BackgroundMany patients with malaria-like symptoms seek treatment in private medicine retail outlets (PMR) that distribute malaria medicines but do not traditionally provide diagnostic services, potentially leading to overtreatment with antimalarial drugs. To achieve universal access to prompt parasite-based diagnosis, many malaria-endemic countries are considering scaling up malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) in these outlets, an intervention that may require legislative changes and major investments in supporting programs and infrastructures. This review identifies studies that introduced malaria RDTs in PMRs and examines study outcomes and success factors to inform scale up decisions.MethodsPublished and unpublished studies that introduced malaria RDTs in PMRs were systematically identified and reviewed. Literature published before November 2016 was searched in six electronic databases, and unpublished studies were identified through personal contacts and stakeholder meetings. Outcomes were extracted from publications or provided by principal investigators.ResultsSix published and six unpublished studies were found. Most studies took place in sub-Saharan Africa and were small-scale pilots of RDT introduction in drug shops or pharmacies. None of the studies assessed large-scale implementation in PMRs. RDT uptake varied widely from 8%-100%. Provision of artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) for patients testing positive ranged from 30%-99%, and was more than 85% in five studies. Of those testing negative, provision of antimalarials varied from 2%-83% and was less than 20% in eight studies. Longer provider training, lower RDT retail prices and frequent supervision appeared to have a positive effect on RDT uptake and provider adherence to test results. Performance of RDTs by PMR vendors was generally good, but disposal of medical waste and referral of patients to public facilities were common challenges.ConclusionsExpanding services of PMRs to include malaria diagnostic services may hold great promise to improve malaria case management and curb overtreatment with antimalarials. However, doing so will require careful planning, investment and additional research to develop and sustain effective training, supervision, waste-management, referral and surveillance programs beyond the public sector.

BackgroundTanzania has seen a reduction in the fraction of fevers caused by malaria, likely due in part to scale-up of control measures. While national guidelines require parasite-based diagnosis prior to treatment, it is estimated that more than half of suspected malaria treatment-seeking in Tanzania initiates in the private retail sector, where diagnosis by malaria rapid diagnostic test (RDT) or microscopy is illegal. This pilot study investigated whether the introduction of RDTs into Accredited Drug Dispensing Outlets (ADDOs) under realistic market conditions would improve case management practices.MethodsDispensers from ADDOs in two intervention districts in Tanzania were trained to stock and perform RDTs and monitored quarterly. Each district was assigned a different recommended retail price to evaluate the need for a subsidy. Malaria RDT and artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) uptake and availability were measured pre-intervention and 1 year post-intervention through structured surveys of ADDO owners and exiting customers in both intervention districts and one contiguous control district. Descriptive analysis and logistic regression were used to compare the three districts and identify predictive variables for testing.Results and discussionA total of 310 dispensers from 262 ADDOs were trained to stock and perform RDTs. RDT availability in intervention ADDOs increased from 1% (n = 172) to 73% (n = 163) during the study; ACT medicines were available in 75% of 260 pre-intervention and 68% of 254 post-intervention ADDOs. Pre-treatment testing performed within the ADDO increased from 0 to 65% of suspected malaria patients who visited a shop (95% CI 60.8–69.6%) with no difference between intervention districts. Overall parasite-based diagnosis increased from 19 to 74% in intervention districts and from 3 to 18% in the control district. Prior knowledge of RDT availability (aOR = 1.9, p = 0.03) and RDT experience (aOR = 1.9, p = 0.01) were predictors for testing. Adherence data indicated that 75% of malaria positives received ACT, while 3% of negatives received ACT.ConclusionsTrained and supervised ADDO dispensers in rural Tanzania performed and sold RDTs under real market conditions to two-thirds of suspected malaria patients during this one-year pilot. These results support the hypothesis that introducing RDTs into regulated private retail sector settings can improve malaria testing and treatment practices without an RDT subsidy. Trial registration ISRCTN ISRCTN14115509

Background To prevent child deaths from severe malaria, early parenteral treatment is essential. Yet, in remote rural areas, accessing facilities offering parenteral antimalarials may be difficult. A randomised controlled trial found pre-referral treatment with rectal artesunate (RAS) to reduce deaths and disability in children who arrived at a referral facility with delay. This study examined the effectiveness of pre-referral RAS treatment implemented through routine procedures of established community-based health care systems. Methods An observational study accompanied the roll-out of RAS in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Nigeria and Uganda. Children <5 years of age presenting to a community-based health provider with a positive malaria test and signs of severe malaria were enrolled and followed up during admission and after 28 days to assess their health status and treatment history. The primary outcome was death; covariates of interest included RAS use, referral completion, and post-referral treatment. Results Post-roll-out, RAS was administered to 88% of patients in DRC, 52% in Nigeria, and 70% in Uganda. The overall case fatality rate (CFR) was 6.7% (135/2011) in DRC, 11.7% (69/589) in Nigeria, and 0.5% (19/3686) in Uganda; 13.8% (865/6286) of patients were sick on day 28. The CFR was higher after RAS roll-out in Nigeria (16.1 vs. 4.2%) and stable in DRC (6.7 vs. 6.6%) and Uganda (0.7 vs. 0.3%). In DRC and Nigeria, children receiving RAS were more likely to die than those not receiving RAS (aOR=3.06, 95% CI 1.35–6.92 and aOR=2.16, 95% CI 1.11–4.21, respectively). Only in Uganda, RAS users were less likely to be dead or sick at follow-up (aOR=0.60, 95% CI 0.45–0.79). Post-referral parenteral antimalarials plus oral artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT), a proxy for appropriate post-referral treatment, was protective. However, in referral health facilities, ACT was not consistently administered after parenteral treatment (DRC 68.4%, Nigeria 0%, Uganda 70.9%). Conclusions Implemented at scale to the recommended target group, pre-referral RAS had no beneficial effect on child survival in three highly malaria-endemic settings. RAS is unlikely to reduce malaria deaths unless health system issues such as referral and quality of care at all levels are addressed. Trial registration The study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03568344.

Maintaining quality, competitiveness and innovation in global health technology is a constant challenge for manufacturers, while affordability, access and equity are challenges for governments and international agencies. In this paper we discuss these issues with reference to rapid diagnostic tests for malaria. Strategies to control and eliminate malaria depend on early and accurate diagnosis. Rapid diagnostic tests for malaria require little training and equipment and can be performed by non-specialists in remote settings. Use of these tests has expanded significantly over the last few years, following recommendations to test all suspected malaria cases before treatment and the implementation of an evaluation programme to assess the performance of the malaria rapid diagnostic tests. Despite these gains, challenges exist that, if not addressed, could jeopardize the progress made to date. We discuss recent developments in rapid diagnostic tests for malaria, highlight some of the challenges and provide suggestions to address them.

IntroductionChildren who receive prereferral rectal artesunate (RAS) require urgent referral to a health facility where appropriate treatment for severe malaria can be provided. However, the rapid improvement of a child’s condition after RAS administration may influence a caregiver’s decision to follow this recommendation. Currently, the evidence on the effect of RAS on referral completion is limited.MethodsAn observational study accompanied the roll-out of RAS in three malaria endemic settings in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Nigeria and Uganda. Community health workers and primary health centres enrolled children under 5 years with suspected severe malaria before and after the roll-out of RAS. All children were followed up 28 days after enrolment to assess their treatment-seeking pathways.ResultsReferral completion was 67% (1408/2104) in DRC, 48% (287/600) in Nigeria and 58% (2170/3745) in Uganda. In DRC and Uganda, RAS users were less likely to complete referral than RAS non-users in the pre-roll-out phase (adjusted OR (aOR)=0.48, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.77 and aOR=0.72, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.88, respectively). Among children seeking care from a primary health centre in Nigeria, RAS users were less likely to complete referral compared with RAS non-users in the post-roll-out phase (aOR=0.18, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.71). In Uganda, among children who completed referral, RAS users were significantly more likely to complete referral on time than RAS non-users enrolled in the pre-roll-out phase (aOR=1.81, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.79).ConclusionsThe findings of this study raise legitimate concerns that the roll-out of RAS may lead to lower referral completion in children who were administered prereferral RAS. To ensure that community-based programmes are effectively implemented, barriers to referral completion need to be addressed at all levels. Alternative effective treatment options should be provided to children unable to complete referral.Trial registrstion numberNCT03568344; ClinicalTrials.gov.