Search

Conflict settings and refugee camps can be chaotic places, with large and rapid population movements, exacerbated public health problems, and ad hoc health services. Reproductive health care that includes family planning is of heightened importance in such settings, however, funding and resources tend to be constrained and geared towards acute health services such as trauma management and infectious disease containment. Here we report on the complexities and challenges of providing family planning in a post-emergency refugee setting, using the example of the largest refugee camp on the Thai-Myanmar border, in existence now for over 30 years. Data from 2009 demonstrates an upward trend in uptake of all contraceptives, especially long acting reversible contraception (LARC) and permanent methods (e.g. sterilization) over time. Increased uptake occurred during periods of time when there were boosts in funding or when barriers to access were alleviated. For example a surgeon fluent in local languages is correlated with increased uptake of tubal ligation in females. These data indicate that funding directed toward contraceptives in this refugee setting led to increases in contraceptives use. However, contraceptive uptake estimates depend on the baseline population which is difficult to measure in this setting. As far as we are aware, this is the longest reported review of family planning services for a refugee camp setting to date. The lessons learned from this setting may be valuable given the current global refugee crisis.

Introduction Plasmodium falciparum infections in pregnancy account for a high proportion of maternal mortality in malaria-endemic countries [1,2], particularly in areas of low and unstable transmission. The northwestern border of [...], Background To date no comparative trials have been done, to our knowledge, of fixed-dose artemisinin combination therapies (ACTS) for the treatment of Plasmodium falciparum malaria in pregnancy. Evidence on the safety and efficacy of ACTS in pregnancy is needed as these drugs are being used increasingly throughout the malaria-affected world. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of artemether-lumefantrine, the most widely used fixed ACT, with 7 d artesunate monotherapy in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy. Methods and Findings An open-label randomised controlled trial comparing directly observed treatment with artemether-lumefantrine 3 d (AL) or artesunate monotherapy 7 d (AS7) was conducted in Karen women in the border area of northwestern Thailand who had uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy. The primary endpoint was efficacy defined as the P. falciparum PCR-adjusted cure rates assessed at delivery or by day 42 if this occurred later than delivery, as estimated by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Infants were assessed at birth and followed until 1 y of life. Blood sampling was performed to characterise the pharmacokinetics of lumefantrine in pregnancy. Both regimens were very well tolerated. The cure rates (95% confidence interval) for the intention to treat (ITT) population were: AS7 89.2% (82.3%-96.1%) and AL 82.0% (74.8%-89.3%), p = 0.054 (ITT); and AS7 89.7% (82.6%-96.8%) and AL 81.2% (73.6%-88.8%), p=0.031 (per-protocol population). One-third of the PCRconfirmed recrudescent cases occurred after 42 d of follow-up. Birth outcomes and infant (up to age 1 y) outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups. The pharmacokinetic study indicated that low concentrations of artemether and lumefantrine were the main contributors to the poor efficacy of AL. Conclusion The current standard six-dose artemether-lumefantrine regimen was well tolerated and safe in pregnant Karen women with uncomplicated falciparum malaria, but efficacy was inferior to 7 d artesunate monotherapy and was unsatisfactory for general deployment in this geographic area. Reduced efficacy probably results from low drug concentrations in later pregnancy. A longer or more frequent AL dose regimen may be needed to treat pregnant women effectively and should now be evaluated. Parasitological endpoints in clinical trials of any antimalarial drug treatment in pregnancy should be extended to delivery or day 42 if it comes later. Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN86353884