Table 2 Day 28 failure rates estimated by four methods – AS+AQ treatment
| Â | Â | Day 28 failure rates % [CI95%] | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Year | Country & Site | Method 1a (per protocol) | Method 1b | Method 2a (WHO 2001) | Method 2b |
2003 | Angola, Kuito | 1.3 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 1.2 |
|  |  | [0–6.8] | [0–6.4] | [0.2–8.3] | [0.2–8.1] |
2003 | DRC, Boende | 18.3 | 14.1 | 15.3 | 56.3 |
|  |  | [9.5–30.4] | [7.2–23.8] | [8.7–25.9] | [45.8–67.4] |
2003 | S Sudan, Nuba | 7.3 | 5.6 | 6.2 | 8.4 |
|  |  | [2.0–17.6] | [1.5–12.6] | [2.4–15.7] | [3.9–18.0] |
2003 | Uganda, Amudat | 22.6 | 8.8 | 10.4 | 21.4 |
|  |  | [9.6–41.1] | [3.6–17.2] | [4.9–21.1] | [14.0–31.8] |
2003 | Uganda, Jinja | 7.9 | 6.5 | 7.0 | 12.2 |
|  |  | [3.2–15.7] | [2.7–13.0] | [3.4–14.1] | [7.2–20.1] |
2003 | Uganda, Kampala | 4.9 | 4.1 | 4.3 | 4.3 |
|  |  | [1.0–13.7] | [0.9–11.5] | [1.4–12.8] | [1.4–12.9] |
2004 | Angola, Caala | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1.5 |
|  |  | [0–6.0]* | [0–5.7]* | [0–5.8]* | [0.2–10.4] |
2004 | Congo, Kindamba | 6.0 | 4.8 | 4.8 | 6.4 |
|  |  | [1.6–14.6] | [1.3–11.9] | [1.8–12.2] | [2.9–13.7] |
2004 | DRC, Kabalo | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4.4 |
|  |  | [0–8.4]* | [0–7.9]* | [0–7.9]* | [1.1–16.3] |
2004 | Guinea, Dabola | 1.0 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.9 |
|  |  | [0–5.3] | [0–5.1] | [0.1–6.5] | [0.1–6.5] |
2004 | S Leone, Kailahun | 27.0 | 15.4 | 19.0 | 20.5 |
|  |  | [16.6–39.6] | [9.3–23.6] | [12.3–28.8] | [13.5–30.5] |
2004 | Uganda, Apac | 24.5 | 15.0 | 15.7 | 15.9 |
|  |  | [16.2–34.4] | [9.8–21.7] | [10.7–22.7] | [10.8–23.1] |
2004 | Uganda, Arua | 28.7 | 19.9 | 20.0 | 20.0 |
|  |  | [20.4–38.2] | [13.9–27.0] | [14.5–27.2] | [14.6–27.0] |
2004 | Uganda, Tororo | 39.3 | 14.5 | 17.8 | 20.0 |
|  |  | [27.1–52.7] | [9.5–20.9] | [12.1–25.8] | [13.6–28.9] |
2005 | Uganda, Tororo | 13.9 | 5.5 | 5.4 | 5.9 |
|  |  | [6.9–24.1] | [2.6–9.8] | [2.9–9.8] | [3.3–10.4] |