Search

South Africa's effort to eliminate malaria is significantly challenged by a large number of imported malaria cases, especially from neighbouring Mozambique. The country has a funding gap to achieve its malaria elimination goals (prior to 2019) and is ineligible to receive a national allocation from the Global Fund. The findings of an IC were utilised to successfully mobilise resources for malaria elimination in South Africa in 2018. A five-step resource mobilisation strategy was implemented to highlight financing challenges and leverage the economic evidence from an IC for malaria elimination in South Africa. South Africa's malaria programme implements control and elimination activities in three malaria-endemic provinces (KwaZulu Natal, Limpopo, and Mpumalanga). Driven by the IC findings, the South African government took an unprecedented step and increased total domestic malaria financing by approximately 36%, from the 2018/19 to the 2019/20 financial years through the creation of a new conditional grant for malaria. The IC findings predicted that malaria control in southern Mozambique is a prerequisite to eliminate malaria in South Africa. Based on this, the South African government also allocated funding towards a co-financing mechanism to support malaria control efforts in southern Mozambique. The IC findings assisted the South African National Department of Health to make a convincing case to key government decision-makers to invest in national malaria elimination and maximise economic returns in the long run. The South African government is the first in Southern Africa to mobilise a significant increase in domestic malaria financing to address the financial sustainability of both national and regional malaria elimination efforts. Continued surveillance activities will be required to prevent the re-establishment of malaria transmission even after malaria elimination is achieved in South Africa. Information sharing and close collaboration with provincial and national government officials were key to the successful outcome.

Background: For a country such as South Africa which is targeting malaria elimination, mobile and migrant populations pose a substantial risk to importation of malaria parasites. It has been hypothesized that halting cross-border movement of mobile and migrant populations will decrease the importation of malaria, however this option is not a politically, operationally, and financially viable prospect. It has social impacts as well, since families live on either side of the border and preventing travel will challenge family ties. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and closure of ports of entry (land and air) for non-essential travel into South Africa, a unique opportunity arose to test the hypothesis., Methodology: An interrupted time series analysis was done to assess whether the post-lockdown trends (April-December 2020) in monthly reported imported and local cases differed from the pre-lockdown trends (January 2015-March 2020). The analysis was conducted separately for KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga, and Limpopo provinces., Results: On average, imported cases were lower in the post-intervention period in all three provinces, and local cases were lower in Mpumalanga and Limpopo, though no results were statistically significant., Conclusion: Since population movement continued after the travel restrictions were lifted, border screening with testing and treating should be considered for reducing parasite movement. Another option is reducing malaria cases at the source in neighbouring countries by implementing proven, effective vector and parasite control strategies and through a downstream effect reduce malaria entering South Africa., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

By May 2021, South Africa (SA) had experienced two 'waves' of COVID-19 infections, with an initial peak of infections reached in July 2020, followed by a larger peak of infections in January 2021. Public health decisions rely on accurate and timely disease surveillance and epidemiological analyses, and accessibility of data at all levels of government is critical to inform stakeholders to respond effectively. In this paper, we describe the adaptation, development and operation of epidemiological surveillance and modelling systems in SA in response to the COVID-19 epidemic, including data systems for monitoring laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases, hospitalisations, mortality and recoveries at a national and provincial level, and how these systems were used to inform modelling projections and public health decisions. Detailed descriptions on the characteristics and completeness of individual datasets are not provided in this paper. Rapid development of robust data systems was necessary to support the response to the SA COVID-19 epidemic. These systems produced data streams that were used in decision-making at all levels of government. While much progress was made in producing epidemiological data, challenges remain to be overcome to address gaps to better prepare for future waves of COVID-19 and other health emergencies., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest. None.

Background: Malaria continues to be a public health problem in South Africa. While the disease is mainly confined to three of the nine provinces, most local transmissions occur because of importation of cases from neighbouring countries. The government of South Africa has reiterated its commitment to eliminate malaria within its borders. To support the achievement of this goal, this study presents a cost-benefit analysis of malaria elimination in South Africa through simulating different scenarios aimed at achieving malaria elimination within a 10-year period., Methods: A dynamic mathematical transmission model was developed to estimate the costs and benefits of malaria elimination in South Africa between 2018 and 2030. The model simulated a range of malaria interventions and estimated their impact on the transmission of Plasmodium falciparum malaria between 2018 and 2030 in the three endemic provinces of Limpopo, Mpumalanga and KwaZulu-Natal. Local financial, economic, and epidemiological data were used to calibrate the transmission model., Results: Based on the three primary simulated scenarios: Business as Usual, Accelerate and Source Reduction, the total economic burden was estimated as follows: for the Business as Usual scenario, the total economic burden of malaria in South Africa was R 3.69 billion (USD 223.3 million) over an 11-year period (2018-2029). The economic burden of malaria was estimated at R4.88 billion (USD 295.5 million) and R6.34 billion (~ USD 384 million) for the Accelerate and Source Reduction scenarios, respectively. Costs and benefits are presented in midyear 2020 values. Malaria elimination was predicted to occur in all three provinces if the Source Reduction strategy was adopted to help reduce malaria rates in southern Mozambique. This could be achieved by limiting annual local incidence in South Africa to less than 1 indigenous case with a prediction of this goal being achieved by the year 2026., Conclusions: Malaria elimination in South Africa is feasible and economically worthwhile with a guaranteed positive return on investment (ROI). Findings of this study show that through securing funding for the proposed malaria interventions in the endemic areas of South Africa and neighbouring Mozambique, national elimination could be within reach in an 8-year period., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Increasing insecticide costs and constrained malaria budgets could make universal vector control strategies, such as indoor residual spraying (IRS), unsustainable in low-transmission settings. We investigated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a reactive, targeted IRS strategy., Methods: This cluster-randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial compared reactive, targeted IRS with standard IRS practice in northeastern South Africa over two malaria seasons (2015-17). In standard IRS clusters, programme managers conducted annual mass spray campaigns prioritising areas using historical data, expert opinion, and other factors. In targeted IRS clusters, only houses of index cases (identified through passive surveillance) and their immediate neighbours were sprayed. The non-inferiority margin was 1 case per 1000 person-years. Health service costs of real-world implementation were modelled from primary and secondary data. Incremental costs per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) were estimated and deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses conducted. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02556242., Findings: Malaria incidence was 0·95 per 1000 person-years (95% CI 0·58 to 1·32) in the standard IRS group and 1·05 per 1000 person-years (0·72 to 1·38) in the targeted IRS group, corresponding to a rate difference of 0·10 per 1000 person-years (-0·38 to 0·59), demonstrating non-inferiority for targeted IRS (p<0·0001). Per additional DALY incurred, targeted IRS saved US$7845 (2902 to 64 907), giving a 94-98% probability that switching to targeted IRS would be cost-effective relative to plausible cost-effectiveness thresholds for South Africa ($2637 to $3557 per DALY averted). Depending on the threshold used, targeted IRS would remain cost-effective at incidences of less than 2·0-2·7 per 1000 person-years. Findings were robust to plausible variation in other parameters., Interpretation: Targeted IRS was non-inferior, safe, less costly, and cost-effective compared with standard IRS in this very-low-transmission setting. Saved resources could be reallocated to other malaria control and elimination activities., Funding: Joint Global Health Trials., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

On 5 March 2020, South Africa recorded its first case of imported COVID-19. Since then, cases in South Africa have increased exponentially with significant community transmission. A multisectoral approach to containing and mitigating the spread of SARS-CoV-2 was instituted, led by the South African National Department of Health. A National COVID-19 Command Council was established to take government-wide decisions. An adapted World Health Organiszion (WHO) COVID-19 strategy for containing and mitigating the spread of the virus was implemented by the National Department of Health. The strategy included the creation of national and provincial incident management teams (IMTs), which comprised of a variety of work streams, namely, governance and leadership; medical supplies; port and environmental health; epidemiology and response; facility readiness and case management; emergency medical services; information systems; risk communication and community engagement; occupational health and safety and human resources. The following were the most salient lessons learnt between March and September 2020: strengthened command and control were achieved through both centralised and decentralised IMTs; swift evidenced-based decision-making from the highest political levels for instituting lockdowns to buy time to prepare the health system; the stringent lockdown enabled the health sector to increase its healthcare capacity. Despite these successes, the stringent lockdown measures resulted in economic hardship particularly for the most vulnerable sections of the population., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

The COVID-19 pandemic has strained healthcare delivery systems in a number of southern African countries. Despite this, it is imperative that malaria control and elimination activities continue, especially to reduce as far as possible the number and rate of hospitalisations caused by malaria. The implementation of enhanced malaria control/elimination activities in the context of COVID-19 requires measures to protect healthcare workers and the communities they serve. The aim of this review is therefore to present innovative ideas for the timely implementation of malaria control without increasing the risk of COVID-19 to healthcare workers and communities. Specific recommendations for parasite and vector surveillance, diagnosis, case management, mosquito vector control and community outreach and sensitisation are given.

Background: KwaZulu-Natal, one of South Africa's three malaria endemic provinces, is nearing malaria elimination, reporting fewer than 100 locally-acquired cases annually since 2010. Despite sustained implementation of essential interventions, including annual indoor residual spraying, prompt case detection using malaria rapid diagnostics tests and treatment with effective artemisinin-based combination therapy, low-level focal transmission persists in the province. This malaria prevalence and entomological survey was therefore undertaken to identify the drivers of this residual transmission., Methods: Malaria prevalence as well as malaria knowledge, attitudes and practices among community members and mobile migrant populations within uMkhanyakude district, KwaZulu-Natal were assessed during a community-based malaria prevalence survey. All consenting participants were tested for malaria by both conventional and highly-sensitive falciparum-specific rapid diagnostic tests. Finger-prick filter-paper blood spots were also collected from all participants for downstream parasite genotyping analysis. Entomological investigations were conducted around the surveyed households, with potential breeding sites geolocated and larvae collected for species identification and insecticide susceptibility testing. A random selection of households were assessed for indoor residual spray quality by cone bioassay., Results: A low malaria prevalence was confirmed in the study area, with only 2% (67/2979) of the participants found to be malaria positive by both conventional and highly-sensitive falciparum-specific rapid diagnostic tests. Malaria prevalence however differed markedly between the border market and community (p < 0001), with the majority of the detected malaria carriers (65/67) identified as asymptomatic Mozambican nationals transiting through the informal border market from Mozambique to economic hubs within South Africa. Genomic analysis of the malaria isolates revealed a high degree of heterozygosity and limited genetic relatedness between the isolates supporting the hypothesis of limited local malaria transmission within the province. New potential vector breeding sites, potential vector populations with reduced insecticide susceptibility and areas with sub-optimal vector intervention coverage were identified during the entomological investigations., Conclusion: If KwaZulu-Natal is to successfully halt local malaria transmission and prevent the re-introduction of malaria, greater efforts need to be placed on detecting and treating malaria carriers at both formal and informal border crossings with transmission blocking anti-malarials, while ensuring optimal coverage of vector control interventions is achieved.

Background: The South African province of KwaZulu-Natal is rapidly approaching elimination status for malaria with a steady decline in local cases. With the possibility of achieving elimination in reach, the KZN malaria control programme conducted a critical evaluation of its practices and protocols to identify potential challenges and priorities to achieving elimination. Three fundamental questions were addressed: (1) How close is KZN to malaria elimination; (2) Are all systems required to pursue subnational verification of elimination in place; and (3) What priority interventions must be implemented to reduce local cases to zero?, Methods: Based on the 2017 World Health Organization Framework for Elimination, twenty-eight requirements were identified, from which forty-nine indicators to grade elimination progress were further stratified. Malaria data were extracted from the surveillance system and other programme data sources to calculate each indicator and semi-quantitatively rate performance into one of four categories to assess the provinces elimination preparedness., Results: Across the key components a number of gaps were elucidated based on specific indicators. Out of the 49 indicators across these key components, 10 indicators (20%) were rated as fully implemented/well implemented, 11 indicators (22%) were rated as partially done/somewhat implemented/activity needs to be strengthened, and 12 indicators (24%) were rated as not done at all/not implemented/poor performance. Sixteen indicators (33%) could not be calculated due to lack of data or missing data., Conclusions: The critical self-evaluation of programme performance has allowed the KZN malaria programme to plan to address key issues moving forward. Based on the findings from the checklist review process, planning exercises were conducted to improve lower-rating indicators, and a monitoring and evaluation framework was created to assess progress on a monthly basis. This is scheduled to be reviewed annually to ensure continued progress toward meeting the elimination goal. In addition, multiple dissemination meetings were held with both provincial senior management and operational staff to ensure ownership of the checklist and its action plan at all levels.

Background: As surveillance is a key strategy for malaria elimination in South Africa, ensuring strong surveillance systems is a National Department of Health priority. Historically, real time tracking of case trends and reporting within 24 h-a requirement in South Africa's National surveillance guidelines-has not been possible. To enhance surveillance and response efficiency, a mobile surveillance tool, MalariaConnect, was developed using Unstructured Supplementary Service Data (USSD) technology. It was rolled out in health facilities in malaria endemic areas of South Africa to provide 24-h reporting of malaria cases., Methods: To evaluate the efficiency of the mobile tool to detect an outbreak data were extracted from the paper based and MalariaConnect reporting systems in Bushbuckridge from 1 January to 18 June 2017. These data were subject to time series analyses to determine if MalariaConnect provided sufficient data reliably to detect increasing case trends reported through the paper system. The Chi squared test was used to determine goodness of fit between the following indicator data generated using MalariaConnect and paper reporting systems: timeliness, completeness, and precision., Results: MalariaConnect adequately tracked case trends reported through the paper system. Timeliness of reporting increased significantly using MalariaConnect with 0.63 days to notification compared to 5.65 days using the paper-system (p < 0.05). The completeness of reporting was significantly higher for the paper system (100% completion; p < 0.05), compared to confirmed MalariaConnect cases (61%). There was a moderate association between data precision and the reporting system (p < 0.05). MalariaConnect provided an effective way of reliably and accurately identifying the onset of the malaria outbreak in Bushbuckridge., Conclusion: Timeliness significantly improved using MalariaConnect and in a malaria elimination setting, can be used to markedly improve case investigation and response activities within the recommended 72-h period. Although data completeness and precision were lower compared to paper reporting, MalariaConnect data can be used to trigger outbreak responses.

Background: The Lubombo Spatial Development Initiative (LSDI) was a tri-country project between South Africa, Swaziland and Mozambique with the aim of accelerating socio-economic development in the region. The malaria component of the project was introduced to decrease the transmission of malaria in the region. This goal was met but with termination of this project resulted in an upsurge of malaria cases in the sub-region mainly as a result of migration from high transmission areas to low transmission ones. The movement of people across borders in southern Africa remains a challenge in sustaining malaria control and elimination., Methods: Malaria case data for Swaziland and South Africa were obtained from their respective national Malaria Information Systems. Data for Mozambique was obtained from the Mozambican Ministry of Health. Data obtained during the course of the LSDI project was compared to the case data post the termination of the LSDI., Results: The 12-year period of the LSDI showed a substantial decrease in disease burden amongst the three countries involved when compared to the baseline year of 2000. The decrease in malaria cases was 99 % in South Africa and 98 % in Swaziland. Malaria prevalence in Mozambique decreased by 85 % over the same period. However, after the LSDI ended, between 2012 and 2014, there was an upward trend in case data that was counter to the goal of elimination., Conclusion: South Africa and Swaziland benefitted from the LSDI and were able to sustain malaria control and progress to the stage of elimination. Mozambique could not sustain the gains made during the LSDI and case numbers increased. Technical and financial resources are key challenges for malaria control and elimination interventions.

Following major successes in malaria control over the past 75 years, South Africa is now embarking on a malaria elimination campaign with the goal of zero local transmission by the year 2018. The key control elements have been intensive vector control, primarily through indoor residual spraying, case management based on parasitological diagnosis using evidence-based drug policies with artemisinin-based combination therapy since 2001, active health promotion in partnership with communities living in the malaria transmission areas, and cross-border collaborations. Political commitment and long-term funding for the malaria control programme have been a critical component of the programme's success. Breaking the cycle of transmission through strengthening of active surveillance using sensitive molecular tests and field treatment of asymptomatic persons, monitoring for antimalarial drug resistance and insecticide resistance, strengthening cross-border initiatives, and ongoing programme advocacy in the face of a significant decrease in disease burden are key priorities for achieving the elimination goal.

Background: Malaria case numbers reported in South Africa have reduced considerably over the last decade, necessitating a revision of the national risk map to guide malaria prevention, including the use of chemoprophylaxis., Objectives: To update the national malaria risk map based on recent case data and to consider the implications of the new transmission profile for guiding prophylaxis., Methods: The geographical distribution of confirmed malaria cases detected both passively and actively over the last six malaria seasons was used to redefine the geographic distribution and intensity of malaria transmission in the country., Results: The national risk map was revised to reflect zones of transmission reduced both in their extent and their intensity. Most notably, the area of risk has been reduced in the north-western parts of Limpopo Province and is limited to the extreme northern reaches of KwaZulu-Natal Province. Areas previously considered to be of high risk are now regarded to be of moderate risk., Conclusion: Chemoprophylaxis is now only recommended from September to May in the north-eastern areas of Limpopo and Mpumalanga Provinces. The recommended options for chemoprophylaxis have not changed from mefloquine, doxycycline or atovaquone-proguanil.

In this supplement, several authors have shared lessons from the past and identified factors that led to the significant reductions in malaria morbidity and mortality during the past half-century in South Africa. In addition, strategies for achieving malaria elimination have been proposed. Here, we highlight the gaps that have been identified and make proposals for taking South Africa from malaria control to elimination.

Malaria case management is a vital component of programmatic strategies for malaria control and elimination. Malaria case management encompasses prompt and effective treatment to minimise morbidity and mortality, reduce transmission and prevent the emergence and spread of antimalarial drug resistance. Malaria is an acute illness that may progress rapidly to severe disease and death, especially in non-immune populations, if not diagnosed early and promptly treated with effective drugs. In this article, the focus is on malaria case management, addressing treatment, monitoring for parasite drug resistance, and the impact of drug resistance on treatment policies; it concludes with chemoprophylaxis and treatment strategies for malaria elimination in South Africa.

Locally specific epidemiological understanding is pivotal to the success of malaria elimination in South Africa. Here, we focus on how the host, vector, parasite and environment and their interactions have influenced malaria incidence in South Africa between 1995 and 2012. Broad environmental considerations are necessary, including the physical (temperature and humidity), social (migration patterns), economic (quality of housing stock) and political (regional collaboration).

Laboratory diagnosis of malaria in South Africa has traditionally relied on microscopic examination of stained blood films. More recently, rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) have been introduced into routine use, and molecular methods like polymerase chain reaction are useful in certain situations. As with all laboratory tests, each technique has its advantages and disadvantages. Microscopy and RDTs, if appropriately quality assured, are adequate for clinical case management. For elimination, active surveillance will need to be expanded substantially, with wider use of more sensitive diagnostic nucleic acid amplification techniques, and/or serology. To facilitate surveillance activities, techniques suitable for field or near-field use would be ideal. A long-running external quality assessment programme in South Africa has shown some deficiencies in the quality of malaria diagnosis in routine laboratories. Quality systems across the spectrum of diagnostic facilities in South Africa need strengthening, to ensure progress towards elimination.

Background: Following the last major malaria epidemic in 2000, malaria incidence in South Africa has declined markedly. The decrease has been so emphatic that South Africa now meets the World Health Organization (WHO) threshold for malaria elimination. Given the Millennium Development Goal of reversing the spread of malaria by 2015, South Africa is being urged to adopt an elimination agenda. This study aimed to determine the appropriateness of implementing a malaria elimination programme in present day South Africa., Methods: An assessment of the progress made by South Africa in terms of implementing an integrated malaria control programme across the three malaria-endemic provinces was undertaken. Vector control and case management data were analysed from the period of 2000 until 2011., Results: Both malaria-related morbidity and mortality have decreased significantly across all three malaria-endemic provinces since 2000. The greatest decline was seen in KwaZulu-Natal where cases decreased from 42,276 in 2000 to 380 in 2010 and deaths dropped from 122 in 2000 to six in 2010. Although there has been a 49.2 % (8,553 vs 4,214) decrease in the malaria cases reported in Limpopo Province, currently it is the largest contributor to the malaria incidence in South Africa. Despite all three provinces reporting average insecticide spray coverage of over 80%, malaria incidence in both Mpumalanga and Limpopo remains above the elimination threshold. Locally transmitted case numbers have declined in all three malaria provinces but imported case numbers have been increasing. Knowledge gaps in vector distribution, insecticide resistance status and drug usage were also identified., Conclusions: Malaria elimination in South Africa is a realistic possibility if certain criteria are met. Firstly, there must be continued support for the existing malaria control programmes to ensure the gains made are sustained. Secondly, cross border malaria control initiatives with neighbouring countries must be strongly encouraged and supported to reduce malaria in the region and the importation of malaria into South Africa. Thirdly, operational research, particularly on vector distribution and insecticide resistance status must be conducted as a matter of urgency, and finally, the surveillance systems must be refined to ensure the information required to inform an elimination agenda are routinely collected.

Background: Malaria is one of the key targets within Goal 6 of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), whereby the disease needs to be halted and reversed by the year 2015. Several other international targets have been set, however the MDGs are universally accepted, hence it is the focus of this manuscript., Methods: An assessment was undertaken to determine the progress South Africa has made against the malaria target of MDG Goal 6. Data were analyzed for the period 2000 until 2010 and verified after municipal boundary changes in some of South Africa's districts and subsequent to verifying actual residence of malaria positive cases., Results: South Africa has made significant progress in controlling malaria transmission over the past decade; malaria cases declined by 89.41% (63663 in 2000 vs 6741 in 2010) and deaths decreased by 85.4% (453 vs 66) in the year 2000 compared to the year 2010. Coupled with this, malaria cases among children under five years of age have also declined by 93% (6791 in 2000 vs 451 in 2010). This has resulted in South Africa achieving and exceeding the malaria target of the MDGs. A series of interventions have attributed to this decrease, these include: drug policy change from monotherapy to artemisinin combination therapy, insecticide change from pyrethroids back to DDT; cross border collaboration (South Africa with Mozambique and Swaziland through the Lubombo Spatial Development Initiative- LSDI) and financial investment in malaria control. The KwaZulu-Natal Province has seen the largest reduction in malaria cases and deaths (99.1% cases- 41786 vs 380; and 98.5% deaths 340 vs 5), when comparing the year 2000 with 2010. The Limpopo Province recorded the lowest reduction in malaria cases compared to the other malaria endemic provinces (56.1% reduction- 9487 vs 4174; when comparing 2000 to 2010)., Conclusions: South Africa is well positioned to move beyond the malaria target of the MDGs and progress towards elimination. However, in addition to its existing interventions, the country will need to sustain its financing for malaria control and support programmed reorientation towards elimination and scale up active surveillance coupled with treatment at the community level. Moreover cross-border malaria collaboration needs to be sustained and scaled up to prevent the re-introduction of malaria into the country.

Background: Malaria rapid diagnostic tests (MRDTs) are quick and easy to perform and useful for diagnosing malaria in primary health care settings. In South Africa most malaria infections are due to Plasmodium falciparurrm, and HRPII-based MRDTs have been used since 2001. Previous studies in Africa showed variability in sensitivity and specificity of HRPII-based MRDTs; hence, we conducted a field evaluation in Limpopo province to determine the accuracy of the MRDT currently used in public sector clinics and hospitals., Methods: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted to determine the sensitivity and specificity of an ICT Pf MRDT. We tested 405 patients with fever with ICT Pf MRDT and compared the results with blood film microscopy (the gold standard). RESULTS. The overall sensitivity of the ICT Pf MRDT was 99.48% (95% confidence interval (CI) 96.17-100%), while specificity was 96.26% (95% CI 94.7-100%). The positive predictive value of the test was 98.48 (99% CI 98.41-100%), and the negative predictive value was 99.52% (95% CI 96.47-100%)., Conclusions: The ICT Pf MRDT is an appropriate test to use in the field in South Africa where laboratory facilities are not available. It has a high degree of sensitivity and acceptable level of specificity in accordance with the World Health Organization criteria. However, sensitivity of MRDT at low levels of parasitaemia (<100 parasites/microl of blood) in field conditions must still be established.