OBJECTIVE: To assess whether traditional birth attendants, drug-shop vendors, community reproductive health workers and adolescent peer mobilizers can administer intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) with sulfadoxine-pyremethamine to pregnant women, and reach those most at risk of malaria and increase access and compliance to it.
METHODS: The study was designed to assess new approaches of delivering IPT through these groups and compare it with IPT at health units. The primary outcome measures were: the proportion of adolescents and primigravidae accessed; gestational age at recruitment and the proportion of women who completed two doses of sulfadoxine-pyremethamine.
RESULTS: Two thousand seven hundred and eighty-five pregnant women (78% of those in the study area) participated. With new approaches, 92.4% of the women received IPT during the second trimester as recommended by the policy, vs. 76.1% at health units, P < 0.0001. Of the women who received two doses of sulfadoxine-pyremethamine, 39.9% were at health units (control) vs. 67.5% through new approaches (P < 0.0001). Women using the new approaches also accessed IPT early: the mean gestational age when receiving the first dose of sulfadoxine-pyremethamine was 21.0 weeks vs. 23.1 weeks at health units (P < 0.0001). However, the health units were used by a higher proportion of primigravidae (23.6% vs. 20.0%, P < 0.04), and this was also the case for adolescents (28.4% vs. 25.0%, P < 0.03). This intervention was acceptable with 89.1% of the women at the new approaches intending to use IPT in future.
CONCLUSIONS: The new approaches increased access to and compliance with IPT. We recommend a review of the policy to allow the provision of IPT through the new approaches.
The main objective of this study was to assess whether traditional birth attendants, drug-shop vendors, community reproductive health workers and adolescent peer mobilisers could administer intermittent preventive treatment (IPTp) with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) to pregnant women. The study was implemented in 21 community clusters (intervention) and four clusters where health centres provided routine IPTp (control). The primary outcome measures were the proportion of women who completed two doses of SP; the effect on anaemia, parasitaemia and low birth weight; and the incremental cost-effectiveness of the intervention. The study enrolled 2785 pregnant women. The majority, 1404/2081 (67.5%) receiving community-based care, received SP early and adhered to the two recommended doses compared with 281/704 (39.9%) at health centres (P<0.001). In addition, women receiving community-based care had fewer episodes of anaemia or severe anaemia and fewer low birth weight babies. The cost per woman receiving the full course of IPTp was, however, higher when delivered via community care at US$2.60 compared with US$2.30 at health centres, due to the additional training costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the community delivery system was Uganda shillings 1869 (US$1.10) per lost disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted. In conclusion, community-based delivery increased access and adherence to IPTp and was cost-effective.
BACKGROUND: The impact of intermittent preventive treatment (IPTp) on malaria in pregnancy is well known. However, in countries where this policy is implemented, poor access and low compliance have been widely reported. Novel approaches are needed to deliver this intervention.
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether traditional birth attendants, drug-shop vendors, community reproductive health workers and adolescent peer mobilizers can administer IPTp with sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) to pregnant women, reach those at greatest risk of malaria, and increase access and compliance with IPTp.
STUDY DESIGN: An intervention study compared the delivery of IPTp in the community with routine delivery of IPTp at health units. The primary outcome measures were the proportion of adolescents and primigravidae accessed, and the proportion of women who received two doses of SP. The study also assessed the effect of the intervention on access to malaria treatment, antenatal care, other services and related costs.
RESULTS: More women (67.5%) received two doses of SP through the community approach compared with health units (39.9%; P<0.0001). Women who accessed IPTp in the community were at an earlier stage of pregnancy (21.0 weeks of gestation) than women who accessed IPTp at health units (23.1 weeks of gestation; P<0.0001). However, health units were visited by a higher proportion of primigravidae (23.6% vs 20.0%; P<0.04) and adolescents (28.4% vs 25.0%; P<0.03). Generally, women who accessed IPTp at health units made more visits for malaria treatment (2.6 (1.0-4.7) vs 1.8 (1.4-2.2); P<0.03). At recruitment, more women who accessed IPTp at health units sought malaria treatment compared with those who accessed IPTp in the community (56.9% vs 49.2%). However, at delivery, a high proportion of women who accessed IPTp in the community had sought malaria treatment (70.3%), suggesting the possibility that the novel approach had a positive impact on care seeking for malaria. Similarly, utilization of antenatal care, insecticide-treated nets and delivery care by women in the community was high. The total costs per woman receiving two doses of SP for IPTp were 4093 Uganda shillings (US$ 2.3) for women who accessed IPTp at health units, and 4491 Uganda shillings (US$ 2.6) for women who accessed IPTp in the community.
CONCLUSION: The community approach was effective for the delivery of IPTp, although women still accessed and benefited from malaria treatment and other services at health units. However, the costs for accessing malaria treatment and other services are high and could be a limiting factor in mitigating the burden of malaria in Uganda.
To assess whether traditional birth attendants, drug-shop vendors, community reproductive health workers and adolescent peer mobilizers can administer intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) with sulfadoxine-pyremethamine to pregnant women, and reach those most at risk of malaria and increase access and compliance to it.
METHODS:
The study was designed to assess new approaches of delivering IPT through these groups and compare it with IPT at health units. The primary outcome measures were: the proportion of adolescents and primigravidae accessed; gestational age at recruitment and the proportion of women who completed two doses of sulfadoxine-pyremethamine.
RESULTS:
Two thousand seven hundred and eighty-five pregnant women (78% of those in the study area) participated. With new approaches, 92.4% of the women received IPT during the second trimester as recommended by the policy, vs. 76.1% at health units, P < 0.0001. Of the women who received two doses of sulfadoxine-pyremethamine, 39.9% were at health units (control) vs. 67.5% through new approaches (P < 0.0001). Women using the new approaches also accessed IPT early: the mean gestational age when receiving the first dose of sulfadoxine-pyremethamine was 21.0 weeks vs. 23.1 weeks at health units (P < 0.0001). However, the health units were used by a higher proportion of primigravidae (23.6% vs. 20.0%, P < 0.04), and this was also the case for adolescents (28.4% vs. 25.0%, P < 0.03). This intervention was acceptable with 89.1% of the women at the new approaches intending to use IPT in future.
CONCLUSIONS:
The new approaches increased access to and compliance with IPT. We recommend a review of the policy to allow the provision of IPT through the new approaches.
