Cited by 42Malaria Research and ControlGlobal Maternal and Child HealthHistory of Medicine and Tropical Health

Proactive community case management in Senegal 2014–2016: a case study in maximizing the impact of community case management of malaria

Open access
Gaye, Seynabou, Kibler, Janelle, Ndiaye, Jean Louis, Diouf, Mame Birame, Linn, Annē, Gueye, Alioune Badara, Fall, Fatou Ba, Ndiop, Médoune +4 more·2020·Malaria Journal

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

The Senegal National Malaria Control Programme (NMCP) introduced home-based malaria management for all ages, with diagnosis by rapid diagnostic test (RDT) and treatment with artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) in 2008, expanding to over 2000 villages nationwide by 2014. With prise en charge à domicile (PECADOM), community health workers (CHWs) were available for community members to seek care, but did not actively visit households to find cases. A trial of a proactive model (PECADOM Plus), in which CHWs visited all households in their village weekly during transmission season to identify fever cases and offer case management, in addition to availability during the week for home-based management, found that CHWs detected and treated more cases in intervention villages, while the number of cases detected weekly decreased over the transmission season. The NMCP scaled PECADOM Plus to three districts in 2014 (132 villages), to a total of six districts in 2015 (246 villages), and to a total of 16 districts in 2016 (708 villages). A narrative case study with programmatic results is presented. During active sweeps over approximately 20 weeks, CHWs tested a mean of 77 patients per CHW in 2014, 89 patients per CHW in 2015, and 90 patients per CHW in 2016, and diagnosed a mean of 61, 61 and 43 patients with malaria per CHW in 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively. The number of patients who sought care between sweeps increased, with a 104% increase in the number of RDTs performed and a 77% increase in the number of positive tests and patients treated with ACT during passive case detection. While the number of CHWs increased 7%, the number of patients receiving an RDT increased by 307% and the number of malaria cases detected and treated by CHWs increased 274%, from the year prior to PECADOM Plus introduction to its first year of implementation. Based on these results, approximately 700 additional CHWs in 24 new districts were added in 2017. This case study describes the process, results and lessons learned from Senegal’s implementation of PECADOM Plus, as well as guidance for other programmes considering introduction of this innovative strategy.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12936-020-03238-0

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Community case management of childhood illness, using proactive frequent home visitation, has shown promising results for reducing under-five mortality in Mali and improving access to care in Senegal, where CHWs are well supplied with needed medicines.

    “Community case management of childhood illness, using proactive frequent home visitation, has shown promising results as a strategy for reducing under-five mortality in Mali and for improving access to care in Senegal, in which CHWs are well supplied with the medicines they need [43, 44].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. [13]Programme National de Lutte contre le Paludisme Bulletin épidémiologique annuel 2016 du paludisme au Sénégal 2017 Sénégal Ministère de la Santé et de l’Action Sociale, Dakar
  2. [15]Hennessee IP, Linn A. Pecadom Plus: Increasing care access and decreasing morbidity in rural southeast Senegal through active, home-based surveillance and treatment of malaria. Proceedings of the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene; Washington, D.C., 2013. Abstract 208.
  3. [17]Gaye S, Thwing J, Ndiop M, Gueye AB, Fall FB, Cisse M, et al. Realizing the potential of community health workers to provide malaria case management: Senegal’s scale up of proactive community case management. Proceedings of the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene; Baltimore, 2017. Abstract 43.
  4. [18]Gaye S, Gueye AB, Fall FB, Ndiop M, Cisse M, Sturm-Ramirez K, Diouf MB, Thwing JI. Implementation of proactive case detection and community case management in moderate malaria transmission districts in Senegal, 2017. Proceedings of the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene; New Orleans; 2018. Abstract 332.
  5. [19]Programme National de Lutte contre le Paludisme Bulletin épidémiologique annuel 2013 du paludisme au Sénégal 2014 Sénégal Ministère de la Sante et de la Prévention; Dakar
  6. [20]Programme National de Lutte contre le Paludisme Bulletin épidémiologique annuel 2014 du paludisme au Sénégal 2015 Sénégal Ministère de la Sante et de la Prévention; Dakar
  7. [21]Programme National de Lutte contre le Paludisme Bulletin épidémiologique annuel 2015 du paludisme au Sénégal 2016 Sénégal Ministère de la Sante et de la Prévention; Dakar

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gaye, S., Kibler, J., Ndiaye, J. L., Diouf, M. B., Linn, A., Gueye, A. B., Fall, F. B., Ndiop, M., Diallo, I., Cisse, M., Ba, M., & Thwing, J.
Affiliations
  • Peace Corps (US)
  • Cheikh Anta Diop University (SN)
  • United States Agency for International Development (US)
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
Corresponding author
Thwing, Julie
Venue
Malaria Journal
Published
2020-04-25
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
166-166
ISSN
1475-2875 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3020000076
Cited by
42
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1
FWCI
3.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Malaria Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
US Presidents Malaria Initiative (not applicable)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Malaria Research and Control
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Global Maternal and Child Health
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › History of Medicine and Tropical Health
Keywords
malaria, community health workers, active case finding, passive case detection, rapid diagnostic tests, artemisinin-based combination therapy, program scaling, malaria case detection
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Child, Child, Preschool, Community Health Workers, Diagnostic Tests, Routine, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Malaria, Middle Aged, Senegal, Case Management, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review