Explore the vast range of titles available.

Despite global malaria programmes already operating within resource constraints, 2025 saw a significant decrease in funding following the US government’s termination of most of its global health programmes, as well as the decline in development aid spending by the UK, France, Germany, Canada, Switzerland, and other countries. The disruption of funding was sudden, with most African countries lacking adequate contingency plans. This, despite most of the malaria burden being in Africa (94% of 263 million cases in 2023), accounting for a reduction in gross domestic product of up to 1.3% annually, and half a billion lost workdays. Key malaria control programme activities have been severely impacted, including insecticide-treated bed net distribution, seasonal malaria chemoprevention campaigns, and malaria indicator surveys. In the wake of the funding cuts, some African governments have committed to increasing efforts to raise funds for malaria programmes from the private sector. The Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has developed a strategy for governments to increase health budgets while seeking additional funding from the private sector, all while maintaining transparency and accountability. If recent malaria control gains are to be sustained and to prevent resurgence across the continent, African governments will need to increase domestic funding and build robust public–private partnerships for their malaria programmes. Lessons can be learnt from countries where these partnerships have succeeded or failed. Leadership by the African Union, the Africa CDC, the African Leaders Malaria Alliance, and other regional bodies is crucial to support countries in taking immediate, substantive steps and benchmarking progress.

Background Concerns about emerging resistance to artemether-lumefantrine (AL) in Africa prompted the pilot introduction of multiple first-line therapies (MFT) in Western Kenya, potentially exposing women-of-childbearing-age (WOCBA) to anti-malarials with unknown safety profiles in the first trimester. The study assessed healthcare provider knowledge and adherence to national guidelines for managing malaria in pregnancy in the context of the MFT pilot. Methods From March to April 2022, a cross-sectional study was conducted in 50 health facilities (HF) and 40 drug outlets (DO) using structured questionnaires to assess pregnancy detection, malaria diagnosis, and treatment choices by trimester. Differences between HF and DO providers and between MFT and non-MFT HFs were assessed using Chi-square tests. Results Of 174 providers (77% HF, 23% DO), 56% were from MFT pilot facilities. Most providers had tertiary education; 5% HF and 20% DO had only primary or secondary education. More HF than DO providers had knowledge of malaria treatment guidelines (62% vs. 40%, p = 0.023), received training in malaria in pregnancy (49% vs. 20%, p = 0.002), and reported assessing for pregnancy in WOCBA (98% vs. 78%, p < 0.001). Most providers insisted on parasitological diagnosis, with 59% HF using microscopy and 85% DO using rapid diagnostic tests. More HF than DO providers could correctly name the drugs for treating uncomplicated malaria in the first trimester (oral quinine, or AL if quinine is unavailable) (90% vs. 58%, p < 0.001), second and third trimesters (artemisinin-based combination therapy) (84% vs. 70%, p = 0.07), and for severe malaria (parenteral artesunate/artemether) (94% vs. 60%, p < 0.001). Among HF providers, those in the MFT pilot had more knowledge of malaria treatment guidelines (67% vs. 49%, p = 0.08) and had received training on treatment of malaria in pregnancy (56% vs. 32%, p = 0.03). Few providers (10% HF and 12% DO) had adequate knowledge of malaria treatment in pregnancy, defined as the correct drug and dose for uncomplicated and severe malaria in all trimesters. Conclusions Knowledge of national malaria in pregnancy treatment guidelines among providers in Western Kenya is suboptimal. Robust training on appropriate anti-malarial and dosage is needed, particularly given the recent change in recommendation for artemether-lumefantrine use in the first trimester. Supervision of DO and HF practices is essential for correct treatment of malaria in pregnancy in the context of MFT programmes.

Background Emergence of Plasmodium falciparum resistance to artemether-lumefantrine in Africa prompted the pilot introduction of multiple first-line therapies (MFT) against malaria in Kenya, potentially exposing women-of-childbearing-age (WOCBAs) to anti-malarials with unknown safety profiles in the first trimester. This qualitative study explored knowledge and perceptions among healthcare providers providing malaria treatment to WOCBAs and pregnant women. Methods In-depth interviews were conducted with purposively selected public and private health facility (HF) and drug outlet (DO) providers within and outside the pilot-MFT area. County health managers were interviewed about their knowledge of the national treatment guidelines. Transcripts were coded by content analysis using the World Health Organization health system building blocks (leadership/governance, financing, health workforce, health information systems, access to medicines, and service delivery). Results Thirty providers (HF:21, DO:9) and three health managers were interviewed. Eighteen providers were from HFs in the pilot-MFT area; the remaining three and all nine DOs were outside the pilot-MFT area. The analysis revealed that providers had not been trained in malaria case management in the previous twelve months. DO providers were unfamiliar with national treatment guidelines in pregnancy and reported having no pregnancy tests. Health managers were unable to supervise DOs due to resource limitations. Providers from HFs and DOs noted poor sensitivity of malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) and hesitancy among patients who associated malaria-RDTs with HIV testing. Almost all providers reported anti-malarial stock-outs, with quinine most affected. Patient preference was a major factor in prescribing anti-malarials. Providers in HFs and DOs reported preferentially using artemether-lumefantrine in the first trimester due to the side effects and unavailability of quinine. Conclusion Knowledge of malaria case management in drug outlets and health facilities remains poor. Improved regulation of DO providers is warranted. Optimizing treatment of malaria in pregnancy requires training, availability of malaria commodities, and pregnancy tests.

Identifying which young people living with perinatally acquired HIV (PHIV) are less likely to engage in care is crucial to allow targeted interventions to support them to attend clinic. We adapted an existing Engagement in Care (EIC) algorithm for adults with HIV in England, for use in young people. We applied it to data from young people with PHIV in the Adolescents and Adults Living with Perinatal HIV (AALPHI) cohort. The algorithm predicts the timing of the next scheduled clinic visit, within 1–6 months of current visit, based on routine clinical data. Follow-up was 12-months from AALPHI baseline interview. Each person-month was classified as engaged in care or not. Logistic regression models (allowing for clustered data) were used to explore baseline characteristics associated with being engaged in care, adjusting for a priori variables (time from interview, sex, age, ethnicity, country of birth). Potential characteristics were across 7 domains: sociodemographic; risk behaviour practices; mental health; cognition; clinic setting; HIV management and experience; and HIV clinical markers. Of 316 young people, 187(59%) were female, 271(86%) of black ethnicity and 184(58%) born abroad. At baseline, median [IQR] age was 17[15–18] years, and 202(69%) had viral load ≤50 copies/ml(c/mL). 87% of 3,585 person-months were classified as engaged in care. Characteristics independently associated with poorer odds of being engaged in care were: Asian/mixed/other ethnicity, vs. black ethnicity (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.25, 0.78, p = 0.02); ever self-harmed, vs. not (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.32, 0.95, p = 0.03); on antiretroviral therapy (ART) and self-assessed bad/not so good adherence (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.25, 0.84) or not on ART (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.64, 1.21) vs. on ART and good/excellent adherence (p = 0.04)); baseline VL>50c/mL, vs VL≤50c/mL (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30, 0.75, p = 0.002). These characteristics can help identify individuals requiring enhanced support to maintain service engagement.