BackgroundAs malaria transmission declines, it becomes more geographically focused and more likely due to asymptomatic and non-falciparum infections. To inform malaria elimination planning in the context of this changing epidemiology, local assessments on the risk factors for malaria infection are necessary, yet challenging due to the low number of malaria cases.MethodsA population-based, cross-sectional study was performed using passive and active surveillance data collected in Aceh Besar District, Indonesia from 2014 to 2015. Malaria infection was defined as symptomatic polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed infection in index cases reported from health facilities, and asymptomatic or symptomatic PCR-confirmed infection identified in reactive case detection (RACD). Potential risk factors for any infection, species-specific infection, or secondary-case detection in RACD were assessed through questionnaires and evaluated for associations.ResultsNineteen Plasmodium knowlesi, 12 Plasmodium vivax and six Plasmodium falciparum cases were identified passively, and 1495 community members screened in RACD, of which six secondary cases were detected (one P. knowlesi, three P. vivax, and two P. falciparum, with four being asymptomatic). Compared to non-infected subjects screened in RACD, cases identified through passive or active surveillance were more likely to be male (AOR 12.5, 95 % CI 3.0–52.1), adult (AOR 14.0, 95 % CI 2.2–89.6 for age 16–45 years compared to <15 years), have visited the forest in the previous month for any reason (AOR 5.6, 95 % CI 1.3–24.2), and have a workplace near or in the forest and requiring overnight stays (AOR 7.9, 95 % CI 1.6–39.7 compared to workplace not near or in the forest). Comparing subjects with infections of different species, differences were observed in sub-district of residence and other demographic and behavioural factors. Among subjects screened in RACD, cases compared to non-cases were more likely to be febrile and reside within 100 m of the index case.ConclusionIn this setting, risk of malaria infection in index and RACD identified cases was associated with forest exposure, particularly overnights in the forest for work. In low-transmission settings, utilization of data available through routine passive and active surveillance can support efforts to target individuals at high risk.

BackgroundSeveral studies conducted in Northeast Tanzania have documented declines in malaria transmission even before interventions were scaled up. One explanation for these reductions may be the changes in socio-environmental conditions associated with economic development, and in particular improvements in housing construction.ObjectiveThis analysis seeks to identify (1) risk factors for malaria incidence among young children and (2) household and environmental factors associated with mosquito vector numbers collected in the child’s sleeping area. Both analyses focus on housing construction quality as a key determinant.MethodologyFor 435 children enrolled in a larger trial of intermittent preventive treatment for malaria in infants in the Korogwe District in Tanga, Northeastern Tanzania, detailed information on their dwelling characteristics were collected in the last year of the trial. Principal components analysis was used to construct an index of housing structure quality and converted to quintile units for regression analysis. Univariate and multivariate random effects negative binomial regressions were used to predict risk factors for child malaria incidence and the mean total number of indoor female Anopheles gambiae and funestus mosquitoes collected per household across three occasions.FindingsBuilding materials have substantially improved in Korogwe over time. Multivariate regressions showed that residing in rural areas (versus urban) increased malaria incidence rates by over three-fold and mean indoor female A. gambiae and funestus numbers by nearly two-fold. Compared to those residing in the lowest quality houses, children residing in the highest quality houses had one-third lower malaria incidence rates, even when wealth and rural residence were controlled for. Living in the highest quality houses reduced vector numbers while having cattle near the house significantly increased them.ConclusionsResults corroborate findings from other studies that show associations between malaria incidence and housing quality; associations were concentrated amongst the highest quality houses.

BackgroundReactive case detection (RACD) is an active case finding strategy where households and neighbours of a passively identified case (index case) are screened to identify and treat additional malaria infections with the goal of gathering surveillance information and potentially reducing further transmission. Although it is widely considered a key strategy in low burden settings, little is known about the costs and the cost-effectiveness of different diagnostic methods used for RACD. The aims of this study were to measure the cost of conducting RACD and compare the cost-effectiveness of microscopy to the more sensitive diagnostic method loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP).MethodsThe study was conducted in RACD surveillance sites in five sub-districts in Aceh Besar, Indonesia. The cost inputs and yield of implementing RACD with microscopy and/or LAMP were collected prospectively over a 20 months study period between May 2014 and December 2015. Costs and cost-effectiveness (USD) of the different strategies were examined. The main cost measures were cost per RACD event, per person screened, per population at risk (PAR); defined as total population in each sub-district, and per infection found. The main cost-effectiveness measure was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as cost per malaria infection detected by LAMP versus microscopy. The effects of varying test positivity rate or diagnostic yield on cost per infection identified and ICER were also assessed.ResultsAmong 1495 household members and neighbours screened in 36 RACD events, two infections were detected by microscopy and confirmed by LAMP, and four infections were missed by microscopy but detected by LAMP. The average total cost of conducting RACD using microscopy and LAMP was $1178 per event with LAMP-specific consumables and personnel being the main cost drivers. The average cost of screening one individual during RACD was $11, with an additional cost of diagnostics at $0.62 and $16 per person for microscopy and LAMP, respectively. As a public health intervention, RACD using both diagnostics cost an average of $0.42 per PAR per year. Comparing RACD using microscopy only versus RACD using LAMP only, the cost per infection found was $8930 and $6915, respectively. To add LAMP as an additional intervention accompanying RACD would cost $9 per individual screened annually in this setting. The ICER was estimated to be $5907 per additional malaria infection detected by LAMP versus microscopy. Cost per infection identified and ICER declined with increasing test positivity rate and increasing diagnostic yield.ConclusionsThis study provides the first estimates on the cost and cost-effectiveness of RACD from a low transmission setting. Costs per individual screened were high, though costs per PAR were low. Compared to microscopy, the use of LAMP in RACD was more costly but more cost-effective for the detection of infections, with diminishing returns observed when findings were extrapolated to scenarios with higher prevalence of infect...

BackgroundThe Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria (GFATM) has been the largest financial supporter of malaria since 2002. In 2011, the GFATM transitioned to a new funding model (NFM), which prioritizes grants to high burden, lower income countries. This shift raises concerns that some low endemic countries, dependent on GFATM financing to achieve their malaria elimination goals, would receive less funding under the NFM. This study aims to understand the projected increase or decrease in national and regional funding from the GFATM’s NFM to the 34 malaria-eliminating countries.MethodsAverage annual disbursements under the old funding model were compared to average annual national allocations for all eligible 34 malaria-eliminating countries for the period of 2014–2017. Regional grant funding to countries that are due to receive additional support was then included in the comparison and analysed. Estimated funding ranges for the countries under the NFM were calculated using the proposed national allocation plus the possible adjustments and additional funding. Finally, the minimum and maximum funding estimates were compared to average annual disbursements under the old funding model.ResultsA cumulative 31 % decrease in national financing from the GFATM is expected for the countries included in this analysis. Regional grants augment funding for almost half of the eliminating countries, and increase the cumulative percent change in GTFAM funding to 32 %, though proposed activities may not be funded directly through national malaria programmes. However, if countries receive the maximum possible funding, 46 % of the countries included in this analysis would receive less than they received under the previous funding model.ConclusionsMany malaria-eliminating countries have projected national declines in funding from the GFATM under the NFM. While regional grants enhance funding for eliminating countries, they may not be able to fill country-level funding gaps for local commodities and implementation. If the GFATM is able to nuance its allocation methodology to mitigate drastic funding declines for malaria investments in low transmission countries, the GFATM can ensure previous investments are not lost. By aligning with WHO’s Global Technical Strategy for Malaria and investing in both high- and low-endemic countries, the Global Fund can tip the scale on a global health threat and contribute toward the goal of eventual malaria eradication.