Malaria Branch, Center for Global Health, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Entomology Branch, Center for Global Health, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2023 May 9;108(6):1127-1139. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.22-0623. Print 2023 Jun 7.
For a malaria elimination strategy, Haiti's National Malaria Control Program piloted a mass drug administration (MDA) with indoor residual spraying (IRS) in 12 high-transmission areas across five communes after implementing community case management and strengthened surveillance. The MDA distributed sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and single low-dose primaquine to eligible residents during house visits. The IRS campaign applied pirimiphos-methyl insecticide on walls of eligible houses. Pre- and post-campaign cross-sectional surveys were conducted to assess acceptability, feasibility, drug safety, and effectiveness of the combined interventions. Stated acceptability for MDA before the campaign was 99.2%; MDA coverage estimated at 10 weeks post-campaign was 89.6%. Similarly, stated acceptability of IRS at baseline was 99.9%; however, household IRS coverage was 48.9% because of the high number of ineligible houses. Effectiveness measured by Plasmodium falciparum prevalence at baseline and 10 weeks post-campaign were similar: 1.31% versus 1.43%, respectively. Prevalence of serological markers were similar at 10 weeks post-campaign compared with baseline, and increased at 6 months. No severe adverse events associated with the MDA were identified in the pilot; there were severe adverse events in a separate, subsequent campaign. Both MDA and IRS are acceptable and feasible interventions in Haiti. Although a significant impact of a single round of MDA/IRS on malaria transmission was not found using a standard pre- and post-intervention comparison, it is possible there was blunting of the peak transmission. Seasonal malaria transmission patterns, suboptimal IRS coverage, and low baseline parasitemia may have limited the effectiveness or the ability to measure effectiveness.
为了实施疟疾消除战略,海地国家疟疾控制规划在实施社区病例管理和加强监测之后,在五个市的 12 个高传播地区试行采用室内滞留喷洒和大规模药物治疗。在上门探访时,大规模药物治疗向符合条件的居民发放了磺胺多辛-乙胺嘧啶和单一低剂量伯氨喹。喷洒驱虫剂运动在符合条件的房屋墙壁上喷洒了吡虫啉杀虫剂。在活动前后进行了横断面调查,以评估联合干预措施的可接受性、可行性、药物安全性和效果。活动前,居民对大规模药物治疗的自述接受率为 99.2%;活动后 10 周,大规模药物治疗的覆盖率估计为 89.6%。同样,基线时居民对室内滞留喷洒的自述接受率为 99.9%;然而,由于大量房屋不合格,家庭室内滞留喷洒覆盖率仅为 48.9%。根据基线和活动后 10 周时疟原虫流行率测量的效果相似:分别为 1.31%和 1.43%。与基线相比,活动后 10 周时血清学标志物的流行率相似,但 6 个月后有所增加。试点研究中未发现与大规模药物治疗相关的严重不良事件;在随后的另一个运动中出现了严重不良事件。大规模药物治疗和室内滞留喷洒都是海地可以接受和可行的干预措施。虽然使用标准的干预前后比较未发现单次大规模药物治疗/室内滞留喷洒对疟疾传播的重大影响,但可能存在传播高峰减弱的情况。季节性疟疾传播模式、室内滞留喷洒覆盖率不理想和基线寄生虫血症率低可能限制了效果或测量效果的能力。