两位作者独立筛选和选择研究、提取数据并评估偏倚风险。在可能的情况下,使用风险比(RR)比较干预措施的效果,并给出95%置信区间(CI)。使用GRADE方法评估证据质量。
我们确定了10项符合纳入标准的试验。干预措施包括对基层卫生工作者或母亲进行简短培训,并且大多数免费或以高额补贴成本提供抗疟药。在8项研究中,在未通过显微镜检查或快速诊断检测(RDT)进行寄生虫学确认的情况下,对发热进行了推定治疗。两项研究培训社区卫生工作者使用RDT作为社区发热管理的一个组成部分。以家庭或社区为基础的策略可能会增加在24小时内接受适当抗疟药治疗的发热患者人数(一项试验中RR为2.27,95%CI为1.79至2.88;第二项试验中RR为9.79,95%CI为6.87至13.95;3099名参与者,中等质量证据)。它们也可能降低全因死亡率,但迄今为止仅在埃塞俄比亚农村得到证实(RR为0.58,95%CI为0.44至0.77,一项试验,13677名参与者,中等质量证据)。乌干达城市的一项小型试验报告了儿童住院情况,未检测到效果(437名参与者,极低质量证据)。没有研究报告严重疟疾情况。对于寄生虫血症患病率,乌干达城市的研究表明社区寄生虫患病率有所降低(RR为0.22,95%CI为0.08至0.64,365名参与者),但布基纳法索农村的第二项研究未显示降低(1006名参与者)。以家庭或社区为基础的方案可能对贫血患病率几乎没有影响或没有影响(三项试验,3612名参与者,低质量证据)。纳入的研究均未报告使用以家庭或社区为基础的疟疾治疗方案的不良反应。在两项培训社区卫生工作者仅在RDT呈阳性后才开具抗疟药的研究中,与社区卫生工作者使用临床诊断的对照组相比,抗疟药的处方量减少(RR为0.39,95%CI为0.18至0.84,两项试验,5944名参与者,中等质量证据)。在这两项研究中,尽管抗疟药使用量较低,但两组的死亡率和住院率仍然很低(两项试验,5977名参与者,低质量证据)。
免费提供抗疟药的以家庭或社区为基础的干预措施可能会改善抗疟药的及时可及性,并且来自埃塞俄比亚农村的中等质量证据表明,在适当环境中实施时,它们可能会影响儿童死亡率。用抗疟药对所有发热进行推定治疗的方案会导致抗疟药的过度使用,并可能对其他发热原因(如肺炎)治疗不足。将RDT诊断纳入以家庭或社区为基础的疟疾方案可能有助于减少这种抗疟药的过度使用,并且在试验条件下已证明是安全的。