Marcy Erskine

Insecticide-treated bed nets (ITNs) are an efficacious intervention for malaria prevention. During a national immunization campaign in Mozambique, vouchers, which were to be redeemed at a later date for free ITNs, were distributed in Manica and Sofala provinces. A survey to evaluate ITN ownership and usage post-campaign was conducted. Four districts in each province and four enumeration areas (EAs) in each district were selected using probability proportional to size. Within each EA, 32 households (HHs) were selected using a simple random sample. Interviews to assess ownership and usage were conducted in each of the selected HHs using personal digital assistants. Valid interviews were completed for 947 (92.5%) (440 in Manica and 507 in Sofala) of the 1,024 selected HHs. Among participating HHs, 65.0% in Manica and 63.1% in Sofala reported that at least one child under five years of age slept in the house the previous night. HH ownership of at least one bed net of any kind was 20.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.9%-43.6%) and 35.6% (95% CI: 27.8%-44.3%) pre-campaign; and 55.1% (95% CI: 43.6%-66.1%) and 59.6 (95% CI: 42.4%-74.7%) post-campaign in Manica and Sofala, respectively. Post-campaign HH ownership of at least one ITN was 50.2% (95% CI: 41.8%-58.5%) for both provinces combined. In addition, 60.3% (95% CI: 50.6%-69.2%) of children under five years of age slept under an ITN the previous night. This ITN distribution increased bed net ownership and usage rates. Integration of ITN distribution with immunization campaigns presents an opportunity for reaching malaria control targets and should continue to be considered.

Background: Insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) are becoming increasingly available to vulnerable populations at risk for malaria. Their appropriate and consistent use is essential to preventing malaria, but ITN use often lags behind ITN ownership. In order to increase ITN use, it is necessary to devise strategies that accurately identify, differentiate, and target the reasons and types of non-use. Methods: A simple method based on the end-user as the denominator was employed to classify each individual into one of four ITN use categories: 1) living in households not owning an ITN; 2) living in households owning, but not hanging an ITN; 3) living in households owning and hanging an ITN, but who are not sleeping under one; and 4) sleeping under an ITN. This framework was applied to survey data designed to evaluate long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) distributions following integrated campaigns in five countries: Togo, Sierra Leone, Madagascar, Kenya and Niger. Results: The percentage of children <5 years of age sleeping under an ITN ranged from 51.5% in Kenya to 81.1% in Madagascar. Among the three categories of non-use, children living in households without an ITN make up largest group (range: 9.4%-30.0%), despite the efforts of the integrated child health campaigns. The percentage of children who live in households that own but do not hang an ITN ranged from 5.1% to 16.1%. The percentage of children living in households where an ITN was suspended, but who were not sleeping under it ranged from 4.3% to 16.4%. Use by all household members in Sierra Leone (39.9%) and Madagascar (60.4%) indicate that integrated campaigns reach beyond their desired target populations. Conclusions: The framework outlined in this paper provides a helpful tool to examine the deficiencies in ITN use. Monitoring and evaluation strategies designed to assess ITN ownership and use can easily incorporate this approach using existing data collection instruments that measure the standard indicators.

Background: Five large insecticide-treated net (ITN) programmes and two indoor residual spraying (IRS) programmes were compared using a standardized costing methodology. Methods: Costs were measured locally or derived from existing studies and focused on the provider perspective, but included the direct costs of net purchases by users, and are reported in 2005 USD. Effectiveness was estimated by combining programme outputs with standard impact indicators. Findings: Conventional ITNs: The cost per treated net-year of protection ranged from USD 1.21 in Eritrea to USD 6.05 in Senegal. The cost per child death averted ranged from USD 438 to USD 2,199 when targeting to children was successful. Long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLIN) of five years duration: The cost per treated-net year of protection ranged from USD 1.38 in Eritrea to USD 1.90 in Togo. The cost per child death averted ranged from USD 502 to USD 692. IRS: The costs per person-year of protection for all ages were USD 3.27 in KwaZulu Natal and USD 3.90 in Mozambique. If only children under five years of age were included in the denominator the cost per person-year of protection was higher: USD 23.96 and USD 21.63. As a result, the cost per child death averted was higher than for ITNs: USD 3,933–4,357. Conclusion: Both ITNs and IRS are highly cost-effective vector control strategies. Integrated ITN free distribution campaigns appeared to be the most efficient way to rapidly increase ITN coverage. Other approaches were as or more cost-effective, and appeared better suited to "keep-up" coverage levels. ITNs are more cost-effective than IRS for highly endemic settings, especially if high ITN coverage can be achieved with some demographic targeting.