Evaluation of the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of a Community-delivered Integrated Malaria Elimination (CIME) model in Myanmar: protocol for an open stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: In the Greater Mekong Subregion, community health workers, known as malaria volunteers, have played a key role in reducing malaria in the control phase, providing essential malaria services in areas with limited formal healthcare. However, the motivation and social role of malaria volunteers, and testing rates, have declined with decreasing malaria burden and reorientation of malaria programmes from control to elimination. Provision of additional interventions for common health concerns could help sustain the effectiveness of volunteers and maintain malaria testing rates required for malaria elimination accreditation by the WHO. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Community-delivered Integrated Malaria Elimination (CIME) volunteer model, integrating interventions for malaria, dengue, tuberculosis, childhood diarrhoea and malaria Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT)-negative fever, was developed based on global evidence and extensive stakeholder consultations. An open stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial, randomised at the volunteer level, will be conducted over 6 months to evaluate the effectiveness of the CIME model in Myanmar. One hundred and forty Integrated Community Malaria Volunteers (ICMVs, current model of care) providing malaria services in 140 villages will be retrained as CIME volunteers (intervention). These 140 ICMVs/villages will be grouped into 10 blocks of 14 villages, with blocks transitioned from control (ICMV) to intervention states (CIME), fortnightly, in random order, following a 1-week training and transition period. The primary outcome of the trial is blood examination rate determined by the number of malaria RDTs performed weekly. Difference in rates will be estimated across village intervention and control states using a generalised linear mixed modelling analytical approach with maximum likelihood estimation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by Institutional Review Board, Myanmar Department of Medical Research (Ethics/DMR/2020/111) and Alfred Hospital Ethics Review Committee, Australia (241/20). Findings will be disseminated in peer-review journals, conferences and regional, national and local stakeholder meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04695886.

The burden of Japanese encephalitis, the catch-up vaccination campaign, and health service providers' perceptions in Myanmar: 2012-2017.

BACKGROUND: Myanmar is endemic for Japanese encephalitis (JE) and has experienced several outbreaks in recent years. The vector-borne disease control (VBDC) program has collected hospital-based surveillance data since 1974. There is an urgent need to collate, analyze, and interpret the most recent information. The study aimed to describe (i) hospital-based JE cases and deaths between 2012 and 2017, (ii) a catch-up vaccination campaign in children in 2017, and (iii) health service provider perceptions about JE in one township in 2018. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of cases, deaths, and catch-up childhood vaccinations using secondary data from program records and a survey database of health service provider perceptions. RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2017, there were 872 JE cases and 79 deaths with a case fatality rate of 91 per 1000; 2016 was the year with most cases and deaths. Most cases (n = 324) and deaths (n = 37) occurred in children aged 5-9 years. Large case numbers were reported in delta and lowland regions (n = 550) and during the wet season (n = 580). The highest case fatality rates were observed in the hills and coastal regions (120 and 112 per 1000, respectively). Nationwide coverage of the catch-up JE vaccination campaign among 13.7 million eligible children was 92%, with coverage lower in the hills and coastal regions (84%) compared with delta and lowland regions and plains (94%). More vaccinations (65%) occurred through school-based campaigns with the remainder (35%) vaccinated through community-based campaigns. Structured interviews in one township showed that service providers (n = 47) had good perceptions about various aspects of JE, although perceived benefits of specific vector control measures were poor: spraying/fumigation (38%), garbage removal (36%), larvicide use (36%), and drainage of standing/stagnant water (32%). CONCLUSION: The catch-up vaccination campaign was a successful response to high JE case numbers and deaths in children. However, ongoing surveillance for JE needs to continue and be strengthened to ensure comprehensive reporting of all cases, more knowledge is needed on disability in JE survivors, and all attempts must be made to ensure high percentage coverage of vaccination through routine and catch-up campaigns.