Cost-effectiveness of intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine versus single screening and treatment for the control of malaria in pregnancy in Papua, Indonesia: a provider perspective analysis from a cluster-randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Malaria infection during pregnancy is associated with serious adverse maternal and birth outcomes. A randomised controlled trial in Papua, Indonesia, comparing the efficacy of intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine with the current strategy of single screening and treatment showed that intermittent preventive treatment is a promising alternative treatment for the reduction of malaria in pregnancy. We aimed to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine compared with single screening and treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine. METHODS: We did a provider perspective analysis. A decision tree model was analysed from a health provider perspective over a lifetime horizon. Model parameters were used in deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Simulations were run in hypothetical cohorts of 1000 women who received intermittent preventive treatment or single screening and treatment. Disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for fetal loss or neonatal death, low birthweight, moderate or severe maternal anaemia, and clinical malaria were calculated from trial data and cost estimates in 2016 US dollars from observational studies, health facility costings and public procurement databases. The main outcome measure was the incremental cost per DALY averted. FINDINGS: Relative to single screening and treatment, intermittent preventive treatment resulted in an incremental cost of US$5657 (95% CI 1827 to 9448) and 107·4 incremental DALYs averted (-719·7 to 904·1) per 1000 women; the average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $53 per DALY averted. INTERPRETATION: Intermittent preventive treatment with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine offers a cost-effective alternative to single screening and treatment for the prevention of the adverse effects of malaria infection in pregnancy in the context of the moderate malaria transmission setting of Papua. The higher cost of intermittent preventive treatment was driven by monthly administration, as compared with single-administration single screening and treatment. However, acceptability and feasibility considerations will also be needed to inform decision making. FUNDING: Medical Research Council, Department for International Development, and Wellcome Trust.

Intermittent screening and treatment or intermittent preventive treatment compared to current policy of single screening and treatment for the prevention of malaria in pregnancy in Eastern Indonesia: acceptability among health providers and pregnant women.

BACKGROUND: The control of malaria in pregnancy in much of Asia relies on screening asymptomatic women for malaria infection, followed by passive case detection and prevention with insecticide-treated nets. In 2012, Indonesia introduced screening for malaria by microscopy or rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) at pregnant women's first antenatal care (ANC) visit to detect and treat malaria infections regardless of the presence of symptoms. Acceptability among health providers and pregnant women of the current 'single screen and treat' (SSTp) strategy compared to two alternative strategies that were intermittent preventive treatment (IPTp) and intermittent screening and treatment (ISTp) was assessed in the context of a clinical trial in two malaria endemic provinces of Eastern Indonesia. METHODS: Qualitative data were collected through in-depth interviews with 121 health providers working in provision of antenatal care, heads of health facilities and District Health Office staff. Trial staff were also interviewed. Focus group discussions were conducted with 16 groups of pregnant women (N = 106) to discuss their experiences of each intervention in the trial. RESULTS: Health providers and pregnant women were receptive to screening for malaria at every ANC visit due to the increased opportunity to detect and treat asymptomatic infections. A primary concern for providers was the accuracy and availability of RDTs used for screening in the SSTp and ISTp arms, which they considered less accurate than microscopy. Providers had reservations about giving anti-malarials presumptively as IPTp, due to concerns of causing potential harm to mother and baby and as a possible driver of drug resistance. Pregnant women were accepting of all three interventions. Women in the IPTp arm were happy to take anti-malarials presumptively to protect themselves and their babies against malaria. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that, within a trial context, malaria screening of pregnant women at every ANC visit ISTp was an acceptable strategy among both health providers and pregnant women owing to an existing culture of screening and treatment. The adoption of IPTp however would require a considerable shift in health provider attitudes and a clear communication strategy. By contrast, pregnant women welcomed the opportunity to prevent malaria infections during pregnancy.

Evaluation of the national policy of single screening and treatment for the prevention of malaria in pregnancy in two districts in Eastern Indonesia: health provider perceptions.

BACKGROUND: Malaria in pregnancy has devastating consequences for both the expectant mother and baby. Annually, 88.2 (70%) of the 125.2 million pregnancies in malaria endemic regions occur in the Asia-Pacific region. The control of malaria in pregnancy in most of Asia relies on passive case detection and prevention with long-lasting insecticide-treated nets. Indonesia was the first country in the region to introduce, in 2012, malaria screening at pregnant women's first antenatal care visit to reduce the burden of malaria in pregnancy. The study assessed health providers' acceptability and perceptions on the feasibility of implementing the single screening and treatment (SST) strategy in the context of the national programme in two endemic provinces of Indonesia. METHODS: Qualitative data were collected through in-depth interviews with 86 health providers working in provision of antenatal care (midwives, doctors, laboratory staff, pharmacists, and heads of drug stores), heads of health facilities and District Health Office staff in West Sumba and Mimika districts in East Nusa Tenggara and Papua provinces, respectively. RESULTS: Health providers of all cadres were accepting of SST as a preventive strategy, showing a strong preference for microscopy over rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) as the method of screening. Implementation of the policy was inconsistent in both sites, with least extensive implementation reported in West Sumba compared to Mimika. SST was predominantly implemented at health centre level using microscopy, whereas implementation at community health posts was said to occur in less than half the selected health facilities. Lack of availability of RDTs was cited as the major factor that prevented provision of SST at health posts, however as village midwives cannot prescribe medicines women who test positive are referred to health centres for anti-malarials. Few midwives had received formal training on SST or related topics. CONCLUSIONS: The study findings indicate that SST was an acceptable strategy among health providers, however implementation was inconsistent with variation across different localities within the same district, across levels of facility, and across different cadres within the same health facility. Implementation should be re-invigorated through reorientation and training of health providers, stable supplies of more sensitive RDTs, and improved data capture and reporting.