Investigating the acceptability of non-mesh, long-lasting insecticidal nets amongst nomadic communities in Garissa County, Kenya using a prospective, longitudinal study design and cross-sectional household surveys.

BACKGROUND: North East Kenya is an area of semi-arid terrain, prone to malaria epidemics. The distribution of long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) has long been a key malaria intervention, however, for nomadic populations who live and sleep outside, in harsh climates and areas with increasing reports of exophagic behaviour of mosquitoes, traditional LLINs are often inadequate. This study investigates the acceptability of non-mesh LLINs, specifically designed to suit nomadic, outdoor sleeping communities. METHODS: In September 2011, 13,922 non-mesh LLINs were distributed to 8,511 nomadic households in Garissa County, North East Province, Kenya. A prospective, longitudinal study design was used to assess the acceptability of this novel type of LLIN. Cross-sectional household surveys, focus group discussions (FGDs), and key informant interviews (KIs) were used to collect data on attitudes and practices regarding the Dumuria nets. RESULTS: A very high level of acceptability was reported with 95.3% of respondents stating they liked the nets. Of the factors reportedly determining net use the most frequently mentioned was "vulnerability". Of those with concerns about the nets, the colour (white) was the most frequently reported. CONCLUSION: The tailoring of LLINs to specific communities and contexts leads to increased levels of acceptability. Large-scale, blanket net distribution campaigns, which are currently the standard practice, do not cater for the specific and nuanced needs of the differing communities they often serve. This non-mesh LLIN offers a highly effective and desirable malaria prevention option to a typically hard to reach and underserved nomadic population at increased risk of malaria infection

Investigating a Non-Mesh Mosquito Net Among Outdoor Sleeping Nomadic Communities in Kenya.

Rising reports of exophagic malaria vectors make even more pressing the need for alternatives to traditional, mesh, long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) designed for indoor sleeping and often inadequate in the protection of outdoor-sleeping populations. This study tests and evaluates the retention, utilization, and durability of novel, non-mesh nets designed for outdoor use. Longitudinal, cross-sectional surveys were conducted, the physical condition of nets was assessed, and bio-efficacy and insecticide content were tested. At 22 months, retention was 98.0%; 97.1% of nets fell within the World Health Organization (WHO) category of being in "good" condition; none were in the "torn" category. At 18 months post-distribution, 100% of nets had at least WHO Pesticide Evaluation Scheme (WHOPES)-acceptable levels of insecticide, this proportion was 66.7% at 22 months. This novel mosquito net has the potential to provide a durable and context-specific tool to prevent malaria among traditionally hard-to-protect and highly vulnerable populations

Patient adherence to prescribed artemisinin-based combination therapy in Garissa County, Kenya, after three years of health care in a conflict setting.

BACKGROUND: Current day malaria cases and deaths are indicative of a lack of access to both methods of prevention, diagnosis, and treatment; an important determinant of treatment efficacy is adherence. This study is a follow up to the baseline study of adherence to artemether-lumefantrine (AL) carried out in Garissa District in 2010. The study presented evaluates any changes in adherence levels which may have occurred in the area during this period and after nearly three years of sustained use of ACT across the public health sector. METHODS: The study was carried out in Garissa County in the North Eastern Province of Kenya and included patients fitting the suspected malaria case definition and having been prescribed AL, regardless of confirmatory diagnosis. A questionnaire assessed the intake of AL via both self-reporting by the participant and observation of blister packs by the interviewer. On separate occasions exit interviews with patients and observations of prescribers were also carried out. RESULTS: Of the 218 participants enrolled, 195 were successfully followed up. 60% of participants were found to be adherent to the three-day AL regimen, this is 4.7% lower than the proportion of participants adherent in 2010; the result of a two-sided z-test was not significant (p = 0.23). The odds of the patient being adherent to AL increased by 65% with each additional correct statement regarding how to take AL that a patient could recall (between zero and four statements), this was the only variable significantly associated with patient adherence (p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Sustaining the ACT adherence rates at the 2010 levels, through 2.5 years of insecurity in the study area is an achievement and suggests that if security can be improved barriers to improving health service quality and patient adherence to AL would be removed. This study, by looking specifically at anti-malarial adherence over a prolonged period and in a setting of severe conflict, provides a valuable and rare insight in to the challenges and barriers to ACT adherence in such settings