ABSTRACT
In areas of drug-resistant malaria, control programs may restrict chemotherapy until malaria has been confirmed via microscopy to contain costs and toxicity. In Brazil, patients travel to centralized laboratory posts (FNS) at great cost for diagnosis and treatment. A program was established through the bars of a mining town offering free dipstick diagnosis and mefloquine treatment on a 24-hr basis; falciparum malaria dipstick tests are accurate and easy to use. Outcomes were compared with historical data and results of a neighboring non-intervention village. Guidelines for dipstick use and treatment were followed for 98% of visits. The number of FNS visits was reduced from 2,316 (expected) to 1,097 (observed) with 626 dipstick tests applied. Ninety-five percent of those who visited the FNS experienced onset of malaria symptoms in the town where the FNS was located. There was an unexpected doubling of the malaria hospital admission rate. We demonstrate that dipstick testing can be used in a sustainable, community-based program that should be applicable in a wide variety of settings.
Subject(s)
Antigens, Protozoan/blood , Community Health Services/standards , Malaria, Falciparum/diagnosis , Malaria, Falciparum/prevention & control , Plasmodium falciparum/immunology , Preventive Health Services/standards , Animals , Antimalarials/therapeutic use , Brazil/epidemiology , Community Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Malaria, Falciparum/epidemiology , Malaria, Falciparum/urine , Mefloquine/therapeutic use , Preventive Health Services/statistics & numerical data , Program EvaluationABSTRACT
In the Brazilian Amazon, travel costs to centralized malaria clinics for diagnosis and treatment can approach 20% of one's monthly salary. A program was established in a mining town for community-based dipstick test diagnosis and treatment. An economic analysis was performed that compared expected costs under the old program to the observed costs of the new one. Data were obtained through interviews, government reports, clinic and hospital records, and community records. There was a 53% reduction (by 1,219 visits) of clinic visits but a doubling of malaria hospitalization admissions (to 191). The new program had an overall annual savings of $60,900 ($11.8K-$160K, sensitivity limits), a 77% reduction of the old program's cost. The benefit-to-cost ratio was 9:1, where benefits were patients' savings from travel and lost wages and costs were government drug, diagnostic, training, and monitoring expenses. A community-based program incorporating dipstick tests for malaria management can have economic advantages.
