Wings of access: a cluster RCT on drone-based medical commodity delivery in remote Madagascar.

IF 5.8 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Katherine Tumlinson, Andry Rabemanantsoa, Sandrah Rahantanirina, Kanto Jude Ramanamahefa, Erica Felker-Kantor, Daniel Crapper, Eunice Kioko, Emilia Goland, Stephanie R Chung, Brooke W Bullington, Sean Sylvia, Tara Templin
{"title":"Wings of access: a cluster RCT on drone-based medical commodity delivery in remote Madagascar.","authors":"Katherine Tumlinson, Andry Rabemanantsoa, Sandrah Rahantanirina, Kanto Jude Ramanamahefa, Erica Felker-Kantor, Daniel Crapper, Eunice Kioko, Emilia Goland, Stephanie R Chung, Brooke W Bullington, Sean Sylvia, Tara Templin","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2025-021965","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Stockouts of essential medicines remain a persistent challenge across the Global South, undermining healthcare access. Unmanned aerial vehicles or drones have emerged as a promising solution to improve delivery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We implemented a two-arm cluster randomised trial in eastern Madagascar. Hard-to-reach public-sector facilities were randomised to drone delivery or standard land-based delivery of medical commodities. Preintervention and postintervention data included audits, provider and client interviews and population-based surveys of reproductive-age women. Our primary outcomes were (1) current modern contraceptive use and (2) the probability of stockouts. Secondary outcomes included aligned and preferred contraceptive use, vaccine and malaria outcomes and perceived quality. For each outcome, we compared intervention and control clusters using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) regressions. Facilities randomised to drone delivery received continuous service from September 2023 to October 2024; outcomes were measured at baseline (June-August 2023) and endline (October 2024-March 2025).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Between June and August 2023, 109 facilities were randomised to drone intervention (n=55) or control (n=54). Within the corresponding communities, a representative sample of 1199 reproductive-age women (n=605 treatment, 594 control) completed a baseline survey. In primary ANCOVA analyses, drone delivery had no measurable impact on current modern contraceptive use, stockouts of most commodities, malaria rapid diagnostic test stockouts or most client-reported quality measures. Supporting difference-in-difference analyses suggested possible reductions in malaria rapid diagnostic test stockouts and modest improvements in aligned and preferred contraceptive use, but these findings were not consistently replicated in the primary specification.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this cluster randomised trial, drone delivery did not measurably improve most stockout, service readiness, utilisation or client-reported quality outcomes. These findings suggest that drone delivery alone may be insufficient to improve commodity availability where upstream supply-chain constraints remain binding. Prior estimates of drone impact across a broad range of supplies may have been inflated by methodological limitations. Rigorousstudies in additional settings are needed before further integration of drones into national health systems in the Global South.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>AEARCTR-0011710.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":"11 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13636326/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2025-021965","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Stockouts of essential medicines remain a persistent challenge across the Global South, undermining healthcare access. Unmanned aerial vehicles or drones have emerged as a promising solution to improve delivery.

Methods: We implemented a two-arm cluster randomised trial in eastern Madagascar. Hard-to-reach public-sector facilities were randomised to drone delivery or standard land-based delivery of medical commodities. Preintervention and postintervention data included audits, provider and client interviews and population-based surveys of reproductive-age women. Our primary outcomes were (1) current modern contraceptive use and (2) the probability of stockouts. Secondary outcomes included aligned and preferred contraceptive use, vaccine and malaria outcomes and perceived quality. For each outcome, we compared intervention and control clusters using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) regressions. Facilities randomised to drone delivery received continuous service from September 2023 to October 2024; outcomes were measured at baseline (June-August 2023) and endline (October 2024-March 2025).

Results: Between June and August 2023, 109 facilities were randomised to drone intervention (n=55) or control (n=54). Within the corresponding communities, a representative sample of 1199 reproductive-age women (n=605 treatment, 594 control) completed a baseline survey. In primary ANCOVA analyses, drone delivery had no measurable impact on current modern contraceptive use, stockouts of most commodities, malaria rapid diagnostic test stockouts or most client-reported quality measures. Supporting difference-in-difference analyses suggested possible reductions in malaria rapid diagnostic test stockouts and modest improvements in aligned and preferred contraceptive use, but these findings were not consistently replicated in the primary specification.

Conclusion: In this cluster randomised trial, drone delivery did not measurably improve most stockout, service readiness, utilisation or client-reported quality outcomes. These findings suggest that drone delivery alone may be insufficient to improve commodity availability where upstream supply-chain constraints remain binding. Prior estimates of drone impact across a broad range of supplies may have been inflated by methodological limitations. Rigorousstudies in additional settings are needed before further integration of drones into national health systems in the Global South.

Trial registration number: AEARCTR-0011710.

获取之翼:关于在马达加斯加偏远地区以无人机运送医疗商品的集群随机对照试验。
背景:基本药物短缺仍然是全球南方国家面临的一个持续挑战,损害了医疗保健的可及性。无人驾驶飞行器或无人驾驶飞机已经成为改善递送的一种有希望的解决方案。方法:我们在马达加斯加东部实施了一项双组随机试验。难以到达的公共部门设施被随机分配为无人机交付或标准陆基交付医疗商品。干预前和干预后的数据包括审计、提供者和客户访谈以及基于人口的育龄妇女调查。我们的主要结果是(1)当前现代避孕药具的使用情况和(2)缺货的可能性。次要结果包括一致和首选避孕药具使用、疫苗和疟疾结果以及感知质量。对于每个结果,我们使用协方差分析(ANCOVA)回归比较干预和控制集群。从2023年9月到2024年10月,随机分配到无人机交付的设施得到了持续的服务;在基线(2023年6月至8月)和终点(2024年10月至2025年3月)测量结果。结果:在2023年6月至8月期间,109个设施随机分为无人机干预组(n=55)和对照组(n=54)。在相应社区内,有代表性的1199名育龄妇女(治疗组605人,对照组594人)完成了基线调查。在ANCOVA的初步分析中,无人机配送对当前现代避孕药具的使用、大多数商品的库存、疟疾快速诊断测试的库存或大多数客户报告的质量措施没有可衡量的影响。支持差异中的差异分析表明,可能会减少疟疾快速诊断检测试剂盒的缺货,并适度改善一致和首选的避孕药具使用,但这些发现在主要规范中没有得到一致的重复。结论:在这个集群随机试验中,无人机配送并没有显著改善大多数缺货、服务就绪、利用率或客户报告的质量结果。这些发现表明,在上游供应链约束仍然具有约束力的情况下,仅靠无人机送货可能不足以提高商品的可用性。由于方法上的限制,之前对无人机影响的估计可能被夸大了。在将无人机进一步整合到发展中国家的国家卫生系统之前,需要在其他环境中进行严格的研究。试验注册号:aearr -0011710。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMJ Global Health
BMJ Global Health Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.90%
发文量
429
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书