Search

This study evaluated the performance, acceptability, costs, and systems fit of three new cold chain devices in India: a second-generation ice-lined refrigerator (ILR), a solar direct drive (SDD) refrigerator, and a long-term passive device (LTPD). The evaluation was conducted over 15 months during 2016–2017. Sites were selected for their diversity in climate, terrain, and grid electrical supply, and 31 cold chain devices were deployed, 1 to each site. Results showed that all three technologies maintained correct temperatures. The SDD refrigerators had no malfunctions, whilst the ILRs had at least one malfunction, mostly due to the printed circuit board’s sensitivity to the erratic power supply. The LTPD temperature display panel caused challenges initially that required replacement of all solar panels with lithium batteries. Yet the devices’ long holdovers helped ensure vaccine potency. One challenge, particularly with the ILRs and SDD refrigerators, was condensation. The passively cooled LTPD was valued in settings with smaller populations and unreliable or no power; however, some its features, including the need to condition ice blocks, made it challenging to operate. In addition, the acceptable temperature range for the LTPD, as for all passively cooled devices (greater than 0 °C and less than + 10 °C), was confusing for some health workers due to the decades-long emphasis on maintaining temperatures at + 2 °C to + 8 °C. The greatest system-related benefit was establishment of new cold chain points (CCPs) at locations with intermittent or no grid electricity, bringing immunisation services closer to hard-to-reach areas. A key limitation of all three devices was the inability to freeze ice packs, which are required for vaccine carriers, somewhat restricting the potential of these technologies to reach underserved populations. Moreover, establishing new CCPs added costs to the health system. Results from this study, including costing data, can help guide decision-making.

Preventing vaccine freezing is one of the biggest challenges in vaccine management. Until 2018, vaccine carriers used in the immunization program lacked features to prevent vaccine freezing. Freeze-preventive vaccine carriers (FPVCs) have an engineered liner that buffers vaccines from direct exposure to frozen ice packs. A field evaluation of three FPVCs was conducted in 24 health posts in eastern Nepal. The objective was to evaluate the FPVCs’ performance, acceptability, systems fit, and cost, to inform prequalification and introduction planning. The study was carried out in two phases: in the first phase, FPVCs containing dummy vaccines (labeled “Not for Human Use”) were transported to outreach sessions along with a standard vaccine carrier (SVC); in the second phase, the FPVCs were used for transporting vaccines taken to outreach sessions and used for vaccinating eligible children. The study gathered quantitative and qualitative data from health workers, logbooks, and electronic temperature monitors placed inside and outside the FPVCs. Results indicate the FPVCs successfully prevented temperatures below 0 °C more than 99% of the time—except at one site, where ambient temperatures were below the minimum rated testing temperature specified by the World Health Organization. Internal cool-down times for the FPVCs were highly variable, as were mean kinetic temperatures, possibly driven by the wide range of ambient temperatures and higher-than-expected variations in freezer performance, which, along with the need to transport ice packs to some locations, affected ice-pack temperatures. Almost all health workers requested smaller, lighter-weight FPVCs but appreciated the FPVCs’ ability to prevent vaccines from freezing while avoiding undue heat exposure. FPVCs had benefit-cost ratios greater than 1 and hence good value for money. Results point to the importance of understanding the intended environment of use and the need for smaller, short-range as well as long-range carriers.