IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pntd00/0000862.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Targeting Antibiotics to Households for Trachoma Control

Author

Listed:
  • Isobel M Blake
  • Matthew J Burton
  • Anthony W Solomon
  • Sheila K West
  • María-Gloria Basáñez
  • Manoj Gambhir
  • Robin L Bailey
  • David C W Mabey
  • Nicholas C Grassly

Abstract

Background: Mass drug administration (MDA) is part of the current trachoma control strategy, but it can be costly and results in many uninfected individuals receiving treatment. Here we explore whether alternative, targeted approaches are effective antibiotic-sparing strategies. Methodology/Principal Findings: We analysed data on the prevalence of ocular infection with Chlamydia trachomatis and of active trachoma disease among 4,436 individuals from two communities in The Gambia (West Africa) and two communities in Tanzania (East Africa). An age- and household-structured mathematical model of transmission was fitted to these data using maximum likelihood. The presence of active inflammatory disease as a marker of infection in a household was, in general, significantly more sensitive (between 79% [95%CI: 60%–92%] and 86% [71%–95%] across the four communities) than as a marker of infection in an individual (24% [16%–33%]–66% [56%–76%]). Model simulations, under the best fit models for each community, showed that targeting treatment to households has the potential to be as effective as and significantly more cost-effective than mass treatment when antibiotics are not donated. The cost (2007US$) per incident infection averted ranged from 1.5 to 3.1 for MDA, from 1.0 to 1.7 for household-targeted treatment assuming equivalent coverage, and from 0.4 to 1.7 if household visits increased treatment coverage to 100% in selected households. Assuming antibiotics were donated, MDA was predicted to be more cost-effective unless opportunity costs incurred by individuals collecting antibiotics were included or household visits improved treatment uptake. Limiting MDA to children was not as effective in reducing infection as the other aforementioned distribution strategies. Conclusions/Significance: Our model suggests that targeting antibiotics to households with active trachoma has the potential to be a cost-effective trachoma control measure, but further work is required to assess if costs can be reduced and to what extent the approach can increase the treatment coverage of infected individuals compared to MDA in different settings. Author Summary: Repeated ocular infection with the bacterium Chlamydia trachomatis leads to the development of trachoma, a major cause of infectious blindness worldwide. Mass distribution of antibiotics, a component of the current trachoma control strategy, has had success in reducing infection in some areas, but results in a large number of uninfected people receiving antibiotics. We have previously shown that transmission of the bacteria between people in the same household is very efficient. Here, we investigated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of targeting antibiotics to households with active trachoma (inflammatory disease) compared to mass distribution, using data from four trachoma-endemic populations and a mathematical model of transmission. We found a high correspondence between households with active trachoma and infected households. In all populations the household targeted approach was predicted to be as effective as mass distribution, but it reduced the number of uninfected individuals receiving antibiotics, making the targeted strategy more cost-effective when antibiotics are not donated. Assuming antibiotics are donated, we predicted the targeted strategy to be more cost effective if it increases the proportion of infected individuals receiving treatment. Further work to address the feasibility and the cost variability in implementing the targeted approach in different settings is now required.

Suggested Citation

  • Isobel M Blake & Matthew J Burton & Anthony W Solomon & Sheila K West & María-Gloria Basáñez & Manoj Gambhir & Robin L Bailey & David C W Mabey & Nicholas C Grassly, 2010. "Targeting Antibiotics to Households for Trachoma Control," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(11), pages 1-10, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0000862
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0000862
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0000862
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0000862&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pntd.0000862?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas C Grassly & Michael E Ward & Shirley Ferris & David C Mabey & Robin L Bailey, 2008. "The Natural History of Trachoma Infection and Disease in a Gambian Cohort with Frequent Follow-Up," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(12), pages 1-9, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. K. Kupoluyi, Adewale & A. Awotunde, Taiye & Abubakar, Abdulrahman, 2017. "The Imperatives Of Comparative Public Administration And New Public Management In A Changing Global Environment," Ilorin Journal of Business and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ilorin, vol. 19(1), pages 55-71, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0000862. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosntds (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.