Win Kyawt Mon, Gimnig John E, Linn Nay Yi Yi, Monti Feliciano, Khin Nu Nu, Hawley William A, Hwang Jimee, Wiegand Ryan E, Topcuoglu Ersin, Moran Alexander, Lin Khin, Thadar Hsu, Myint Aye Aye, Tun Kyaw Myint
Department of Public Health, National Malaria Control Programme, Nay Pyi Taw, Myanmar.
Mahidol Vivax Research Unit, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Malar J. 2025 Jan 10;24(1):7. doi: 10.1186/s12936-024-05241-1.
In Myanmar, progress towards malaria elimination has stagnated in some areas requiring deployment of new tools and approaches to accelerate malaria elimination. While there is evidence that networks of community-based malaria workers and insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) can reduce malaria transmission in a variety of settings, evidence for the effectiveness of other interventions, such as topical repellents, is limited. Since malaria transmission in Myanmar occurs outdoors, mainly among forest-goers, this study tested the effectiveness of topical repellents in combination with supplemental ITN distribution and strengthened networks of malaria workers.
Thirty-eight villages in the Tanintharyi Region and Rakhine State were initially selected for the study based on malaria incidence in previous years. An additional 31 villages were included as comparison areas. The implementation of interventions began in March 2020 and continued through June 2021. Malaria cases were detected in all villages through surveillance at health facilities and a network of malaria workers. Data were analysed by interrupted time series. A nested case-control study was also conducted where forest-goers who tested positive for malaria by RDT were matched to up to three forest-goers who tested negative.
A decrease in mean monthly incidence was observed in the intervention villages from 6.0 (95% CI 4.9-7.1) to 3.7 (95% CI 2.4-4.9) cases per 1000 people at risk before and after the interventions. For the comparison villages, the mean monthly incidence increased from 1.1 (95% CI 0.8-1.5) to 5.7 (95% CI 2.1-9.3) cases per 1000 people at risk. Malaria incidence was significantly lower following the implementation of the interventions (RR = 0.117; 95% CI 0.061-0.223; p < 0.001) in the intervention villages, whereas that of comparison villages was higher after the implementation of the interventions (RR = 3.558; 95% CI 0.311-40.750; p = 0.308). However, a significant trend for increasing malaria incidence after implementation was observed in the intervention villages (RR = 1.113; 95% CI 1.021-1.214, p = 0.015), suggesting a waning effect. The nested case-control analysis showed that the odds of topical repellent use were significantly lower among cases than controls (aOR: 0.063, 95% CI 0.013-0.313, p < 0.001).
The tailored intervention package for forest-goers helped reduce malaria incidence in Myanmar. Topical repellents may help to further reduce malaria transmission in elimination settings where high-risk populations such as forest-goers do not have easy access to routine health services or are less likely to use ITNs for malaria prevention.
在缅甸,疟疾消除工作在一些地区停滞不前,需要部署新的工具和方法来加速疟疾消除进程。虽然有证据表明,以社区为基础的疟疾防治工作者网络和经杀虫剂处理的蚊帐(ITN)能够在各种环境中减少疟疾传播,但其他干预措施(如外用驱虫剂)有效性的证据有限。由于缅甸的疟疾传播发生在户外,主要是在进入森林的人群中,本研究测试了外用驱虫剂与补充分发ITN以及加强疟疾防治工作者网络相结合的有效性。
根据前几年的疟疾发病率,最初在德林达依省和若开邦选择了38个村庄进行研究。另外31个村庄作为对照地区。干预措施于2020年3月开始实施,并持续到2021年6月。通过卫生设施监测和疟疾防治工作者网络在所有村庄检测疟疾病例。采用中断时间序列分析数据。还开展了一项巢式病例对照研究,将通过快速诊断检测(RDT)检测出疟疾呈阳性的进入森林的人与多达三名检测呈阴性的进入森林的人进行匹配。
干预村庄每1000名有风险人群的月平均发病率在干预前后从6.0(95%置信区间4.9 - 7.1)降至3.7(95%置信区间2.4 - 4.9)例。对照村庄每1000名有风险人群的月平均发病率从1.1(95%置信区间0.8 - 1.5)增至5.7(95%置信区间2.1 - 9.3)例。干预村庄在实施干预措施后疟疾发病率显著降低(RR = 0.117;95%置信区间0.061 - 0.223;p < 0.001),而对照村庄在实施干预措施后发病率更高(RR = 3.558;95%置信区间0.311 - 40.750;p = 0.308)。然而,在干预村庄观察到实施干预措施后疟疾发病率有显著上升趋势(RR = 1.113;95%置信区间1.021 - 1.214,p = 0.015),表明效果逐渐减弱。巢式病例对照分析显示,病例组使用外用驱虫剂的几率显著低于对照组(调整后的比值比:0.063,95%置信区间0.013 - 0.313,p < 0.001)。
为进入森林的人群量身定制的干预方案有助于降低缅甸的疟疾发病率。在消除疟疾的环境中,外用驱虫剂可能有助于进一步减少疟疾传播,在这些环境中,像进入森林的人群这样的高危人群难以获得常规卫生服务或不太可能使用ITN预防疟疾。