Testing and treatment for malaria elimination: a systematic review

Malaria Journal

Review

Gillian Stresman¹  Roly Gosling²  Nakul Chitnis³  Jimee Hwang⁴  Gretchen Newby⁵  Sydney Fine⁵  Kelly Harvard⁵  Ingrid Chen⁶  Michelle E. Roh⁶  Michelle S. Hsiang⁷  Adam Bennett⁸  Chris Cotter⁹ 

[1] College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA;Department of Infection Biology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK;Department of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK;Malaria Elimination Initiative, Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 550 16th Street, 94143, San Francisco, CA, USA;Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, UCSF, San Francisco, CA, USA;Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwil, Switzerland;University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland;Malaria Branch, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. President’s Malaria Initiative, Atlanta, GA, USA;Malaria Elimination Initiative, Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 550 16th Street, 94143, San Francisco, CA, USA;Malaria Elimination Initiative, Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 550 16th Street, 94143, San Francisco, CA, USA;Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, UCSF, San Francisco, CA, USA;Malaria Elimination Initiative, Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 550 16th Street, 94143, San Francisco, CA, USA;Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, UCSF, San Francisco, CA, USA;Department of Pediatrics, UCSF, San Francisco, CA, USA;Malaria Elimination Initiative, Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 550 16th Street, 94143, San Francisco, CA, USA;Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, UCSF, San Francisco, CA, USA;PATH, Seattle, WA, USA;Malaria Elimination Initiative, Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 550 16th Street, 94143, San Francisco, CA, USA;Department of Women’s and Children’s Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden;

关键词: Malaria;    Malaria elimination;    Plasmodium falciparum;    Screen and treat;    Test and treat;    Active case detection;    Proactive;    Reactive;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12936-023-04670-8

 received in 2023-05-09, accepted in 2023-08-07,  发布年份 2023

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundGlobal interest in malaria elimination has prompted research on active test and treat (TaT) strategies.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the effectiveness of TaT strategies to reduce malaria transmission.ResultsA total of 72 empirical research and 24 modelling studies were identified, mainly focused on proactive mass TaT (MTaT) and reactive case detection (RACD) in higher and lower transmission settings, respectively. Ten intervention studies compared MTaT to no MTaT and the evidence for impact on malaria incidence was weak. No intervention studies compared RACD to no RACD. Compared to passive case detection (PCD) alone, PCD + RACD using standard diagnostics increased infection detection 52.7% and 11.3% in low and very low transmission settings, respectively. Using molecular methods increased this detection of infections by 1.4- and 1.1-fold, respectively.ConclusionResults suggest MTaT is not effective for reducing transmission. By increasing case detection, surveillance data provided by RACD may indirectly reduce transmission by informing coordinated responses of intervention targeting.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2023

【 图 表 】

41408_2023_919_Article_IEq12.gif

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

12888_2023_5172_Article_IEq34.gif

Fig. 1

12888_2023_5168_Article_IEq1.gif