| Literature DB >> 27566109 |
Mary K Muhindo1, Abel Kakuru1, Paul Natureeba1, Patricia Awori1, Peter Olwoch1, John Ategeka1, Patience Nayebare1, Tamara D Clark2, Atis Muehlenbachs3, Michelle Roh2, Betty Mpeka4, Bryan Greenhouse2, Diane V Havlir2, Moses R Kamya5, Grant Dorsey2, Prasanna Jagannathan6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Indoor residual spraying of insecticide (IRS) is a key intervention for reducing the burden of malaria in Africa. However, data on the impact of IRS on malaria in pregnancy and birth outcomes is limited.Entities:
Keywords: Indoor residual spraying; Malaria in pregnancy; Placental malaria; Plasmodium falciparum; Vector-borne disease
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27566109 PMCID: PMC5002129 DOI: 10.1186/s12936-016-1489-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Malar J ISSN: 1475-2875 Impact factor: 2.979
Fig. 1Temporal trends with enrolment, delivery and entomological measures. Shown are the number of women enrolled (blue bars) and number of women delivered (green bars) each month between 2014 and 2015. The red line (2013–2014) and yellow line (2014–2015) represent the number of female anopheline mosquitoes collected per household per night (right y axis) in Tororo district from 100 randomly selected households enrolled in the International Centers of Excellence in Malaria Research cohort [21]
Characteristics of women stratified by duration of pregnancy under the protection of IRS
| Characteristic | Proportion of pregnancy under the protection of IRS | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| None (n = 134) | >0–20 % (n = 90) | >20–43 % (n = 65) | |
| Malaria parasites detected at enrolment, n (%) | 76 (56.7 %) | 52 (57.8 %) | 39 (60.0 %) |
| Age at enrolment in years, mean (SD)a | 21.1 (3.9) | 22.9 (4.0) | 22.6 (4.0) |
| Gravidity, n (%)a | |||
| 1 | 64 (47.8 %) | 23 (25.6 %) | 16 (24.6 %) |
| 2 | 37 (27.6 %) | 25 (27.8 %) | 25 (38.5 %) |
| | 33 (24.6 %) | 42 (46.7 %) | 24 (36.9 %) |
| Study drugs started at 16 vs 20 weeks GA, n (%)a | 61 (45.5 %) | 85 (94.4 %) | 57 (87.7 %) |
| Assigned IPTp arm, n (%) | |||
| 3-dose SP | 45 (33.6 %) | 34 (37.8 %) | 23 (35.4 %) |
| 3-dose DP | 41 (30.6 %) | 26 (28.9 %) | 22 (33.9 %) |
| Monthly DP | 48 (35.8 %) | 30 (33.3 %) | 20 (30.8 %) |
| Maternal weight gain during pregnancy, mean kg/week (SD) | 0.25 (0.15) | 0.25 (0.12) | 0.24 (0.15) |
| Household wealth index, n (%) | |||
| Lowest tertile | 45 (33.6 %) | 34 (37.8 %) | 20 (30.8 %) |
| Middle tertile | 45 (33.6 %) | 23 (25.6 %) | 27 (41.5 %) |
| Highest tertile | 44 (32.8 %) | 33 (36.7 %) | 18 (27.7 %) |
aP < 0.001
Fig. 2Parasite prevalence during pregnancy by calendar month before, during and after IRS. Shown is the predicted probability of having a positive (+) LAMP result during pregnancy, stratified by IPTp arm, after enrolment and initiation of study drugs, over the period of time of the study. Parasite prevalence point estimates and standard errors obtained using generalized estimating equations after adjustment for gravidity, age, and gestational age when study drugs were started. Grey-shaded bar shows the time period of IRS in Tororo district. SP (black): sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine; DP (blue): dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine
Associations between proportion of pregnancy under the protection of IRS and outcomes measured at birth
| Outcome | Proportion of pregnancy under the protection of IRS | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| None | >0–20 % | >20–43 % | |
| Placental blood positive for malaria parasites by LAMPa | |||
| Risk | 22/131 (16.8 %) | 1/88 (1.1 %) | 1/61 (1.6 %) |
| aORb (95 % CI) | Reference group | 0.03 (0–0.25) | 0.05 (0.01–0.41) |
| | 0.001 | 0.006 | |
| Any evidence of placental malaria by histopathologya | |||
| Risk | 63/132 (47.7 %) | 25/88 (28.4 %) | 17/62 (27.4 %) |
| aORb (95 % CI) | Reference group | 0.77 (0.35–1.69) | 0.63 (0.27–1.48) |
| P value | 0.51 | 0.29 | |
| Moderate-high grade pigment deposition by histopathologya | |||
| Risk | 37/132 (28.0 %) | 11/88 (12.5 %) | 9/62 (14.5 %) |
| aORb (95 % CI) | Reference group | 0.52 (0.20–1.36) | 0.54 (0.20–1.47) |
| P value | 0.18 | 0.23 | |
| Risk | 28/134 (20.9 %) | 9/90 (10.0 %) | 2/65 (3.1 %) |
| LBW (<2500 g) | |||
| aORb (95 % CI) | Reference group | 0.29 (0.12–0.75) | 0.08 (0.02–0.39) |
| P value | 0.01 | 0.002 | |
| Risk | 23/134 (17.2 %) | 3/90 (3.3 %) | 1/65 (1.5 %) |
| Pre-term delivery (<37 weeks) | |||
| aORb (95 % CI) | Reference group | 0.13 (0.03–0.53) | 0.05 (0.01–0.43) |
| P value | 0.005 | 0.006 | |
| Fetal/neonatal deaths | |||
| Risk | 10/134 (7.5 %) | 1/90 (1.1 %) | 0/65 (0 %) |
| aORb (95 % CI) | Reference group | 0.10 (0–0.86) | 0 (n/a) |
| P value | 0.03 | 0.03 | |
LBW low birth weight; aOR adjusted odds ratio
aIncludes all subjects with evaluable outcomes of interest
bOdds ratio adjusted for gravidity, household wealth, presence of parasites at enrollment, gestational age study drugs started, and assigned IPTp treatment arm
Fig. 3Impact of IRS on birth weight. Shown are birth weights (clear circles) from infants born to mothers with no IRS exposure (n = 134), >0–20 % exposure (n = 90), and >20–43 % exposure (n = 65). Also shown are model adjusted means and 95 % CI (lines and error bars), and P values comparing birth weights between groups, adjusted for gravidity, gestation age study drugs started, wealth category, LAMP at enrolment, and treatment arm