Title |
The acceptability of intermittent screening and treatment versus intermittent preventive treatment during pregnancy: results from a qualitative study in Northern Ghana
|
---|---|
Published in |
Malaria Journal, November 2014
|
DOI | 10.1186/1475-2875-13-432 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Christopher Pell, Arantza Meñaca, Samuel Chatio, Abraham Hodgson, Harry Tagbor, Robert Pool |
Abstract |
Affecting mother and child, malaria during pregnancy (MiP) provokes a double morbidity and mortality burden. Within a package of interventions to prevent MiP in endemic areas, the WHO currently recommends intermittent preventive treatment (IPTp). Concerns about anti-malarial resistance have however prompted interest in intermittent screening and treating (IST) as an alternative approach to IPTp. IST involves screening for malaria infection at scheduled antenatal care (ANC) clinic visits and treating malaria cases. In light of the need to comprehensively evaluate new interventions prior to roll out, this article explores the acceptability of IST with artemether-lumefantrine (AL) compared to IPTp with sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) and in Upper East Region, northern Ghana. |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
Cameroon | 1 | <1% |
Ethiopia | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 304 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 98 | 32% |
Researcher | 40 | 13% |
Student > Bachelor | 21 | 7% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 5% |
Student > Postgraduate | 13 | 4% |
Other | 43 | 14% |
Unknown | 78 | 25% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 89 | 29% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 44 | 14% |
Social Sciences | 28 | 9% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 3% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 3% |
Other | 41 | 13% |
Unknown | 88 | 29% |