School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Hwy, Burwood, VIC, 3125, Australia.
Burnet Institute, 85 Commercial Rd, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Malar J. 2019 Aug 6;18(1):269. doi: 10.1186/s12936-019-2900-1.
Community-delivered models have been widely used to reduce the burden of malaria. This review aimed to explore different community-delivered models and their relative effectiveness in terms of coverage and malaria-metric outcomes in order to inform the design and implementation of Community Health Worker (CHW) programmes for malaria control and elimination.
A systematic review of studies investigating the impact of community-delivered models on coverage and malaria-metric (parasitaemia and hyperparasitaemia, malaria case and mortality, anaemia, and fever) outcomes compared to non- community-delivered models was undertaken by searching in five databases of published papers and grey literature databases. Data were extracted from studies meeting inclusion and quality criteria (assessed using relevant tools for the study design) by two independent authors. Meta-analyses were performed where there was sufficient homogeneity in effect and stratified by community-delivered models to assess the impact of each model on coverage and malaria-metric outcomes.
28 studies were included from 7042 records identified. The majority of studies (25/28) were performed in high transmission settings in Africa and there was heterogeneity in the type of, and interventions delivered as part of the community-delivered models. Compared to non- community-delivered models, community-delivered models increased coverage of actual bed net usage (Relative Risk (RR) = 1.64 95% CI 1.39, 1.95), intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (RR = 1.36 95% CI 1.29, 1.44) and appropriate and timely treatment of febrile children, and improved malaria-metric outcomes such as malaria mortality (RR = 0.58 95% CI 0.52, 0.65). However, the considerable heterogeneity was found in the impact of community-delivered models in reducing, parasitaemia and hyperparasitaemia prevalence, anaemia incidence, fever prevalence and malaria caseload. Statistical comparisons of different community-delivered models were not undertaken due to the heterogeneity of the included studies in terms of method and interventions provided.
Overall, the community-delivered model is effective in improving the coverage of malaria interventions and reducing malaria-associated mortality. The heterogeneity of the community-delivered models and their impact on malaria-metric indices suggests that evidence for context-specific solutions is required. In particular, community-delivered models for malaria elimination, integrated with services for other common primary health problems, are yet to be evaluated.
社区提供的模式已被广泛用于减轻疟疾负担。本研究旨在探讨不同的社区提供模式及其在覆盖率和疟疾指标(寄生虫血症和过度寄生虫血症、疟疾病例和死亡率、贫血和发热)方面的相对效果,以便为社区卫生工作者(CHW)疟疾控制和消除规划的设计和实施提供信息。
通过在五个已发表论文数据库和灰色文献数据库中搜索,对社区提供模式对覆盖率和疟疾指标(寄生虫血症和过度寄生虫血症、疟疾病例和死亡率、贫血和发热)结果的影响进行了系统评价,与非社区提供模式进行了比较。两名独立作者根据纳入和质量标准(使用相关工具评估研究设计)从研究中提取数据。在效果具有足够同质性的情况下进行了荟萃分析,并按社区提供模式进行了分层,以评估每种模式对覆盖率和疟疾指标结果的影响。
从 7042 条记录中确定了 28 项研究。大多数研究(25/28)是在非洲高传播环境中进行的,社区提供模式的类型和干预措施存在异质性。与非社区提供模式相比,社区提供模式增加了实际蚊帐使用率(相对风险(RR)=1.64 95%CI 1.39,1.95)、妊娠间歇性预防治疗(RR=1.36 95%CI 1.29,1.44)和发热儿童的适当及时治疗,并改善了疟疾指标结果,如疟疾死亡率(RR=0.58 95%CI 0.52,0.65)。然而,在社区提供模式降低寄生虫血症和过度寄生虫血症患病率、贫血发病率、发热患病率和疟疾病例数方面的影响存在很大的异质性。由于纳入研究在方法和提供的干预措施方面存在异质性,因此未对不同社区提供模式进行统计学比较。
总的来说,社区提供模式在提高疟疾干预措施的覆盖率和降低疟疾相关死亡率方面是有效的。社区提供模式的异质性及其对疟疾指标的影响表明,需要针对具体情况提供解决方案。特别是,尚未评估针对疟疾消除的社区提供模式,这些模式与其他常见初级卫生问题的服务相结合。