Malaria burden and costs of intensified control in Bhutan, 2006-2014: A situational analysis

- Introduction Malaria cases have dwindled in Bhutan with aim of malaria elimination by 2016. The aims of this study are to determine the trends and burden of malaria, the costs of intensified control activities, the main donors of the control activities and the costs of different preventive measures in the pre-elimination phase (2006-2014). - Methods A descriptive analysis of malaria surveillance data from 2006-2014 was carried out, using data from the Vector-borne Disease Control Programme (VDCP), Bhutan. Malaria morbidity and mortality among local Bhutanese and foreign nationals were analysed. The cost of different control and preventive measures, and estimation of the average numbers of long-lasting insecticidal nests (LLINs) per person were calculated. - Findings There were 5,491 confirmed malaria cases from 2006 to 2014. By 2013, there was an average of one LLIN for every 1·51 individuals. The Global Fund was the main international donor accounting for > 80% of the total funds. The cost of procuring LLINs accounted for > 90% of the total cost of prevention measures. - Interpretation The malaria burden reduced significantly over the study period with high coverage of LLINs in Bhutan. This foreseeable challenges that require national attention to maintain malaria-free status after elimination are importation of malaria, particularly from India; continued protection of the population in endemic districts through complete coverage with LLINs and IRS; and exploration of local funding modalities post elimination in the event there is a reduction in international funding.

IMPOSE (IMProving Outcomes after Sepsis)—the effect of a multidisciplinary follow-up service on health-related quality of life in patients postsepsis syndromes—a double-blinded randomised controlled trial: protocol

Introduction Patients post sepsis syndromes have a poor quality of life and a high rate of recurring illness or mortality. Follow-up clinics have been instituted for patients postgeneral intensive care but evidence is sparse, and there has been no clinic specifically for survivors of sepsis. The aim of this trial is to investigate if targeted screening and appropriate intervention to these patients can result in an improved quality of life (Short Form 36 health survey (SF36V.2)), decreased mortality in the first 12 months, decreased readmission to hospital and/or decreased use of health resources. Methods and analysis 204 patients postsepsis syndromes will be randomised to one of the two groups. The intervention group will attend an outpatient clinic two monthly for 6 months and receive screening and targeted intervention. The usual care group will remain under the care of their physician. To analyse the results, a baseline comparison will be carried out between each group. Generalised estimating equations will compare the SF36 domain scores between groups and across time points. Mortality will be compared between groups using a Cox proportional hazards (time until death) analysis. Time to first readmission will be compared between groups by a survival analysis. Healthcare costs will be compared between groups using a generalised linear model. Economic (health resource) evaluation will be a within-trial incremental cost utility analysis with a societal perspective. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval has been granted by the Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC; HREC/13/QRBW/17), The University of Queensland HREC (2013000543), Griffith University (RHS/08/14/HREC) and the Australian Government Department of Health (26/2013). The results of this study will be submitted to peer-reviewed intensive care journals and presented at national and international intensive care and/or rehabilitation conferences.