Cargando…

Is there a distinction between malaria treatment and intermittent preventive treatment? Insights from a cross-sectional study of anti-malarial drug use among Ugandan pregnant women

BACKGROUND: In Uganda, treatment of clinical malaria and intermittent preventive treatment with sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) are common during pregnancy. As a result, both formal and informal reports from antenatal sources suggest possible misuse of SP for malaria treatment among pregnant women....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Odongo, Charles O, Bisaso, Kuteesa R, Kitutu, Freddy, Obua, Celestino, Byamugisha, Josaphat
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4424832/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25935720
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-015-0702-7
_version_ 1782370385406197760
author Odongo, Charles O
Bisaso, Kuteesa R
Kitutu, Freddy
Obua, Celestino
Byamugisha, Josaphat
author_facet Odongo, Charles O
Bisaso, Kuteesa R
Kitutu, Freddy
Obua, Celestino
Byamugisha, Josaphat
author_sort Odongo, Charles O
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In Uganda, treatment of clinical malaria and intermittent preventive treatment with sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) are common during pregnancy. As a result, both formal and informal reports from antenatal sources suggest possible misuse of SP for malaria treatment among pregnant women. The objective of this study was to investigate anti-malarial drug use patterns among women who had recently suffered malaria illness before and during pregnancy. METHODS: A cross-sectional study in which a structured questionnaire (interviewer-administered) was used to collect data from pregnant women attending an urban antenatal clinic. Details of medicines used to treat malaria episodes suffered before and during pregnancy were captured. A first order Markov probability model was used to estimate probabilities of transitioning between treatment choices made before and during pregnancy. Logistic regression was used to explore whether demographic and obstetric characteristics were associated with transition patterns. RESULTS: Seven hundred women were interviewed among whom 428 had suffered malaria in both instances. Three hundred thirty of these could recall the medicines used in both instances. Women who used ACT/QNN (correct choice) before pregnancy had higher probabilities of transitioning to SP than staying on ACT/QNN during pregnancy (0.463 versus 0.451). Access of medicines from private outlets (clinics and pharmacies) were more than nine times predictive of receiving correct medicines (p=0.035 and p=0.039 respectively). Access of medicines from clinics was 5.9 times protective against receiving SP for malaria treatment (p=0.033). Among those who used SP before pregnancy, there was a 0.75 probability of staying on it during pregnancy. None of the factors explored could explain this observation. CONCLUSION: Use of SP for malaria treatment is common during pregnancy. This may be contributing to adverse pregnancy outcomes. Antenatal care providers should endeavour to emphasize the distinction between treatment and prevention of malaria during pregnancy. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12936-015-0702-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4424832
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44248322015-05-09 Is there a distinction between malaria treatment and intermittent preventive treatment? Insights from a cross-sectional study of anti-malarial drug use among Ugandan pregnant women Odongo, Charles O Bisaso, Kuteesa R Kitutu, Freddy Obua, Celestino Byamugisha, Josaphat Malar J Research BACKGROUND: In Uganda, treatment of clinical malaria and intermittent preventive treatment with sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) are common during pregnancy. As a result, both formal and informal reports from antenatal sources suggest possible misuse of SP for malaria treatment among pregnant women. The objective of this study was to investigate anti-malarial drug use patterns among women who had recently suffered malaria illness before and during pregnancy. METHODS: A cross-sectional study in which a structured questionnaire (interviewer-administered) was used to collect data from pregnant women attending an urban antenatal clinic. Details of medicines used to treat malaria episodes suffered before and during pregnancy were captured. A first order Markov probability model was used to estimate probabilities of transitioning between treatment choices made before and during pregnancy. Logistic regression was used to explore whether demographic and obstetric characteristics were associated with transition patterns. RESULTS: Seven hundred women were interviewed among whom 428 had suffered malaria in both instances. Three hundred thirty of these could recall the medicines used in both instances. Women who used ACT/QNN (correct choice) before pregnancy had higher probabilities of transitioning to SP than staying on ACT/QNN during pregnancy (0.463 versus 0.451). Access of medicines from private outlets (clinics and pharmacies) were more than nine times predictive of receiving correct medicines (p=0.035 and p=0.039 respectively). Access of medicines from clinics was 5.9 times protective against receiving SP for malaria treatment (p=0.033). Among those who used SP before pregnancy, there was a 0.75 probability of staying on it during pregnancy. None of the factors explored could explain this observation. CONCLUSION: Use of SP for malaria treatment is common during pregnancy. This may be contributing to adverse pregnancy outcomes. Antenatal care providers should endeavour to emphasize the distinction between treatment and prevention of malaria during pregnancy. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12936-015-0702-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-05-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4424832/ /pubmed/25935720 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-015-0702-7 Text en © Odongo et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Odongo, Charles O
Bisaso, Kuteesa R
Kitutu, Freddy
Obua, Celestino
Byamugisha, Josaphat
Is there a distinction between malaria treatment and intermittent preventive treatment? Insights from a cross-sectional study of anti-malarial drug use among Ugandan pregnant women
title Is there a distinction between malaria treatment and intermittent preventive treatment? Insights from a cross-sectional study of anti-malarial drug use among Ugandan pregnant women
title_full Is there a distinction between malaria treatment and intermittent preventive treatment? Insights from a cross-sectional study of anti-malarial drug use among Ugandan pregnant women
title_fullStr Is there a distinction between malaria treatment and intermittent preventive treatment? Insights from a cross-sectional study of anti-malarial drug use among Ugandan pregnant women
title_full_unstemmed Is there a distinction between malaria treatment and intermittent preventive treatment? Insights from a cross-sectional study of anti-malarial drug use among Ugandan pregnant women
title_short Is there a distinction between malaria treatment and intermittent preventive treatment? Insights from a cross-sectional study of anti-malarial drug use among Ugandan pregnant women
title_sort is there a distinction between malaria treatment and intermittent preventive treatment? insights from a cross-sectional study of anti-malarial drug use among ugandan pregnant women
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4424832/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25935720
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12936-015-0702-7
work_keys_str_mv AT odongocharleso isthereadistinctionbetweenmalariatreatmentandintermittentpreventivetreatmentinsightsfromacrosssectionalstudyofantimalarialdruguseamongugandanpregnantwomen
AT bisasokuteesar isthereadistinctionbetweenmalariatreatmentandintermittentpreventivetreatmentinsightsfromacrosssectionalstudyofantimalarialdruguseamongugandanpregnantwomen
AT kitutufreddy isthereadistinctionbetweenmalariatreatmentandintermittentpreventivetreatmentinsightsfromacrosssectionalstudyofantimalarialdruguseamongugandanpregnantwomen
AT obuacelestino isthereadistinctionbetweenmalariatreatmentandintermittentpreventivetreatmentinsightsfromacrosssectionalstudyofantimalarialdruguseamongugandanpregnantwomen
AT byamugishajosaphat isthereadistinctionbetweenmalariatreatmentandintermittentpreventivetreatmentinsightsfromacrosssectionalstudyofantimalarialdruguseamongugandanpregnantwomen