Background Malawi is estimated to have achieved its Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 4 target. This paper explores factors influencing progress in child survival in Malawi including coverage of interventions and the role of key national policies. Methods We performed a retrospective evaluation of the Catalytic Initiative (CI) programme of support (2007-2013). We developed estimates of child mortality using four population household surveys undertaken between 2000 and 2010. We recalculated coverage indicators for high impact child health interventions and documented child health programmes and policies. The Lives Saved Tool (LiST) was used to estimate child lives saved in 2013. Results The mortality rate in children under 5 years decreased rapidly in the 10 CI districts from 219 deaths per 1000 live births (95% confidence interval (CI) 189 to 249) in the period 1991-1995 to 119 deaths (95% CI 105 to 132) in the period 2006-2010. Coverage for all indicators except vitamin A supplementation increased in the 10 CI districts across the time period 2000 to 2013. The LiST analysis estimates that there were 10 800 child deaths averted in the 10 CI districts in 2013, primarily attributable to the introduction of the pneumococcal vaccine (24%) and increased household coverage of insecticide-treated bednets (19%). These improvements have taken place within a context of investment in child health policies and scale up of integrated community case management of childhood illnesses. Conclusions Malawi provides a strong example for countries in sub- Saharan Africa of how high impact child health interventions implemented within a decentralised health system with an established community-based delivery platform, can lead to significant reductions in child mortality.
The analyses undertaken were part of a multi–country retrospective evaluation of the CI programme. The selection of the 10 CI districts for UNICEF support was undertaken jointly by UNICEF and the Ministry of Health (Figure 1). The selected districts reported higher rates of maternal, newborn and child mortality in 2006 [14] compared to national mortality and included remote areas with limited health care access. The CI grant supported both facility and community–based interventions including preventive and curative services (Box 1). This evaluation compared average annual change (AAC) in coverage for key indicators in the 10 CI districts before the CI support began (2000–2006) and during the period of implementation (2007–2013). Expanded Programme on Immunisation: • Catch up immunisation through child health days • Vitamin A supplementation Health system strengthening of the health surveillance assistant (HAS) platform (particularly related to integrated community case management (iCCM) of malaria, pneumonia and diarrhoea): • Communication and social mobilisation on iCCM (through job aids) • Recruitment, selection and training of HSAs • Basic supplies for HSAs (drug box, bicycles, motorcycles for supervision) • Supervision (quarterly mentorship and review meetings on iCCM) • M&E (support to M&E officer at IMCI unit) • Review of health surveillance curriculae to include new competencies Renovation of three training centers: • Purchased sachets of oral rehydration salts (ORS) and zinc tablets, cotrimoxazole, sulfadoxine–pyrimethamine and artemisinin–combination therapies (ACTs) for village clinics Integrated Management of Childhood Illnesses (IMCI): • Training of nurses and clinicians in IMCI Malaria prevention: • Supply and distribution of ITNs for pregnant women and children under five years Health promotion Infant and young child feeding: • Promotion of early initiation and exclusive breastfeeding for six months • Screening for severe and acute malnutrition WASH: • Education on safe water, sanitation and hygiene We used birth and death history data collected from women aged 15 to 49 years in nationally representative surveys: namely the 2000 Demographic and Health Survey (DHS), 2004 DHS, 2006 Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS), and the 2010 DHS to calculate under–5 mortality. The surveys covered 14 213, 13 664, 30 553, and 24 825 households respectively. For analysis of intervention coverage we used standard indicator definitions [15] for 11 interventions targeted by the CI for tracking progress towards MDG 4 (Table 1). We also captured coverage change for other maternal and contextual indicators. Surveys included in the analysis of intervention coverage were the 2000 DHS, 2006 MICS, 2010 DHS and the 2013 Lot Quality Assurance Survey (LQAS) which sampled in the 10 CI districts only [16,17]. The 2004 DHS did not include disaggregated data for all of the CI districts; therefore it was excluded from the coverage analysis (Section A in Online Supplementary Document(Online Supplementary Document)). All surveys provided cross–sectional data on intervention coverage in their respective years. Full survey data sets with district sampling weights were used for the analysis. For further details on the surveys included in the analysis see Table s1 in Online Supplementary Document(Online Supplementary Document). Adjustments were made to align indicator definitions across the DHS, MICS and LQAS surveys (Section B in Online Supplementary Document(Online Supplementary Document)). Summary of indicator coverage change in the 10 Catalytic Initiative–focus districts IPTp – intermittent preventive treatment of malaria for pregnant women, ITNs – percent of children <5 who slept under an Insecticide Treated Net the previous night, DPT – diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus, ACTs – Artemisinin–combination therapies, ORS – Percentage of children <5 with diarrhoea in the last 2 weeks who received oral rehydration salts *Amongst children aged 12–23 moths. †ACTs were only introduced as first line malaria treatment in 2008. ‡Arrows in the last column indicate whether average annual change in coverage decreased, was stable or increased between period 1 and period 2: ↓ – decrease in AAC between pre–CI (period 1) and during CI (period 2); → – stable AAC between pre–CI (period 1) and during CI (period 2), ↑ – increase in AAC between pre–CI (period 1) and during CI (period 2). Contextual information about child health policies, CI implementation and other relevant child health programmes was obtained through a desk review of documents and databases obtained during a 10–day country visit (August 2013). The information gathered from these sources was used to compile a policy and programme timeline (Figure 2). For further details on the contextual analysis see Panel s1 in Online Supplementary Document(Online Supplementary Document). Major policy changes and programmatic activities related to child survival in Malawi (Catalytic Initiative districts and nationally), 2004 – 2012. RED – Reach Every District Strategy; ACSD – Accelerated Child Survival and Development policy; GoM – Government of Malawi; IMCI – Integrated Management of Childhood Illness; MoH – Ministry of Health; CI – Catalytic Initiative; ACTs – Artemisinin–combination therapies for the treatment of malaria; HSA – Health surveillance assistant; NGO – Non-governmental organisation; ITN – insecticide-treated bed net. We used a direct method for estimating under–5 mortality based on the synthetic cohort approach [18,19]. Under this concept, age–specific mortality probabilities for narrow age ranges and defined periods are calculated using death events and exposures. These probabilities are combined to compute the probability that a child has not died before reaching age 5 years [19]. Five–periods were used beginning with five years before the survey, and survival probabilities were calculated over age ranges; 0, 1–2, 3–5, 6–11, 12–23, 24–35, 36–47, 48–59 months as recommended by DHS (Section C in Online Supplementary Document(Online Supplementary Document)) [19]. The standard errors for the computed mortality estimates were obtained using the Jackknife variance estimation, a repeated sampling method [18]. A series of mortality estimates were obtained by deleting and replacing each primary sampling unit; this produced a sample of under–5 estimates, from which the variance was computed in turn. We also estimated the AAC in mortality using mortality estimates for the periods 1991–1995 and 2006–2010 (Section C in Online Supplementary Document(Online Supplementary Document)). For analysis of intervention coverage, the 10 CI districts were treated as one stratum. We re–calculated all relevant coverage indicators from each survey data set in order to obtain the confidence intervals around the estimates. We then assessed whether there was a significant difference in the AAC in coverage for 11 indicators between the pre–CI period (2000–2006) and the CI implementation period (2006–2013) for the 10 CI districts. The 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) around the AAC on the log scale were based on standard deviations calculated using the delta method for the log function of a proportion. The 95% confidence intervals were used to assess whether the changes were significantly different between pre–CI and CI periods. In order to check the hypothesis that the simultaneous national scale up of iCCM would result in similar coverage change between CI and non–CI districts (supported by other partners), we calculated AAC in intervention coverage in CI and non–CI districts between 2000 and 2010 (data for the non–CI districts was not collected in the 2013 LQAS). To assess the contribution of iCCM by HSAs, data relating to care and treatment sought for fever, suspected pneumonia and diarrhoea by place of treatment were extracted from the available household surveys. The 2006 MICS only collected data on place of treatment for suspected pneumonia but not for diarrhoea or fever [20] and it was therefore not included in this analysis. The sampling design of the household surveys such as regional and rural/urban stratification, clustering at enumeration areas and sampling weights (due to non–proportional sampling) were taken into account. We used Stata (version 12) for these analyses [21]. An attempt to quantify the association between change in contextual factors and intervention coverage with change in under–5 mortality in a multivariate analysis did not yield meaningful results due to the limited number of data points for macroeconomic contextual variables (Section D in Online Supplementary Document(Online Supplementary Document)). We used the Lives Saved Tool (LiST) [22] to forecast child mortality (rates and deaths) in the 10 CI districts in 2013 on the basis of the above measured baseline values of mortality in children younger than 5 years for the period 2006–2010 (Section E in Online Supplementary Document(Online Supplementary Document)) and interpolated changes in coverage from the MICS 2006, DHS 2010 and LQAS 2013. We present the estimates of lives saved in 2013, relative to 2008 when CI implementation began, and used the LiST model to investigate the extent to which the declines in child mortality could be attributed to changes in intervention coverage. We also considered the proportion of deaths averted between 2000 and 2008 using our measured baseline mortality and coverage data from the DHS 2000, MICS 2006 and DHS 2010 to compare results between pre–CI and CI periods. The LiST modelling methods have been widely published, including discussion of the limitations which are particularly related to the lack of population–based coverage data for certain key interventions [22–24]. Specific input values used in this LiST application are available in Table s6 in Online Supplementary Document(Online Supplementary Document). The analysis was done with the computer programme Spectrum/ Lives Saved Tool, version 5.04. The study received ethical approval from the ethics committee of the South African Medical Research Council (EC021–9/2012).