PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Epstein, Adrienne AU - Gonahasa, Samuel AU - Namuganga, Jane Frances AU - Nassali, Martha AU - Maiteki-Sebuguzi, Catherine AU - Nabende, Isaiah AU - Snyman, Katherine AU - Nankabirwa, Joaniter I AU - Opigo, Jimmy AU - Donnelly, Martin J AU - Staedke, Sarah G AU - Kamya, Moses R AU - Dorsey, Grant TI - Evaluating the impact of two next generation long-lasting insecticidal nets on malaria incidence in Uganda: an interrupted time series analysis using routine health facility data AID - 10.1101/2024.10.03.24314858 DP - 2024 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2024.10.03.24314858 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/10/04/2024.10.03.24314858.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/10/04/2024.10.03.24314858.full AB - Introduction Malaria remains a significant public health challenge globally, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, where progress has stalled in recent years. Long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) are a critical preventive tool against malaria. This study investigated the effectiveness of newer-generation LLINs following a universal coverage campaign in Uganda.Methods Health facility data collected 36 months prior to LLIN distribution and 24 months after LLIN distribution were utilized from 64 sites that took part in a cluster randomized trial comparing two newer-generation LLINs (pyrethroid-PBO and pyrethroid-pyriproxyfen). Using an interrupted time series approach, we compared observed malaria incidence with counterfactual scenarios if no LLINs were distributed adjusting for precipitation, vegetation, seasonality, and care-seeking behavior. Analyses were also stratified by LLIN type and study-site level estimates of transmission intensity.Results Overall, malaria incidence decreased from 827 cases per 1,000 person-years in the pre-distribution period to 538 per 1,000 person-years in the post-distribution period. Interrupted time series analyses estimated a 23% reduction in malaria incidence (IRR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.65-0.91) in the first 12 months following distribution relative to what would be expected had no distribution occurred, which was not sustained in the 13-24 month post-distribution period (IRR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.75-1.28). Findings were similar when stratified by LLIN type. In the first 12 months following distribution, LLIN effectiveness was greater in the high transmission sites (IRR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.54-0.86) compared to the medium (IRR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.59-0.92) and low transmission sites (IRR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.56-1.32).Conclusion This study demonstrated a modest reduction in malaria incidence following the distribution of newer-generation LLINs that was sustained for only 12 months, highlighting the need for improved strategies to maintain net effectiveness. Adjusting the frequency of universal coverage campaigns based on local malaria transmission intensity may enhance control efforts.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was supported by the National Institutes of Health as part of the International Centers of Excellence in Malaria Research (ICMER) program (U19AI089674).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The ethics committee of University of California, San Francisco waived ethical approval for this work.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesThe datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study will be available at ClinEpiDB (https://clinepidb.org).